IN'£l£RNATIONAL GREAT LAKES WATl£R LJo.:VELS STUDIES

EFFECT OF LAKE REGULATION ON SHORE PROPERTY

DEC IS 1997

SHORE PROPEHTY INVl£STIGATION

ST. LAWRENCE RIVER

MONTREAL TO TROIS-RIVrERES

)

-�. .'

DEPARTl1ENT TRANSPORT m'

�IARINE HYDHAULICS BRANCH

ST. LAWRENCE SHIP CHANNEL DIVISION

ENGINEERING FIELD INVESTIGATIONS SECTION

MONTREAL, P.Q.. Transports Canada Garde cotiem canadienne Region des Laurenii-'::es CEMTRE DE DOcmtilEfHAT!� LGC J APRIL 1968 M. PICHE D. LE VAN Te. ¥21 . '33 p5� o TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Table of Contents ...... i

List of Tables ...... ii

List of Plates (Appendix A) ...... iii

Synopsis ...... iv

Coloured Map of St. Lawrence Ship Channel ...... LVTIWDUCTION

General ...... 1

Purpose and Scope of Study ••••••••••• .••••• . •••••• ...... 1

Acknowledgement ...... J DESCRIPTION O�' THE ST. LAWRENCE RIVER AND ITS SHORbLlNES WWEH

General ...... 4

Soil Characteristics ...... ••••••••• 5 Reach Zones ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5 COlvlPlLATION AND ANALYSIS OF BASIC DATA

Objective Inundation Erosion " ...... I: & " " " "" "" " " " " " "" 6 lea) Inundation ...." " .." " ". " ...." "" " .." " " "" " "" " " " 6

Method of data compilation "" "" " " " "" " " " " " "" " 9 o Eros ion """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 10 Erosion in the reach of the St. Lawrence - Montreal to Trois-Rivieres ••• .••••••••••••••• .••• 12

Ob jective 2: Recreation" " " "" " " "" "" " " " "" "" " "" " "" "" " "" " " "" " " " 15 2(a) Beaches """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 15

2(b ) Marinas" " "" " "" "" "" " "" " " "" " " "" "" " " "" " " " " "" " " " "" " " 16

Objective Marine Structures Shoreline J I & Protection Works """""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 17 J(a) l"'JB.rine Structures """""""""""""",,"",,"""""",,""""""" 17 J(b ) Existing and future shoreline protection works ••• 18 Ob jective 4: Fish and Wildlife and

Ob jective 5: Commercial Fisheries "" " " "" "" " "" " "" " "" " " " "" " " " 18 Objective 6: Water Intakes Sewer Outfalls " " "" " " " " " " " " " "" " 19 &

Ob jective 7: Ice Effects " " "" " " " " " " " " "" " " "" " " " " "" " " "" " " " "" " 19 Ob jective 8: Projection",,",,""""",,",,"",,",,",,""""""""""""""""" 19 8(a) Present Shoreline Economic Development ••••••••••• 19

8(b ) Present Value of Land" " " " " "" "" "" "" " " " " " " " " " " "" " " 21

i o

. LIST OF TABLES

�o.

1 to 6 Inundation Study - Basic data inventory (Zone I to VI)

7 to 13 Shores affected by erosion (Zone I to VI)

14 to 19 Exposed terrains which could be utilized as beaches (Zone I to VI)

20 to 23 Marinas (Zone I to VI)

24 Berthing lengths .vs Available depth at Chart Datum l10ntreal Harbour

25 Berthing lengths vs Available depth at Ch art Datum Sorel Harbour o 26 Berthing lengths vs Available depth at Chart Datum Trois Rivierea Harbour

27 to 33 Classification of present and future protection works (Zone I to VI)

34 to 42 Intakes Sewer Outfalls (Zone I to VI) Water & 43 Shores of the St. Lawrence River·

44 Present Shoreline Economic Development (}hntreal - Trois-Rivieres) 45 to 51 Total Present Prop erty Values (Zone I to VI)

ii LIST OF PLATES

(Appendix A )

No. Title

1 General Location Plan 2 to 7 Erosion, Inu ndation Protection Walls (Zone I to VI) & 8 Inundation Study: Montreal to Varennes (�one I)

9 to 11 Varennes to Vercheres (Zone II)

12 to 16 Ve rcheres to Lanoraie (Zone III)

17 to 21 Le.noraie to Lake St. Peter (Zone IV)

22 to 24 Lake St. Peter (Zone V)

25 to 27 Lake St. Peter to Trois-Rivieres (Zone VI) 0 28 to 38 Islands (Zone I) 39 to 53 Islands (Zone II)

54 to 69 Islands (Zone III)

70 to 115 Islands (Zone IV)

116 to 142 St. Lawrence Rive r Profiles (Zone to VI) I 143 to 144 Photographs showing erosion

145 to 150 Present Shoreline Economic Development (Zone I to VI)

151 to 156 Future Shoreline Protection Works (Zone I to VI)

iii o SYNOPSIS

Th is re port is an inventory of basic shoreline data for the

St. Lawrence River from Montreal to Trois-Rivieres. This all-Canadian

reach is included as the one furthest downstream in the International

Great Lakes Water Levels Studies which COmmence at the head of Lake

Superior.

The basic data herein relate to the following objectives:

Erosion, Inundation, Recreation, Marine Structures , Fish and Wildlife,

Commercial Fisheries, Watsr Intakes and Sewer Outfalls , Ice Effects

and Projection. These objectives have been stipulated by the Shore

Property Subcommittee of this international study. The Canadian Section

of this Subcommittee is chaired by D.W. Quinlan, Department of Public Mr. o Works , Toronto. The task force involved in this reach worked in parallel with similar task forces for the lakes and river reach upstream.

The use of these data is to evaluate the effects of proposed regulation of the Great Lakes on shore property within the reach. No

guarantee is intended that all the data necessary for this eValuation

is included in this report. Data for some objectives have been extensively

presented whereas other objectives have been covered in only a minor way.

To the maximum extent possible coordination has been maintained with the

Province of �uebec representative on the Shore Property Subcommittee in

the preparation of this Department of Transport contribution.

CJ

iv M 0 N T / /

3 . / \ Iv.f '.fv II} / , CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY

lie au Castor HoORD AUTOROUTE DE LA

LE DUPAS

Sf-Ignoce- de-loyola

ile Madame

r lanoraie he aux Ours - - ""'---- ... - ::'h,� �-E-S------..-�� ,

J �C>

L�GENDE LEGEND

Aire draguee'a 35 pieds Area dredged to 35 feet

Aire draguee a mains de 35 pieds Area dredged to less than 35 feet

Chenal a falble tirant Shallow draft channel CA N. NA T. RYs, Eau profonde naturelle Natural deep water

��------� CANADA MINISTERE DES TRANSPORTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT DUPAS CHENAL MARITIME DU ST-LAURENT ST. LAWRENCE SHIP CHANNEL

ENTRE - BETWEEN MONTREAL A�rD QUEBEC

i;, .' ______�oL- ��  16' f----��---

20' f------"'�------'

25' f-----=!£.---.C f-----=!!L-- 27· 5'

30' f------�

35'"------

Representation graphiQue des C4 Prepare par Ie Service HydrographiQue Canadien, Direction des sciences de Is chenal maritime du Saint-LaUi Ministere de 1'(nergie, des Mines et des Ressources, 1967. diverses eta pes des travaux d'� ment. Les dates indiQuees sont Prepared by the Canadian Hydrographic Service, Marine Sciences cnt terminees les Mapes. Department of Energy. Mines and Resources, 1967. St-Aug I de-Quebec

L'elargissement a 800' etait termine dans une proportion de 90/'. en 1967. was 90,/.

lupes du Sketch showing relative cross sections of "ent aux progressive stages in the development of menage­ the St. Lawrence ship channel. The dates :elles ou shown are those at which the stages were completed. -� -=------�'-'--

Andenne -lorette

D'OR ANS

ECHELLE NATURELLE 1: 125,000 NATURAL SCALE

E:CHELlE EN MILLES MARINS SCALE OFSEA MILES 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 H H H

(CHELLE EN PIEDS SCALE OF FEET 0 40000 10000I H H H H H 10000 20000 30000

(CHELLE EN METRES SCALE OF METRES 3000 0 3000 6000 900a 12000 1. o INTRODUCTION

General Current studies by the International Joint Commission of the

further possibilities of the regulation of the Great Lakes require an

assessment of the effects of such regulation on various interests both

on the Lakes and downstream on the St. Lawrence River. Th is report is concerned particularly with that re ach of the St. Lawrence River from

Montreal to Trois-Rivieres and the presentation of the collection and

analysis of basic data which have been made relative to the shore property

interests in this reach. It has been prepared as input to the Shore

Property Subcommittee studies . The report does not fully cover the wide

variety of shore property interests since a number of them are Provincial o in character and should be reviewed by the appropriate Provincial agencies. To the maximum extent possible coordination has been maintained with

Provincial representatives in the pre paration of this Department of Transport contribution. The concentrated field programme in wh ich most of the data

presented herein were collected, ran from March 1966 to July 1967. Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present the basic data inventory

of the investigation on shore property interests for the reach of the

St. Lawrence River between Montreal and Trois-Rivieres. It includes other

recorded data which will permit the determination of the effects on shore

property resulting from the regulation of the Gre at Lakes. The investigation

has been examined under the eight objectives listed below, as was suggested

in the Outline of the Study submitted by the Shore Pro perty Subcommittee. o 2. o Objective 1 - Erosion and Inundation With respect to erosion, a complete field survey of the shorelines

was conducted in 1966, and a qualitative appreciation of the sxtent of the

erosion of unprotected shorelines was made. While no reliable rate of

erosion has been established, a fairly full discussion on the possible

contributing factors, and how these might be affected by plans of flow

regulation is contained later in the appropriate section of the report.

With respect to inundation, an investigation of all the low lands

of the reach has been made . The areas flooded in the past were determined

by using topographical plans with contour lines at five (5) foot intervals. The surfaces which would be flooded if the level rose above the natural highwat er mark were also estimated.

Objective 2 - Recreation o While this objective should probably be looked after by Provincial Authorities, data relating to the number, size, location and facilities of

beaches and marinas has been collected and compiled.

Objective 3 - Marine Structures investigation has been conducted on the berthing space and An available depth in the three harbours of the reach, namely Montreal, Sorel

and Trois-Rivieres. Existing and future shore protection works have also been surveyed.

Objective 4 - Fish and Wildlife and Objective 5 - Commercial Fisheries

It is believed that these are matters on which the Shore Property

. Subcommittee should obtain information from appropriate officials of Provincial and/or Federal Authorities. Meanwhile, these objectives have merely been broached with only the Provincial Authority. 3. o Ub jective 6 - Water In takes and Sewer Ou tfalls A field survey has been conducted in each municipal ity along

the shoreline, between Montreal and Trois-Rivieres, obtaining the dimensions

an d locations of water intakes an d sewer outfalls.

Ob jective 7 - Ice Effects Considerable data are available in the D.O.T. files insofar as

winter ice conditions an d ice breaking are concerned. In addition, a

report entitled. "Stage-Discharge Relationships in the Reach of the

St. Lawrence River lolontreal to Trois-Rivieres" dated !larch 1968, has

been submitted to the Shore Property Subcommittee giving relationships

between discharge and water levels for the winter months� Ice effects,

as they may be related to Inundation an d Erosion can be considered under

those headings in this report. o Ob jective 8 - Projection investigs.tion of the value of the land along the shores of An the St. Lawrence was undertaken, covering the following items of land use. Industrial and Commercial, Municipal, Residential, Recreational, Farming

and Firing Range . It is suggested that data presented under this objective should be reviewed by appropriate Provincial authorities. Acknowledgement

The initiation of the work, from March 1966 - July 1967, involving

principally the field data collection and the preliminary compilation, was

supervised by Marcel Piche, O. I.C. Planning and Development Unit, Mr. Engineering Field Investigations Section, St. Lawrence Ship Channel Division,

D.O.T. Subsequently, the work was completed and this report prepared under

the supervision of D. LeVan, who replaced Piche in July 1967. Mr. Mr. 4.

DESCRIPTION OF THE LOWER ST. LAWRENCE RIVER ITS SHORELINES AND o General The lower St. Lawrence River stretches in a north-easterly direction from Montreal to naturally deep water about 40 miles below �uebec, a total distance of some 180 miles. Of this distance , nearly 2/3 is occupied by a dredged channel 35 feet deep. For the first 37 miles, where the shores are more densely populated and developed industrially, the river contains many islands , most quite low lying. The famous lIe Ste Helene - lIe Notre Dame group upon which the World's Fa ir was built, is located opposite upper Montreal Harbour. A coloured map of the St. Lawrence Ship Channel from Montreal to Quebec appears after the synopsis on page (iv) of this report (Chart S-200 Canadian Hydrographic Service , 1967). 0' The Ottawa River joins the St. Lawrence above and below Montreal Island with approximately 40% of its flow through the Ste Anne and Vaudreuil Channel above , and the remainder through the Back Rivers , to Bout de l'lle below. The St. Lawrence is generally some 2 miles wide in this upper reach , then narrows to 1/2 mile in a naturally deep gut for some 9 miles from Lanoraie to Sorel. From this point , the river splits into nine channels spreading out through a delta formation of islands before entering into Lake St. Peter. Of the nine channels, the main Ship Channel carries about 70% of the flow. Five of the remaining channels are partially closed by submerged rock weirs , built in 1929 for backwater effect. Although the effects of tides are discernable at �IDntreal, the river is considered tidal, for general purposes only, from Lake St . Peter downstream. At Trois-Rivieres the range of tide is about 1 foot. o Soil Characteristics o With reference to the river geomorphology, it was found that the rock level is fairly close to the channel bottom in the Montreal area , but dips downward, reaching levels of some 200 to 300 feet below the water surface in the Sorel Islands. The overburden encountered between �funtreal and Trois-Hivieres consists mainly of clay. Very often, a dense layer of preglacial till is found between the clay and the rock surface. At many places, beds of silt, or sand , or gravel cover this main body of clay and erosion of these layers by the St. Lawrence River itself lead to the formation of almost all the islands located this reach, except for in lIe Ronde and Ste Helene Island wh ich are of volcanic origin * . Reach Zones For purposes of this study, the reach between Montreal and Trois-

Rivieres has been divided into six ·zones. For each zone , a centrally located o gauge or a pair of gauges situated at the upstream and downstream ends , have been selected to represent the mean water level in the zone. This is summarized as follows (see plate 1): Zone Reach Lan�h Water Lavel Gauges (in miles) I King Edward Pier Longue Pointe to Varennes II Varennes to Vercheres 8.3 Average of Varennes and Vercheres III Vercheres to Lanoraie 14.7 Average of Vercheres and Lanoraie IV Lanoraie to head of 18.2 Sorel Lake St. Peter V Lake St. Peter 20.7 Average of Sorel and Trois-Rivieres VI Foot of Lake St. Peter Trois-Rivieres o to Trois-Rivieres

Catalog of St. Lawrence River - Soil and Rock Data, unpublished report by L. Simard , D.C.T. , St. Lawrence Ship Channel, June 1967. 6.

COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS OF .BASIC DATA o Ob.jective I: Inundation and Erosion

Overland flooding and shore erosion are the main causes of damages to shore properties. Variations in water levels , due to high discharge during the springtime , and ice jams in the river during the winter months cause inundation. Shore erosion, which is a localized damage, is due to navigation, currents, and wind wa.ves, causing rapid fluctuations in water levels. Although the shore reaches have been indicated separately with respect to erosion and inundation damage , both actions may take place in fact, during a damaging event and in cases many it is difficult, if not impossible , to separate the damage of erosion from that of inundation. l(a) Inundation o In the past, it was the accepted thing to experience flooding during the spring ice breakup on the St. Lawrence River. Marks on �bntreal waterfront buildings record the heights to which the most disastrous of these floods have reached. Many sections downstream shared with Montreal the distress associated with the passing of the ice. The periodical "La Minerve " reported that 50 people lost their lives in the high 'spring flood of 1865 , when miles of country in the flat area around Sorel was covered by water and floating ice. The primary reason for such floods was the fact that the ice still had a grip on the river at the time of the freshet. The flow of water was retarded by ice jams , with the result that levels rose behind the jams until an escape route had been created. For Montreal the worst flood took place in 1886, when Notre Dame Street became a river. The C) Flood Commission, wh ich was set up that year, recommended that attempts o be made to keep the channel open during the winter for the purpose of lessening the danger from inundation. Twenty years later the first St. Lawrence River icebreakers made their appearance. The last destructive flood in 110ntreal occurred in the early spring of 1928, when warm weather brought on the freshet before the ice had gone out. Sections of the wharf areas were covered with several feet of water. The small icebreaking fleet could not open the channel in time to provide an escape route for the ice. Several flash floods have , however, occurred since 1928. The duration of those floods ranged from le ss than one week to two weeks. During the winter of 1961, serious damage to property was observed at Repentigny and in 1966 and 1967, property owners in the Pointe aux Trembles area complained about flooding o of their basements. In early 1968 , unusual ice jams occurred below Trois- Rivieres, resulting in extensive flooding throughout the Lake St. Peter foreshore and Sorel Islands areas . The problem of land flooding cannot sensibly be discussed or properly appreciated without some understandings of the nature and behaviour of the St. Lawrence River. Depending on, climatic conditions the flow in the St. Lawrence River, now controlled under the Lake Ontario Regulation Plan, varies from year to year,but overall there is a consistent seasonal flow cycle. A regular peak occurs between May and June and a minimum flow occurs around September and October. Based on about 100 years of records , the monthly 'mean discharge of the St. Lawrence River at the outlet of Lake Ontario has averaged ab out 240 ,000 c.f.s. , ranging from a high of 314,000 to a low of 154,000 c.f.s. Through Montreal Harbour, where the St. Lawrence is joined by part of the Ottawa River flow, the mean discharge has averaged 280 ,000 c.f.s. , ranging from 480,000 to 180,000 c.f.s. 8.

mentioned above , these flow statistics are further complicated o As by winter conditions involving a somewhat complex pattern of ice formation. Winter on the St. Lawrence River usually begins in late December with an ice bridge on Lake St. Peter, which is some 40 miles downstream from the City of Montreal. The ice oover then works its way upstream quite rapidly. When it arrives at Varennes , a point about five miles downstream from the City of Montreal, there is approximately a ten foot rise in the water elevation as a result of the restricted passage provided by the ice pack. A further feed-in of ice from upstream results in the cover progressing to inner Montreal Harbour, with some alternste jamming and shoving occurring. Levels at King Edward Pier of the order of 20 feet above corresponding open water levels are not uncommon at this time. The normal flood preventive procedure is to keep open a channel o through Lake St. Peter with icebreakers , through which the ice can pass downstream, and to clear a channel up to Montreal. With the channel open, it is found that water elevations are substantially reduced. However, the reforming of ice takes place very rapidly and it frequently becomes a difficult problem to keep the ice in control by the icebreaking equipment. It is therefore normal to experience maximum water levels due to ice conditions rather than to peak spring runoff. The project of an ice control structure located immediately upstream from Champlain Bridge - Montreal was approved in order to increase the protection against flooding of the World's Fair Site. The construction of th is ice control structure was begun 1963 and it was put into partial in operation during the winter of 1965-1966. It is too early to conclude what the effects of this structure are on downstream water levels during the o winter. Method of Data Compilation o Topographical plans showing contour lines at 5 foot intervals were used to calculate the number of acres affected by a rise in the water level. A series of plans showing the area flooded in the past were prepared (see plates 2 to 7). Plates No. 8 to 115 indicate the surface in acres which would be flooded if the level rose above the natural high water mark . This high water mark coincides with the vegetation line and represents the boundary between private and public property. From a generally accepted legel point of view, inundation starts at this line and this report deals only with areas flooded above the high water mark . Before a compilation of the surface of flooded areas was started, a definition of "natural high water mark " had to be given. A Superior Court judgment by Justice LaFleur on October 26, 1966 dealt with this subject. o Mr. The judge said that each spring in the Province of �uebec the water level of the river rises , but jurisprudence had ruled that these spring levels should not be considered as the normal high water marks of the rivers in question. He ruled therefore that the boundary between private and public property should coincide with the vegetation line. So in any boundary dispute, experts should be called to determine the position of the vegetation line. Fortunately, a vegetation line had been established in the past at Lavaltrie, Contrecoeur and Nicolet. Based on this information, there follows the elevations of the natural high water mark which coincide with the vegetation line for each zone : o 10.

Natural High Water Mark o Elevation in feet (I.G.L.D.) Water Level Gauges I 21.40 Longue Pointe II 19.55 Average of Varennes and Vercheres III 18.00 Average of Vercheres and Lanoraie IV Sorel V Average of Sorel and Trois-Rivieres VI Trois-Rivieres Taking into account the average off-shore and on-shore slopes (see plates 116 to 142)and also the wave characteristics , a series of

stage-flooded area tables were prepared (see tables No. I to 6). l(b) Erosion Erosion, the agents of which are water, wind, ice and gravity, o plus added human activities, is defined as the wearing away of land. Sediment is the by-product of erosion and usually applies to eroded material which has been transported and deposited by water. Normal erosion is referred to as the erosion of land in its natural environment und isturb ed by human activity. Disturbance of this natural state by men 's activities can accelerate the rate of erosion and is hence defined as accelerated erosion. Water is the most widespread agent of erosion and particularly when it is contained in a restricted channel. Channel erosion is dependent initially, and ignoring ice, wind and man, upon the energy exerted by forces of concentrated water flow. In flowing water the kinetic energy varies as the square of the velocity. If the velocity is doubled, the cutting power is increased four times , the quantity C) of material that can be carried is increased 32 times , and the volume size of particles that can be carried increases 64 times. Slope is an important 11. o factor since velocity varies as the square root of the slope. Water will flow down a 40 per cent slope with twice the velocity of that on a 10 per cent slope. Examples of channel erosion are stream bank, stream bed and flood plain scour. Ice erosion may result from the freezing of water in fractures, thus aiding the disintegration of the material, or it may occur during the formation and disintegration of the ice cover as a result of continuous impact from ice floes. Gravity erosion occurs when forces caused by the weight of material exceed forces of resistance inherent in the material. Water contributes to gravity erosion by removal· of toe support of slopes, or decreasing shear strength in cohesive materials. Similarly, ice, wind generated waves and navigation may contribute towards the removal of the o toe support (see plates No. 143 and 144). rate of channel erosion depends upon the hydraulic characteristics The of the flow and the inherent erodibil�ty of the channel materials. Channel

materials may be classified as non-cohesive and cohesive . Clean, uncemented, coarse-grained materials such as sand and gravel, which have unstable structure in the.dry state, are considered as non-cohesive materials. Some materials such as fine sand or materials containing minor amounts of clay or other materials may be temporarily stable when compressed in the moist state, but readily lose that stability upon drying out. Cohesive materials are those having particles bonded tightly together by cementation, cohesion, or adhesion and remain stable in the dry state. Rates of channel erosion can be predicted by a number of empirical equations or more readily determined by field measurements and comparison with earlier channel cross sections and profiles. Channel widening such as 12. o might occur as a result of stream bank recession can usually be detected and measured by comparison of position of banks as shown by aerial photo­

graphs taken on different dates.

Erosion in the reach of the St. Lawrence Montreal to Trois-Rivieres The more important erosive agents at work in the reach of the

river are flow, ice and navigation. Wind will be neglected due to the

confined nature of this part of the reach. Th eir contribution towards

effecting a rate or erosion , either singly or accumulatively, is governed

by the river geometry - which may have been changed from its natural state

to suit the needs of navigation, and the erodibility of the materials.

Obviously in certain locations all of these factors are at play and the

problem· of establishing an overall rate of erosion becomes almost secondary

to the one of assigning the responsibility to any one agent. In fact, o neither of those problems have been quantitatively resolved and the following paragraphs will be devoted to explaining the work carried out in trying to

resolve them , the existing data on the subject, and finally to putting forward a qualitative answer in terms of the effects of proposed plans of flow regulation on erosion.

A survey of the unprotected shorelines of the St. Lawrence River

between Montreal and Trois-Rivieres was conducted during the open water season

of 1966 to try and establish the extent and nat ure of erosion taking place within this reach. Based on these visual observations a qualitative summary

of the nature of the erosion and the limits of its occurrenoe found in each

zone is shown on Tables No. 7 to 13. Plates 2 to 7 show the estimated nature of the erosion and its limits with respect .to the rea.ch of the river contained

within each zone. o 13. o From the ma rkings on the above-mentioned plates it may be seen that the most severe erosion is occurring where the flow sections are narrow.

These coincide in most cases with steep slopes and hence high flow velocities.

Adde d to these open water hydraulic characteristics is the continuous passage of navigation in the St. Lawrence Ship Channel, main waterway to the Port of

Montreal and the St. Lawrence Seaway. The Ship Channel passes through much

of the restricted and narrower arms of �he river where the steep slopes and

water velocities have made a naturally de ep channel. Erosion from the action of passing ships is particularly noticeable at the lIes des Barques Cut, down­

stream of Sorel. In wintertime, navigation is at a minimum and flows are

usually much lower than the higher spring values. However, du ring winter -

lasting from late December to early April - ice formation then becomes a

significant fac tor in creating water levels exceeding those of the spring o period. To best understand how the ice can effect erosion other than by the aforementicned manner in the introductory paragraphs, an unde rstanding of ice

cover formation in this reach of the river is desirable. To this end reference

should be made to the Hydraulics Studies Division re port "Stage-Discharge

Re lationships in the Reach of the St. Lawrence River Montreal to Trois-Rivieres".

From consideration of the appropriate sections of the above report and earlier discussion in this present section on the energy exerted by the

forces of concentrated flow on the banks , it is obvious that du ring the early

stages of cover formation and at spring breakup large ice floes increase

enormously the kinetic energy forces exerted on the stream banks of a

confined channel. Furthermore , in between these times of early winter and spring the newly formed ice cover is prone to slipping and telescoping in

areas where flow velocities are high, or where the river is wide and the

cohesive factor between bank and ice is not sufficient to withstand the

flow drag on the unde rside of the cover. At such times as these, water levels are invariably at their maximum value . On the basis of these three facets l� o of ice cover formation in this reach it seems reasonable to state that ice, or ice formation and ice breakup , more than of the other agents, any e.g. open water discharge , wind or navigation, is responsible for the more extensive erosion occurring at low or high water mark . And, while it can be pointed out that lower discharges during ice cover formation will, overall, create lower velocities , hence reducing the kinetic energy of ths ice floes or the drag on an established cover held in part by bank cohesion, the facts are that the erosive forces of ice, unless in some way controllable or at least contained, will continue to act at some level on the banks, e.g. at lower discharges tow-cutting will result and at higher discharges erosion of the shoreline. (The former will eventually result in the latter due to �he aforementioned gravity agent of erosion) . The general conclusions from the field observation and a knowledge o of the possible erosive forces are that flow, wind and navigation may be looked upon in the relative sense as accelerating factors and not as major ones contributing towards the overall erosion. In the context therefore of proposed plans of flow regulations it is doubtful if differences between proposed plans will materially affect the erosion of the unprotected areas of the "shorelines between Montreal and Trois-Rivieres. Certainly in considering the open water flow as a secondary cause of erosion it can be said that any regulation plan which would aim at raising the low water level and lowering the high would on a long period compress the variance

of mean water level, and consequently the rate of erosion. In this sense a further regulation of the flow of the St. Lawrence should be beneficial to as yet unprotected areas of shoreline affected by erosion. o Ob jective 2: Recreation

While this subject should probably be looked after by the

Provincial Authorities , data relating to the number, size, location and facilities of beaches and marinas have been collected and compiled. It

should be noted that very few of the beaches are actually being used by

bathers because of water pollution. It is assumed that the pollution

problem would be solved somehow during the period of projection and at

such time the beaches would then become very valuab le. 2(a) Beaches

During the field survey of 1966, the 25 public and private

beaches situated between Mon treal and Trois-Rivieres were investigated.

Each beach was identified by an alphabetical letter and their geographical o location appear on plates No. 145 to 150. The lengt h, width and beach profile were determined.

During the beach survey, as mentioned previous ly , very few of

the beaches were actually used by bathers. Water pollution apparently keeps people away from the St. Lawrence River.

The Department of Tourism of the State of New York has estimated that close to one quarter of a million bathers originating from the l�ntreal

area invade their beaches during the summer season. It appears that part of this bathing population would rather to beaches closer to their homes , if go they were given a choice between Lake Champlain and the St. Lawrence beaches.

For this reason, it may be assumed that the beaches investigated would readily become overcrowded if the water was not polluted. The fluctuation of water

level would then have a direct effect on beach areas and consequently, the o capacity could be reduced or increased by a regulation plan. 16.

o Taking into account the profile of each beach, a series of

tables giving a relationship between stage and exposed terrains which

could be utilized as beaches, were prepared for each zone. The present

value assessment of the beaches has also been given ( see tables 14 to 19).

2 ( b) Marinas

Data relating to the number, size, location and facilities of

marinas have been collected from Montreal to Trois-Rivieres ( tables

20 to 2; ). It should be noted that these data were compiled in the

same form as outlined in Appendix D of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

report on �ffect of Lake Regulation on Navigation, dated August 1965.

It is understood that most of this information will be used by the

Navigation Subcommittee.

analysis was made of the effect of the variation of water o An levels on the permanent marina installations. Conclusions were drawn

that the greater the range of water levels, the greater the cost of

providing and maintaining shore structures for boat operation. The range

that is recommended is a reduction on the natural range.

o 17.

--, Ob jective Marine Structures and Shoreline Protection Works ! 1 3: �,

3(a) Marine Structures The fluctuation of water levels can affect marine structures

in two ways : (i) Damage due to dry rot developing in untreated wharf timb er when substructures are partly exposed to the corrosive action of air during

a low water period. considering this da mage , it was found that most of On the wharves with timber substructures had either been reinforced recently

or were too old to justify any dSJllage that might be attributed to dry rot

during the remaining life .

(ii) Losses incurred in the utilization of wha rves when the

water level drops below chart datum. ,

There are approximately seventeen miles of berthing space o in the three harbours in the reach extending between Montreal and Trois-

Rivieres. Only 5% of the total berthage length has less than 29 feet

de pth at chart dat um, whereas the maximum depth is 35 feet at chart datum. Three descriptive tables showing berthing lengths - vs - available depth at chart datum were pre pared (see tables No. 24 to 26). Most of these berths were dre dge d from chart datum and whenever the water level drops

below the chart datum, the use of harbour facilities is critically affected.

During the navigation season in 1964, there were 197 days in which water

levels were below chart datum in the Montreal Harb our. a matter of As interest, chart datum values are as follows.

Chart Dat um Elevation Gauge Location (Feet ab ove M.S.L. - I.G.L.D. )

Longue Pointe o 12.20 Sorel

9.40 Trois-Rivieres 18.

Estimated volumes of dredging in cub ic yards per foot of depth

dredged, and estimated areas of wh arf in square feet per foot of available

depth at the wharf wall are given for each of the main harbours in the

reach as follows :

Harbour Volume rate Are a rate (cu. yds ./foot) (sq. ft./foot) 1. Montreal 336,500 '73,800

2. Sorel 30,000 7,000

3. Trois-Rivieres 33,500 9,500

The estimated quantity for dredging includes the berthing basin areas

and the area from the faoe of the wharf to a line 90 feet away from the dockline for the full length of the harbour. The basio data for item 1

above is subjeot to oonfirmation by Montreal Harbour Authorities. Items c) 2 an d 3 above were ob tained through the Operations and Maintenanoe Section of the St. Lawrence Ship Channel.

3(b) Existing and Future Shoreline Proteotion Works

A oomprehensive inventory has been taken of the present proteoted

shoreline including harbour development , margine.! wh arves and proteotion

walls, for all the reach, between Montreal and Trois-Hivieres. The remaining shoreline has been classified in terms of observed severity of erosion and

also on the basis of probable future developments. (See plates 151 to 156 and tables 27 to 33 ).

Ob.jective 4: Fish and Wi1dlife and Ob.jective 51 Commercial Fisheries It is believed that these ob jectives are matters on which the

Shore Property Subcommittee should obtain informatiori from appropriate agencies. Consequently, no data is available on the subjeot at the present time. 19 .

Objective 6: water Intakes Sewer Outfalls & o Tables 34 to 42 list the location and dimensions of existing

water intakes and sewer outfalls of the reach. It was found that all

these installations have been designed with intakes or outlets well

below the lowest recorded water level.

Objective 7: Ice Effects

Surelevation due to ice in the reach Montreal to Trois-Rivieres

have been expressed as functions of discharge in the report "Stage-Discharge

Relationships in the Reach of the St. Lawrence River Montreal to Trois­

Rivieres ", dated Y�rch 1968. This information provides a means of evaluating

in a quantitative manner, proposed plans of regulation in terms of inundation

due to ice. Data on erosion of unprotected shorelines have been examined

relative to ice effects, as well as flow and navigation. A qualitative

apprecia.tion of the part each plays in causing erosion is contained in the

o appropriate sections of this present report. In summary it may be said

that, with respect to Inundation, Erosion and l�rine Structures, damaging

effects of ice are increased with higher discharge. Consequently, any plan of

flow regulation which tended to give greater than preproject discharges

during the winter months could be considered as being detrimental to the

downstream interests expressed in these objectives. Alternatively, plans

which provided reduced higher flows would be beneficial. The extent of

such detriments or benefits in monetary terms would be difficult, if not

impossible, to evaluate.

Objective 8: Projection

8 (a ) Present Shoreline Economic Development

investigation of the value of the land along the shores of An

the St. Lawrence was undertaken and the base year for this land appraisal

is 1970 . Aerial photographs at scale 500 ft ••1 inch, were utilized to ,. 20. o classify land according to its present economic occupation (see tables No. 4; and 44) . The following classifications were adopted. Industrial and Commercial, Municipal , Residential, Recreational , Fa rming and Firing

Range. A plan showing Present Shoreline Economic Development was prepared

for each zone. (See plates No. 145 to 150). �ach classification is defined as follows :

i) Industrial and Commercial :

Wherever industries were established along the shores, the terrains

were identified as industrial regardless of whether these industries were

located outside or inside the city limits. Small bus inesses such as motels,

hotels , restaurants , and stores were classifie d as commercial on ly when they

were located outside the city limits, othsrwiee , they were 'included in the

category called Municipal. o ii) Municipal : Any land serviced by municipal utilities like sewers and aqueducts were categorized as Municipal .

iii) Residential :

This category was utilized to describe any built up shore land not serviced by municipal utilities. This moetly applies to summer cottages built along the shores of the St. Lawrence.

iv) Recreational: Any piece of land with either a marina or a beach was categorized as recreational .

v) Farming:

This category applies to any open or wooded area used for

agricultural pu rposes.

Vi) Firing Range:

This category was adopted to properly describe the shore of Lake St. Peter now utilized by the Department of National Defence. 21 .

o Present Value of Land Using 1970 as the base year for appraisal, the cost of land

was established after consultation with city assessers and county

registrars . The last sales were noted. average price was calculated An for each category in each zone and this average was accepted as the going price for land along the St. Lawrence River. (See table lio. 45). Tables No. 46 to 51 indicate the length of shore and the

corresponding price per category for each zone.

o

o o

TAB LE NO. 1

INUNDATION STUDY BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE I

JHevations in �'e et Ab ove I':.S.L. Ref. Industrial & Firing I.G.L.D. 1955 Commercial Nunicipal Residential Recreational Farming llange Total Incremental acreage flooded at levels shown

20 .0 0 21 .4 153 22. 0 .....Q) .....Q) .....Q) Q) ...... II) .....II) 72 23 .0 � � � .g � � no 24.0 ...... Ol ...... no i=l 25.0 '" � � � no 26.0 '" � '" � � '" 48 �Ul 27.0 +' +' +' +' +' +' 45 o H 28.0 0.:: 0 .::0 .::0 .:: 0.:: .::0 45 29.0 42 30.0 45

Sub Total 780-* Total 780

Only total figure of land occupation is available * at the present time.

(.�' TABLE NO. 2 o INUNDATION STUDY BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE II

Elevation in Feet Ab ove M. S.L. Ref." Industrial Firing & I.G.L.D. 1955 Commeroial Municipal Residential Reoreational Farming Range Total Inoremental aoreage flooded at levels shown

18.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 .55 5.0 7.4 .8 1.8 15 20 .0 1.7 2. 5 .2 .6 5 21.0 10 .1 14.9 1.5 3.5 30 '" '" fl'! 22. 0 .... 9.7 14.4 1.5 3.4 .... 29 g 23.0 � 9.7 14.4 1.5 3.4 � 29 <) CI.l 24.0 .... 10.1 14.9 1.5 3.5 ....<) 30 �P5.0 .... 10.1 14. 9 1.5 3.5 .... 30 Ao Ao � 26 .0 � 10.1 14.9 1.5 3.5 � 30 IZI 27.0 9.0 13.4 1.4 3.2 27 = = 28. 0 :i 9.4 13.8 1.5 3.3 :i 28 29 .0 10.1 14.9 1.5 3.5 30 30.0 9.7 14.4 1.5 3.4 29 o Sub Total 104.7 154.8 15.9 36.6 312 18.22 0 19.55 55 20 .0 20 21 .0 68 22.0 '" '" '" '" OJ '" ...... 70 23 .0 e � � � � � � 69 ...... 24.0 ...... 69 3 ...... CI.l 25 .0 oj oj oj 70 H 26.0 � � � � � � 67 27 .0 .., .., .., .., .p .p 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 28.0 = = = = =. = 67 29 .0 67 30.0 67

Sub Total 755* Total 1067

Only total figure of land oooupation is available at the present time. * TABLE NO. 3 o INUNDATION STUDY BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE III

Elevation in Feet Above l'l.S.L. Ref. Industrial Firing & I.G.L.D. 19.5.5 Commercial Municipal Residential Recreational J!'arming Range Total Incremental acreage flooded at levels shown

16 • .52 0 0 0 18.0 7.2 23.8 31

19.0 3 • .5 11 . .5 1.5 20.0 6;3 20.7 27 21.0 Q) Q) 4.4 Q) 14. 6 Q) 19 ,.; ,.; ,.; ,.; f>'l 22. 0 4.4 19 0 � � � 14. 6 � l:tl 23.0 0 0 4.7 0 1.5. 3 0 20 'I.l' ...... 24.0 ,.; ,.; 4.4 ,.; 14. 6 ,.; 19 »< »< »< »< 2.5 .0 � � 4.7 � 1.5.3 � 20 � 26.0 .5.1 16.9 22 :z; � � �, 27 .0 ,g ,g .5.4 ,gj;j 17.6 ,g 23 28.0 4.9 16.1 21 29.0 .5.6 18.4 24 30.0 .5. 1 16.9 22

Sub Total 65.7 216.3 282

16 • .52 0 0 0 18.0 .5.0 2.0 7 19 .0 2.9 1.1 4 20.0 2.9 1.1 4 21.0 26.6 Q) Q) Q) 10.4 Q) 37 ,.; ,.; ,.; ,.; 22.0 2.5.1 � � � 9 .9 � 3.5 f>l 0 0 0 9.9 0 35 0 23.0 2.5.1 ...... l:tl 24. 0 25 .1 ,.; ,.; ,.; 9.9 ,.; 3.5 '" »< "" "" 2.5 .0 23 .7 � � 9,3 � 33 � 17 • .5 62 26.0 44. 5

29.0 44 • .5 17.5 62 30.0 40.2 1.5 .8 .56

Sub Total 3.51 .8 138.2 490

•••2 NO . o TABLE ;

�ONE III (Cont 'd. )

Elevation in �'eet Above N.S.L. Ref.' Industrial Firing & I.G.L.n. 1955 Commercial 11unicipal Residential Recreational Farming Range Total Incremental acreage flooded at levels shown

16.52 0 18. 0 1;0 19.0 85 20. 0 90 '" '" Q) '" Q) '" 215 21.0 r< r< r< r< r< r< 215 CIl 22.0 � � � � � � r< r< r< r< r< r< 2;.0 ·n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 220 �' 24.0 oS oS oS 2;0 CIl � � � � ! � 21; H 25.0 .., .., .., .., .., .., 152 26.0 0 0 27 .0 I'l 8 8 I'l 8 8 150 28.0 155 29.0 152 ;0.0 158 * Sub Total 2165

* Only total figure of land occupation is available at the present time.

(J TABLE No. 4 o INUNDATION STUDY BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE IV

Elevation in �'eet Above 11. S.L. Ref. Industrial Firing & I.G.L.n. 1955 Commercial Hunicipal Residential Recreational Farming Range Total lncremental acreage flooded at levels shown

13.83 0 0 0 0 16.7 6 21 603 630 ., ., ., 17.0 ..... 1 3 ..... 76 ..... 80 fl:1 18.0 � 2 10 � 328 � 340 0 0 0 0 19 .0 ..... 2 11 ..... 307 ..... 320 CI)i:I1 ...... 20.0 Po 3 10 Po 327 Po 340 �. 21.0 � 4 4 � 682 � 690 0:; 0 22. 0 I:: 4 3 I:: 733 I:: 740 '" 23.0 � 4 3 � 713 � 720 24. 0 3 4 713 720 25.0 4 3 723 730

Sub Total 33 72 5,205 5,310 o 13.83 0 0 1,190 16.7 1,190 ., ., Q) ., Q) 17.0 ...... 160 ...... 160 18. 0 � � 510 � � � 510 fl:1 0 0 0 0 0 19. 0 ...... 525 ...... 525 a ...... 55 20. 0 Po Po 505 Po Po Po 505 i:I1 21.0 � � 480 � � � 480 IS 22. 0 I:: 470 I:: I:: I:: 470 a '"0 CI) 23.0 � � 470 � � 470 24 .0 475 475 25.0 485 485

Sub Total 5,270 5,270

o •••2 o TABLE NO. 4

ZONB IV (Cont 'd. )

Elevation in Feet Above l-l.ti.L. Ref. Industrial �'iring & I.G.L.D. 1955 Commercial Hu nicipal Residential Recreational Farming Range Total Incremental acreage flooded at levels shown

1).8) 0 16. 7 , 5,)00 17. 0 520 Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) ,..; ,..; ,..; ,..; ,..; ,..; Ul 18. 0 2,010 19.0 � .� � � � � 1,920 ,..; ,..; ,..; ,..; ,..; ,..; � 20. 0 'M 'M 'M 'M 'M 'M 2,020 CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl Ul H 21 .0 � � � � � � 1,180 22. 0 1,2)0 '-+'> -+'> -+'> -+'> -+'> -+'> 2).0 0 0 0 0 1,220 1=1 8 ,1=1 1=1 8 1=1 24. 0 1,200 25 .0 1,200 * Sub Total 17 ,800 o Total 28,)80

* Only total figure of land occupation is available at the present time.

, \', �./ TABLE NO. o 5 INUNDATION STUDY BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE V

Elevation Feet Above in !'I.S.L. Ref. Industrial Firing & I.G.L.D. 1955 Commercial l1unicipa1 Residential Recreational �' arminlr Total Incremental acreage flooded at levels shown RanRe

15.) 0 16.0 600 1,050 17.0 OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ 1B.0 ..-I - ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I 1,000 � � � � � � � 1,040 � 19.0 ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I 20.0 -n -n 'n 'n 'n 'n 1,020 oj oj oj � 21.0 I> � � � � 1,240 <:tl oj � 0 22.0 1,170 '" .., .., .., .., .., .., 2).0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,lBO � <=: � <=: � 24.0 <=: 1,200 25.0 1,1)0 * Sub Total 10,6)0

15.) 0 16.0 1,)80 17.0 OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ 2,050 1B.0 ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I 2,0)0 § .g � .g .g � � 19.0 ..-I ..-I ..-I ...... -I 2,010 a 'n..-I 'n 'n -n 'n 'n � 20.0 oj oj oj oj oj 2,OBO 21.0 � � � � � � 1,510 � 22.0 .., .., .., .., .., .., 1,510 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI)0 2).0 <=: <=: � <=: <=: � 1,500 24.0 . 1,500 25.0 1,450 * Sub Total 17 ,020 Total 27,650

* Only total figure of land occupation is available at the present time.

C) TABLE NO. 6

INUNDATION STUDY BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE VI

Elevation in Feet Ab ove 1'1 .S.L. Ref. Industrial & Firing I.G.L.D. 1955 Commercial l'Iunicipal Residential Recreational Farming Range Total Incremental acreage flooded at levels shown

13.39 0 0 0 0 13 .9 7.5 11.3 16.2 35 14. 0 1.3 1.9 2.8 6 15.0 15.5 23.2 33.3 72 16.0 Q) 3.7 5.5 Q) 7.8 Q) 17 17.0 ...... ftl· � 3.7 5.5 � 7.8 � 17 0 18. 0 t) 3.9 5.8 t) 8.3 t) 18 o o on � n n CIl 19.0 ..... 3.7 5·5 ..... 7.8 ..... 17 20 .0 3.4 5.2 p. 7.4 p. 16 ii:1 21. 0 � 18.9 28.3 � 40.8 � 88 �

13.39 0 13.9 46 14. 0 8 15.0 94 47 16.0 Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) .....Q) ftl 17 .0 ...... 46 0 � � � � � � 18. 0 ...... 43 o o o o o 1E on n n n n n 19 .0 III III . III III III 44 20.0 � � � � � � 44 �0 21 .0 .., .., .., .., .., .., 191 en 0 0 0 0 0 0 22.0

Total 1986

* Only total figure of land occupation is available at the present time. o TABLE NO. 7

SROllliS AF�'ECTED BY ERCJSION

LENGTH OF SHORE IN MILES TOTAL LENGTH III IV :4ONE V :.oliN": VI IN HILES ZONE I ZONE II ZO�E :.oom; -- Extensive erosion due to various factors 1.0 0.2 1.7 10.0 0.2 N.A. 13.1

Little to average erosion due to various factors 6., 2.8 1.3 - 5.7 N.A. N.-A. 16.3

Extensive erosion due mainly 7.4 N.-A. 18.2 o to ship waves 3.6 2.7 4.5 N.A.

Little to average erosion due to ship waves mainly 0.2 1.4 3.0 1.6 N.A. 4.0 10.2

TOTAL LENGTH IN NILES 11.3 7.1 10.5 24;7 0.2 4.0 57.8

N.A. = Non Applicable

o C) o o

TABLE NO. 8 SHuHE AFFECTED BY EROSION

LENGTH OF SHORE MILES IN ZONE I

-- Extensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship wa.ves Erosion due to Length Location .f:Ilactors Various Factors Mainly Ship Waves Mainly in Niles

11e St. Jean '" 0.5 N.A. 0.5 G. Battures Tailhandier ..... N.A. 0.1 0.1 � • lie a Pinard () 0.7 <>1 N.A• 0.7 ..... • 11e au Foin ..... ' 0.1 z 0.1 0.2 Po lie Grosbois � 1.7 1.7 lie aux Vaches 0.2 0.6 0.8 He awe Veawe s:: 0.4 N.A. 0.4 g He St. Patrice 0 ••2 0.3 0.5 Q) He Masta 0.4 <>1 N.A...... 0.4 11e a I'Aigle N.A. � 1.3 � 1.3 · () lIe awe Fermiers 0.2 0.5 ..... 0.7 <>1 ..... He au Beurre 0.1 N.A. Z Po 0.1 0.2 1.4 � 1.6 lIe Ste. Therese • <>1 s:: 0.1 lIe awe Asperges • 0.1 He z 0.2 • g 0.2 X <>1 North Shore 0.1 N.A. z• 0.1 South Shore 0.2 1.7 1.9 TUTAL LENGTH IN NIlES 1.0 6.5 I 3.6 0.2 11.3

N.A. = Non Applicable o o o

TABLE NO. 9 SHORB �� CTED BY EROSION IN llILES LBNGTH OF SHOnE ZONE II

Extensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship Waves Erosion due to Length Location �'actors Various Factors ¥Ja inly Ship Waves Va inly in 11iles

Ile a l'Aiglon • 0.5 . 0.5

"" ""• Ile au Cerfeuil • 0.4 . 0.4 lIe aux Vers � 0.6 IZi 0.6 ""• lIe Deslauriers 0.2 0.1 0.5 � 0.8 Ile St. Laurent 0.8 N.A. 0.8 Ile Bellegarde 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 Ile Beauregard • 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.8 "" • Ile Marie 0.1 0.2 0.3 � <:• South Shore IZi 1.7 0.7 2.4 TOTAL LENGTH IN HILES 0.2 2.8 2.7 1.4 7.1

N.A. = Non Applicable o o o

TABLE NO. 10 SHORE AFFECTED BY EROSION LENGTH OF SHORE IN HILES III WNE

3xtensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship Waves Erosion due to Length Location l!'actors Various Factors Hainly Ship Waves �a inly in Niles

He Bouchard • 0.5 1.2 0.5 2.2 <>l He aux Prunes • 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.9 He aux Boeufs z 0.5 N.A. 0.5 He au Dragon 0.4 0.1 0.5 He aux Veaux 0.1 0.1 • He a Bonin · N.A. N.A. ..;• -< <>l He aux Rats • z z ;z; 0.1 0.1 He Y 0.1 0.1 He St. Ours 0.2 0.9 1.1 North Shore 0.8 0.4 N.A. N.A. 1.2 South Shore 0.5 0.2 2.3 0.8 3.8 - TOTAL LENGTH IN MILES 1.7 1.3 4.5 3.0 10.5

N.A. = Non Applicable (\ '-..-) o o

TABLE NO. 11 SHORE A.]o'}'ECTED BY JiliOSIUN UF HILES LENGTH SHORE IN

ZONE IV

Extensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship Waves Erosion due to Length Location Fa.ctors Various Factors Mainly Ship Waves Nainly in Niles N. . Ile aux Foins A 0.2 0.2 0.4 Ue du Milieu 0.5 0.3 · 0.8 ..: Ue au Castor • N.A. 0.5 z 0.5 lIe aux Vaches 0.3 0.3 Ile Dorvi11iers 0.1 Q) . 0.1 r-i 0.2 ..: Ile du Sable 0.2 Z � 0.2 Ue St. Amour 0.1 " 0.1 ..... Ile Dupas 0.7 0·5 r-i 1.2 Ue des Plantes N.A. 0.1 0.1 Ile Ducharme 0.2 0.1 • � 0.3 ..:· s:: Ile a 1 'Orme 0.3 0.2 z :;g 0.5 He Lamarche 0.2 N.A. 0.2 He a la Csvale 0.2 0.2 0.4 He aux Noyers 0.3 0.3

.,,;• He Madame 0.2 z 0.2 Ile St. Ignace 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.0 He Ronde 0.6 0.6 He aux Ours 0.3 .,,; • 0.3 Ile du Nord 0.5 Z ..:· 0.5 Ile aux Sables "" 0.2 0.1 • 0.3 He de Grace 0.5 0.6 ..: 0.9 • 2.0 lIe aux Corbeaux 0.4 N.A. N.A. z 0.4 He Lapierre 0.8 0.2 1.9 2.9 Ile des Barques N.A. N.A. 1.1 1.1 He du Noine 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.1 2.5 Ile Lacroix 1.1 1.1 N.A. N.A.

N.A. = Non Applicable o o (1 j

TABLE NO. 11

lIOm: IV CGl'/"r'D.

Extensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship Waves Erosion due to length Location Factors Various Factors Mainly Ship Waves �� inly in Miles

- !le aux Raisins N.A. 0.1 0.1 !lets Perces 0.2 0.2 0.4 • Chenal a Cote 0.2 0.1 ""I 0.3 • ..; • !l a la Perche 0.6 0.6 '«I. � Z !le Z 0.1 z 0.1 !le St. Amand 0.2 0.2 0.4 North Shore 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.1 2.6 South Shore 0.4 0.1 1.0 0.3 1.8 TOTAL LENGTH IN 11ILES 10.0 5.7 7.4 1.6 24.'7

N.A. = Non Applicable (-', () '-.../ o

TABLE NO. 12 SHORE AFFECTED BY EROSION LENGTH OF SHORE MILES IN �ONE V

Extensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship Waves Erosion due to Length Location Factors Various Factors YJa inly Ship Waves Mainly in Miles

II a l'Aigle 0.2 N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.2 - TOTAL LENGTH IN MILES 0.2 N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.2

N.A. = Non Applicable (�\ ,-I o o

TABLE NO. 13

SHORE AFFECTED BY EROSION

LENGTH OF SHORE IN MILES ZOllE VI

Extensive Erosion Little to Average Extensive Erosion Little to Average Total due to Various Erosion due to due to Ship Waves Erosion due to Length Location Factors Various Factors Mainly Ship Waves Mainly in Miles

North Shore N.A. N.A. N.A. 1.5 1.5 South Shore N.A. N.A. N.A. 2. 5 2.5

TOTAL LENGTH N.A. N.A. N.A. MILES IN 4.0 4.0

N.A ••Non Applicable C:: c) o

TABLE NO. 14

EXPOSED TERRAINS WHICH COULD BE UTILIZED AS BEACHES BASIC. DATA INVENTORY ZONE I . Elevation in Feet Above Beach Beach Beach Total M.S.L. Ref. B C I.G.L.D. 1955 A .Lncremental acreage at . LeveLs ShOwn 22.0 0 0 0 0 .21.1 0 0 0 0 20.6 0 0 0 0 20.3 0 0 0.14 0.14 20.1 0.08 0 0.13 0.21 19.9 0.06 0 0.12 0.18 19.8 0.03 0 0.07 0.10 19.6 0.08 0 0.14 0.22 19.4 0.05 0.12 0.17 19.2 0.10 o·0 0.13 0.23 19.0 0.07 0 0.12 0.19 18.8 0.07 0 0.12 0.19 18.5 0.11 0 0.19 0.30 18�3 0.02 0 0.13 0.15 17.9 0.20 0 0.26 0.46 17.6 0.10 0.53 0.19 0.82 17.3 0.12 0.49 0.19 0.80 16.9 0.14 0.62 0.27 1.03 16.5 0.15 0.74 0.24 1.13 16.1 0.14 0.52 0.25 0.91

Total 1.52 2.90 2.81 7.23

_. Note : Beach "A"I Located on the South Shore between Varennes Boucherville. & Beach "B"I Situated on 11e aux Fermiers. Beach "C", Si tuated on Ue Ste. Therese. o o o

TABLE N(). 15 EXPOSED TERRAINS WHICH COULD BE UTILIZED AS BEACHES BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE II Elevation in Feet Above Beach Beach Beach Beach Total M.S.L. Ref. D E F G I.G.L.D. 1955 �cremental acreage at levels shown 20..5 0..10. 0. 0..15 0..10. 0.35 19.1 0..03 0..41 0..28 0..11 0.83

. 18.7 0..0.0. 0..26 . 0..0.9 0..0.3 0..38 18 .5 0..0.1 0..12 0..0.4 0.0.1 0.18 18.3 0..0.0 0..14 0..0.4 0..0.2 0..20 18.1 0..0.0 0..14 0..0.4 0.0.1 0..19 17.9 0..0.1 0..13 0..0.4 0..0.2 0..20 17.7 0..0.0. 0..14 0..0.4 0..0.1 0.19 17 .4 0..0.1 0.20. 0.;0.6 0..0.3 0.30 17.2 0..0.0. 0..12 0..0.3 0..0.1 0..16 17.0. 0..0.0. 0..14 0..0.5 0..0.2 0.21 16.8 0..0.1 0..13 0..0.4 0..0.1 0.19 16. 6 0..0.0. 0..13 0..0.4 0..0.2 0.19 16.4 0..0.0. 0..12 0..0.4 0..0.1 0.17 16.1 0..0.1 0.20. 0..0.5 0..0.2 0.28 15·9 0..0.0. 0..12 0..0.5 I 0..0.2 0.19 15.6 0..0.1 0..20. 0..0.6 0..02 0.29 15.2 0..0.0. 0..26 0..0.8 0..0.3 . 0..37 14. 8 0..0.1 0..25 0..0.8 0..0.3 0.37 14. 3 0..0.1 0..35 0..0.9 0..0.4 0.49 Total 0..21 3.56 1.39 0..57 5.73 Notel Beach "D"I Located on the North Shore at the mouth of Riviere L'Assomption. Beach "E". Situated on Ile Deslauriers. Beach "F". Located on the North Shore at Repentigny. Beach "G"I Located on the North Shore , East of Repentigny opposite Ue Marie. & o o o

TABLE NO. 16

EXPOSED TERRAINS, WHICH COULD BE UTILIZED AS BEACHES BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE III - Elevation in Feet Above . Beach Beach Total N.S.L. Ref. H I I.G.L.D. 1955 Incremental acreage at levels shown 19.0 0 2.38 2.38 17.9 0.26 1.07 1.33 17.5 0.23 0.37 0.60 17.2 0.16 0.31 0.47 17.0 0.12 0.17 0.29 16.8 0.12 0.20 0.32 16.6 0.11 0.20 0.31 16.4 0.12 0.17 0.29 16.2 0.12 0.22 0.34 16.0 0.12 0.16 0.28 15.8 0.11 0.23 0.34 15.6 0.11 0.17 0.28 15.4 0.13 0.22 0.35 . 15.2 0.11 0.17 0.28 14.9 0.17 0.27 0.44 14.6 0.18 0.28 0.46 14.4 0.10 0.22 0.32 14.1 0.18 0.26 0.44 13.7 0.23 0.37 0.60 13.1 0.34 0.60 0.94 Total 3.02 8.04 11.06 Note: Beach "H" : Located on the I�orth Shore West of Lanoraie. -- Beach "1"1 Located on the South Shore opposite Lanoraie. CI o o

17 TABLE NO. EXPOSED TERRAINS WHICH COULD BE UTILIZED AS BEACHES BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE IV Elevation in Feet Above Beach Beach Beach Beach Beach Beach Beach Beach Total M.S.L. Ref. J K L M Ii 0 p Q l.G.L.D. 1955 Incremental acreage of levels shown 17.3 0.93 0.15 0.51 0.01 0.23 0.59 0.00 2.42 16.3 0.29 0.16 0.24 0.05 0.15 0.21 0.00 1.10 15.9 0.10 0.07 0.09 0;02 0.07 0.09 0.04 0.48 15.7 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.25 15.5 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.24 15.4 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.13

15.2 0.05 0.03 . 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.24 15.1 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.14 14.9 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.23 14.8 0.03 0.02 ' 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.14 14.6 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.17 0.03 0.41 14. 4 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.23 0.02 0.47 14;3 0.02 ' 0.02 .0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.13 0.02 0.26 14.1 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.21 0.03 0.46 13.9 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.23 0.03 0.50 13.6 0.08 0.05 0.07 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.33 0.03 0.68 13.4 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.22 0.03 0.44 13.1 0.08 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.40 0.04 0.77 12.7 0.12 0.07 0.10 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.40 0.06 0.91 12.2 0.15 0.08 0.12 0.03 0.09 0.10 0.57 0.07 0.91 Total 2.36 0.96 1.75 0.25 1.05 1.67 2.89 0.55 11.18

•••2 L: G o

TABLE NO. 17 - 2 - Cont'd. ZONE IV ( ) I

I.

Note: Beach "J": Located on the North Shore , East of Lanoraie. Beach "K": Located on the North Shore , East of Lanoraie. Beach "L": Located on· the South Shore , South-East of Lsnoraie.

Beach "M": Located on the Sout� Shore , South-East of Lanoraie. Beach "N" : Located on the South Shore at St. Joseph de Sorel. Beach "0" : Situated on Ile St. Ignace.

Beach "pfl : Situated on Ile de Grace. Beach "(I,"I Situated on Ile Plate. c o o

TABLE NO. 18 EXPOSED TERRAIl'lS WHICH COULD BE BEACHES UTILIZED AS BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE V Elevation in Feet Above Beach Beach Beach Beach Beach Beach Total M.S.L. Ref. R S T U V W I.G.L.D. 1955 Incremental acreage at levels shown

, 16.6 0.00 1.17 1.8.5 0.06 3.82 6.90 15·4 0.01 0.32 0.36 0.02 0.36 1.07

14.9 0.03 0.12 0.21 0.00 0.16 0 • .52 14 • .5 0.01 0.12 0.18 0.01 0.13 0.4.5 14. 3 0.01 0.0.5 0.10 0.01 0.06 0.23 14.2 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.11 14.0 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.06 0.22 13.8 0.01 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.01 0.07 0.33 13.7 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.20

13 • .5 0.01 '0.0.5 0.13 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.32 13.4 0.01 0.04 0.0.5 0.0.5 0.00 0.03 0.18 13.2 0.00 0.0.5 0.14 0.07 0.01 0.06 0.33 13.1 0.01 0.03 . 0.06 0.0.5 0.00 0.03 0.18 12.9 . 0.01 0.06 0.12 0.07 0.01 0.07 0.34 12.7 0.00 0.06 0.12 0.08 0.01 0.06 0.33

12 • .5 0.01 0.06 0.13 0.08 0.01 0.06 0.3.5 12.3 0.01 0.0.5 0.13 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.3.5 11.9 0.02 0.12 0.24 0.12 0.01 0.12 0.63

• 11 .5 0.04 0.12 . 0.26 0.23 0.02 0.13 0.80 10.9 0.07 0.18 0.38 0.41 0.01 0.19 1.24 Total 0.27 0.91 3.83 4.2.5 0.22 .5.60 1.5.08 ------

•••2 I. c! o o

TABLE NO. 18 - 2 - ZONE V (Cont 'd.)

�I Beach "R" : Located on the South Shore on mouth of Riviere Nicolet. Beach "S". Located on the South Shore on mouth of Riviere Nicolet. Beach "T". Located on the North Shore at Pointe du Lac. Beach "U". Located on the North Shore at Pointe du Lac.

B each "V" I Located on the North Shore , East of Pointe du Lac. Beach "W". Located on the South Shore at Port St. Fran90is.

I ! o o c)

TABLE NO. 19

EXPOSED TERRAINS WHICH COULD BE UTILIZED BEACHES AS BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE VI Elevation in Feet Above Beach Beach Total M.S.L. Ref. Y I.G.L.D. 1955 IncrementalX acreage at levels shown 15.6 0.25 0.40 0.65 14.1 0.26 0.10 0.36 13.6 0.07 0.03 0.10 13.4 0.04 0.01 0.05 13.3 0.02 0.01 0.03 13.1 0.05 0.01 0.06 12.9 0.04 0.02 0.06 12.7 0.03 0.01 0.04 12.6 0.03 0.01 0.04 12.4 0.04 0.01 0.05 12.2 0.04 0.01 0.05 12.0 0.04 0.02 0.06 11.8 0.04 0.01 0.05 11.6 0.04 0.01 0.05 11.5 0.03 0.01 0.04 11.3 0.03 0.01 0.04 11.1 0.04 0.01 0.05 10.9 0.05 0.02 0.07 10.6 0.05 0.02 0.07 9.9 0.15 0.04 0.19

- Total 1.34 0.77 2.11

- Notel Beach Located on the South Shore , East of Port St. Fran90is. Beach "X" I Located on the South Shore , East of Port St. Fran!j'ois. "Y" : G o o

TABLE NO. 20

MARINAS BASIC DATA I ORY ZONE NVENTI MONTREAL TO VARENNES I � , ..., ..., 0 � . -4 ..... N III ..., ...... '" 0 0"" � � � OJ OJ OJ Ul .0 ; � III 0 � � ..., � � ..., OJ OJ OJ ., ..... '" ..... III ..., ..., ..., ..., � :S Q) . "" .., "" III III cd cd .... Q) cd '" � � Po 'd � Po .: Po .: ...... III '"' to' Q) Q)...... Q) ..... Q) 0 0 0 0 (J) p. ., �� � � � � � � � � .: $ � D Wharf i tgJ 0 Class ification Location �oat Classificat Access Channe BR"in Wh,rf Port Ste. Helene 1966 5' 26 acres Ue Ste. HelEme to (b) 11 ' Lo�euil Boating 60 40 15 5 15 $150,000 1867 Nil Nil Nil 4' 00' 650' 4' 150 ' permanent Concrete Wharf Club Longueuil to 11 to Floating Dock , I (c) I) ' I) ' , il17' )00' 700' ?T-to i 10 ' :I : Club Nautique 25 60 20 Nil Nil $7,000 n/s. Nil Nil Nil NiJ Nil Nil 21 ' n/a temporary Floating Dock !Boucherville to (Barrels, Wood , Metal) i Boucherville (d) 29 ' i Fontaine n/a 200 200 40 Nil $17,000 1957 Natural Natural 4' 170' temporary Floating Dock Easso Marine to (Barrels) Tetreaultville )0 ' : (e) : Club Nautique de 100 90 20 5 4 $50,000 nla Nil Nil Nil Ni' Nil Nil )' 11O' temporary Floating Dock 'Pte. Aux Trembles to (Barrels) (f) 9' Jean Beaudouin 12 10 15 18 5 $160,000 1927 Nil Nil Nil 5' Natural 5' 128 ' temporary Floating Dock . Yacht Club to to (Wood) Pte. Aux Trembr;i 4O ' 4O '

•••2 o o o

TABLE NO. 20

MAR I ContINAS'd . ) ZONE (

Note I a) Boat Classification Class A = Less than 16 feet Class 1 = Between 16 and 26 feet Class 2 = Between 26 and 40 feet Class 3 = Between 40 and 65 feet Sailboat = Between 26 and 40 feet b) Port Ste. Helene : Can accomodate 262 boats of all types. Facilities include: a narrow boat barge - 850'"in length for mooring sailboats. c) Longueuil Boating Club : Proj ection: construction of a basin, a boat ramp , summer cottages and a breakwater. Total dredging cost for basin = $10,000. No damage caused by passing ships. d) Club Nautigue .de Boucherville : Construction of a new wharf. e) Fontaine Esso Marine l Facilities include summer cottages. f) Club Nautigue de Pte . Aux Trembles l Facilities include summer cottages, fuel pump. g) Jean Beaudouin Yacht Club : Facilities include : garage , storehouse for boat accessories , fuel pump , boat ramp . No damage caused by passing ships.

nla = not available or unknown o o o

TABLE NO. 21

BASIC DATAMlillINAS INVENTORY ZONE II VARENNES TO VERCHEHES

+' 0.: .... '" '" 1;1 +' ..: 0 .: .:01 01 ...O+'..... ,<:1 ,<:1 ,<:1 '" '" '" '" .0 OJ :;j EI :S ,<:1 ,<:1 ,<:1 ,<:1 +' '" '" '" '" .... '" .... '" +' to +' +> to +> !>O OJ oj oj oj oj .... OJ oj '" � Po <0 .: Po <0 .: Po .: ...... oj "';>Q) e 01· .... Q) .... Q) <> <> <>.... <> .... rt.l Po. '" �� A � A � A � "' :.. :.. ;; 0.: Wharf Location Boat Classification ..: <> Access Channe Wharf Classification Basin

Repentigny 20 70 50 10 5 $500,000 1962 7' 100 ' .800 ' 5' 210 ' 575 ' 5' 540 '. Temporary Floating Dock Country Club to to - Barrels, Logs , Wood. Repentigny (a) 8' 8'

�: a) Repentign.y Country Club Breakwater at Eastern end. Total Dredging Cost Evaluated at $10,000 , Facilities Include : swimming pool, restaurant. No damage caused by passing ships. b) Boat Classification Class A = Less than 16 feet Class 1 = Between 16 and 26 feet Class 2 = Between 26 and 40 feet Class 3 = Between 40 and 65 feet Sailboat = Between 26 and 40 feet (� "-.- ) o o

TABLE NO. 22 HARINAS BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE IV VERCHERES TO !.ANORAIE § M N ...... � "" '" II!0 � Ql Ql ....o+' ..... aJ OJ ,0 Ql .....:: .<: .<: ., M OJ ;j EI .<: .<: .<: .<: .<: ., ., aJ ., M ., +' '>0 +' � +' � ., � 0. ...'t:I � 0. 't:I... � 0. >: Ql MII! MII! M II! II! ..... '" II! ., M II! f.il>'" � '" ..... '" ..... '" � <> <> <> <> UJ iJ.< ., �� t=I :.: � t=I :.: � t=I � E-t ., � "" 0 <> Wharf Location Boat Classificatl�b Iilccess Channel Bas·in Wharf Classification Marina de Tracy 30 25 20 15 Nil $225,000 1965 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 24' 650' temporary Floating Dock Tracy (a) to Logs and Barrels 25' - Club de Yacht 8 5 3 2 2 $7,000 1961 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 12' 100 " temporary Floating Dock Richelieu to (Wood) St. Joseph de 1)' Sorel (b) Club de Yacht 50 50 6 5 ) $75,000 1948 10' 200 ' 690 ' 4' )00' 880 4' 1080' permanent Concrete Wharf Sorel to to to Interlocking sheet piling Sorel (c) ·12' 11 ' 11 ' Floating Dock Club . Nautique )0 )0 20 12 2 $)1,000 1959 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 11 ' 212' temporary Floating Dock de Berthierville to Wooden planks (d) 1) ' wi th Barrels -- - _. - --- �---

•••2 () o o

TABLEO N . 22

MARINAS ZONE (Cont 'd. IV )

Note : a) Marina de Tracy Facilities include : hotel, motel, fuel pump. Wharf length will be doubled. b ) Club de Ya cht Richelieu Facilities include : . restaurant , .boat ramp , fuel pump . No damage caused by passing ships . c ) Club de Yacht Sorel Concrete wharf belongs to D.P.W. , Canada. Facilities include . storehouse for boat accessories , garage , restaurant. No damage caused by passing ships. d) Club Nautigue de Berthierville Facilities include . shed boat . No dama ge caused by passing ships .

e ) Boat Classification Class A = Less than 16 feet Class I • Between 16 and 26 feet Class 2 • Between 26 and 40 feet Class J = Between 40 and 65 feet Sailboat • Between 26 and 40 feet ( --'I '-.-) o o

TABLE NO. 23

MARINAS BAS IC DATA INVENTORY ZONE V LANORAIE TO HEAD OF LAKE ST. PETER

Club Nautique d� 15 8 6 4 Nil $28,000 1953 6' Natural Nil Nil Nil 6' 80 ' temporary Floating Dock I Louiseville to to 120 Barrels Louiseville (a 7' 9' "Silofone" I ) Club Nautique 60 14 8 6 8 $35,000 1954 9' 100 ' 2700 ' Nil Nil Nil 3' 450' temporary Floating Dock La Batura to "Silofone" Nicolet (b 6' ---- ) ------

Note : a) Club Nautigue de Louiseville Facilities include :- summer cottages, lot� , swimming pool. Proj ection' construction of new wharf , parking lot, boat ramp , enlarging access channel. No damage caused by passing ships. b ) Club Nautigue La Batura Fac ilities include . summer cottages , lots , boat ramp . Projection: construction of a sailboat club , retaining walls.- No damage caused by passing ships .

c ) Boat Classification Class A = Less than 16 feet Class 1 = Between 16 and 26 feet Class 2 = Between 26 and 40 feet Class :3 = Between 40 and 65 feet Sailboat = Between 26 and 40 feet o TABLE NO. 24

MONTREAL HARBOUR

Table showing berthing lengths

- VB -

Ava ilable depth at Chart Datum

-�------r------:------'------.------Available Depths Length of Wharves % of Total Length 35 ' 17,819.10 ' 24.16 2,766.50 ' 3.75 4,505.51' 6.11 30 ' 28 ,170.53 ' 38.19 o 29 ' 16,117.64' 21.85 27 ' 802.80 ' 1.09 26' 3,056.90' 4.14 12' 102.50' 0.14

10' to 16 ' 421.55' 0.57

TOTAL 100.0%

o (j�.

TAELE NO. 25

SOREL HARBOUR

Table showing berthing lengths

- vs -

Available depth at Chart Datum

Available Depths Length of Wharves % of Total Length

;0' 1,176.60 ' 16.82 29 ' 690.00' 9.86 ---" "--.J 26 ' 1,103.10' 15.77 25' 2,572.00' 36.76 18' 288.00 ' 4.12 15' 1,166.00' 16.67

TOTAL . 6,995.70' 100.0% o

TABLE NO. 26

TROIS RIVIERES HARBOUR

Table showing berthing lengths

- vs -

Ava ilable depth at Chart Datum

'Available Depths Length of Wharves % of Total Length

i J5' 2,015.00 ' 21.14 O JO ' 7,516.00 ' 78.86

TOTAL 9 ,5J1. 00 ' 100.0%

I ,-,' " (' -- , "-) o C)

TABLE NO. 27

CLASSIFICATION OF PRESENT FUTURE SHORELINE PROTECTION WORKS AND

Len�ths in Feet

Shore wh ich is protected Shore on Shore on Shore on at the present time which local wh ich local wh ich local Total Future protection protection protection Length Harbour Marginal Protection Harbour would be would not would not in Development Wharves Wal ls Development justified be justified be necessary Feet

Zone I 76,000 N.A. 80,.580 1.5.5,92.5 78,982 40 ,6.50 101 ,64; .5;;,78

Zone II N.A. 2.54 2.5,409 .50,09; 91 ,10; 8; ,091 249 ,95 OJ r-! Zone III N.A. 1,871 48 ,900 � 81,6;1 86,0;7 144,211 ;62,6.5 () .... Zone 11,050 422 62,26; r-!. 81 ,8;7 220,882 926,196 1,;02,6.5 IV Po � Zone V N.A. N.A. 7,;04 N.A• 2,700 .560 ,2;5 .570,2; .: , � Zone VI 10,400 700 7,800 22,970 J'? ,;78 7,552 86,80

Total 'Length in Fest 97,450 ;,247 2;2,256 1.5.5,92.5 ;15,.51; 478,7.50 1,822,928 ;,106,06

N.A. • Non App licable C') o o

TABLE NO. 28

CLASSIFICATION OF PRESENT AND FUTURE SHORELINE PROTECTION WORKS

Zone I

Shore wh ioh is proteoted Shore on Shore on Shore on at the present time wh ioh looal whioh looal wh ich looal Total Future protection proteotion pro teotion Length Harbour Marginal ' Protection Harbour would be would not would not in Iles Development Wharves Walls Development justified justified be neoessary Feet be Ste-TMrbe 8,190 22,980 16,080 N.A. 47,25C a l'Aigle 6,958 8,992 15,950 • aux Fermiers 6,862 6,288 13,150 • �o , n1 :hli"� (J c) o

TABLE NO. 29 CLASSIFICATION or PRESENT SHORELINE PROTECTION WORKS AND FUTURE

Zone II

Shore which is ·protected Shore on Shore on Shore on at· the present time which local which local which local Total Future protection protection protection Length Harbour Marginal Protection HarboUr would be would not would not in Iles Development Wharves Walls Development justified be justified be necessary Feet

'-- Ile l'Aiglon N.A. 10,700 a 10 ,700 au Bois Blanc 600 4,150 4,750 au Cerfeuil • 2,675 4,725 7,400

Marie 12,488 • 16,612 29,100 6,850 Dansereau •

South Shore Varennes Vercheres 182' 2;.909 19 ,109 N.A. N.A. 4; ,20C °

254 25,409 N.A. 50,09) 91 ,10; 8;,091 249 ,950

Ii.A. = Nqn Applicable (-\ U o o

T.AELE 30 NO. CLASSIFICATION OF , PliESEiiT' AND FUTURE SHORELINE PROTE CTION WOllKS

Zone III

Shore which is protected Shore on Shore on Shore on llt the present time which local which local wh ich local Total Future protection protection protection Length Harbour Marginal Protection Harbour would be would not would not in Iles Development Wharves Walls Development justified be justified be necessary Feet

St. 6,451 17,799 24,250 Ours Duval 9,700 9,700 Contrecoeur 7,250 7,250 Rondeau 3,700 3,700 • Grande Ile 9,050 9,050 ..,z• Devant 1 'Eglise z 6,150 6,150 Hurteau OJ 3,600 3,600 o-i a Plante � aux Bats 936 ., 7,164 8,100 CD OJ OJ CD 900 '.-1 3,000 3,900 Bonin o-i o-i o-i o-i o-i aux Veaux � � � � N.A. "" 7,650 7,650 ., ., ., C> � • •.-1 . 1,880 2,350 a Brillant •.-1 .-1 ... 470 o-i

- -- N.A. N.A. 81 ,631 86,037 144 ,211 362 ,650 Total Length in Feet ; 1,871 ,48,900 , N.A. = :Non Applicable 'I (-! o o

TABLE NO. 31 CLASSIFICATION OF PRESENT FUTURE SHORELINE PROTECTION WORKS AND

Zone IV

Shore which is protected Shore on Shore on Shore on a.t the present time which local wh ich local which local Total --- Future protection protection protection Length Harbour Marginal Protection Harbour would be would not would not in nes Development Wharves Walls Development justified be justified be necessary Feet

Iap ierre 14,700 11 ,700 16 ,850 43,250 nets Peces 7,800 26,800 34,600 a la Perche 18,100 N.A. 18,100 du Chenal a Cote 11 ,650 N.A. 11 ,650 Millette 3,300 14,900 18 ,200 Iacroix • 4,200 3,800 8,000 «: D'Embaras • N.A. 10 ,000 10 ,000 St. Pierre . :;" N.A. 5,750 5,750 aux Raisins 1,200 23 ,300 24 ,500 Bibeau 1,200 2,350 3,550 du Moine 9,000 12,000 33,050 54,050 Plate N.A. N.A. 21 ,050 21,050 aux Corbeaux Q) Q) Q) Q) N�A. 3,000 22,350 25 ,350 de Grace r-I r-I r-I r-I � � � � 9,000 10 ,200 45 ,500 64,700 des Barques 0 0 0 0 3,300 N.A. 17 ,300 20 ,600 OM ·M OM OM Grande ne r-I r-I r-I r-I N.A. 46,300 46,300 aux Sables ", ", ", ", 1,800 ", 71 ,450 73 ,250 a Letendre � � � <4 N.A• 19 ,350 19 ,350

TABLE NO. 31 "

- 2 - CLASSIFICATION OF PRESENT AND FUTURE SHORELINE PROTECTION WORKS

Zone IV

Shore on Shore on Shore on Shore wh ich is protected ,I which local which local which local Total at the present time Future protection protection protection Lengtl " ! Harbour MarginaC - rotection Harbour I would be would not would not in nes Development Wharves Walls Development justified be justified be necessarJ Feet

Dupas N.A. 15,000 111 ,650 126,650 Made. • 600 1,500 52,550 54,65C Bonde <01• • 4,060 10 ,440 14,50C IZ; <4 Ducharme • • 3,300 17 ,650 20,95C z a l'Orme <4 5,900 N.A. 5,90G St. Ignace St; Ignace l2i " Loyola 372 12;000 4,800 17 ,700 19 ,178 54,050 OJ • St. Amour ...... N.A. 900 7,550 8,450 du Sable �" � N.A. 2,296 3,654 5,950 " " Deirvillier ...... 4,689 N.A • 7,761 12,450 .... OJ .... Castor } Po .... Po du Milieu � � � 2,100 5,400 75,650 83 ,1.50 " • St. Amand ,::: ..... <4• ,::: :3,000 22,150 25,150 .... 0 aux Foins � I Po Z z 7,409 5,:391 12,800 • "aux Vaches � <4 4,4.50 • 4,450 N.A. des Plante ,::: z 900 8,7.50 9,650 � North Shore 4,963 14,928 :33 ,167 52 , 542 105,600

South Shore 11 ,050 Colonie des 44 ,700 19 , :320 10 ,1.50 18 ,680 10:3,9.50 Graves , 50 i II Total Length � 11 ,050 422 62,263 I N.A. 81 ,8:37 220,882 926 ,196 o in Feet I I " N.A. = Non Applicable i o o o

TABLE NO. 32 CLASSIFICATION OF PRESENT FUTURE SHORELINE PROTECT ION WORKS AND

Zone V Shore which is protected Shore on Shore on Shore on at the present time which local which local which local Total Future protection protection protection Lengtt Harbour Marginal Protection Harb.our would be would not would not in Iles - Development Wharves Walls Development justified be justified be necessary Feet

• Landry <>l• 4,000 4,OO( :<; • ll ,50 aux Cochons 11,500 ( a l'Aigle <>l• 2,700 35 ,100 37 ,80t :<; de la Girodeau • • • • 47,800 47 ,80t � � � �• . . North Shore :zi :<; 7,304 i :<; :zi N.A. 191 ,185 198 ,48� i South Shore N.A. N.A. 270,650 270,65( I Total Length in N.A. N.A. 7,304 N.A. N.A. 2,700 560 ,235 570 ,23� Feet I

N.A. = Non Applicable (5 o o

TABLE NO. 33 CLASSIFICATION OF PRESENT AND FUTURE SHORELlllE PROTECTION WORKS Zone VI . .. - -._. . _- _ - - , - ! - Shore which i� protected - Shore o hore on Shore on I - ! at the present time - I which local� I whichs local which local Total 1------Future I protection protection protection Length Harbour Marginal Protection Harbour . I would be would not would not in Development Wharves Walls Development justified be justified be necessary Feet ! i Trois P. des i North Shore Rivieres Ormes I 10,400 600 6,000 6,392 10,756 7,552 41,700 I • I � St. • . p. :z; I South Shore Francois H.!.. I 100 1,800 16,578 26 ,622 N.A. 45 ,100 I . - Total Length in 10,400 700 7,800 N.A. 22,970 37 ,378 7,552 86,800 Feet I !

i

N.A. = Non Applicable ( ' () --.) o

TAB LE NO. 34 ·

W.ATER INTAliliS SEWER OUTFALLS & BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE I (NORTH SHORE ) MONTREAL TO VARENNES

c.ounty Pity or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation'" Slope Diameter in inch at Water ln inch Surface

Riverside St. 72 Bonaventure Pl o nla Youville St. 48

Papineau St •. 72 Craig St . 72 . Delo:dmier St. 120 Fullum St. 66 Q) D I Iberville St. 78 ...... 0 Dezerie St. 72

Pte. aux 97th Avenue 21 12.6 .011 Trembles 96th Avenue 18 12.85 .015 • 94th Avenue 21 13.30 .034 ...:. 81st Avenue 102 0.7 .03 � 79th Avenue 24 13.30 .022 ( " Vi C) o

TAB LE 34 NO. - 2 -

ZONE I ( Cont 'd.)

...... �...... County C�ty or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation� Slope Diameter , in inch at Water in inch Surface

60th Avenue' 18 13.1 .05 57th Avenue 18 12.0 .10 55th Avenue 15 17.60 .025 Q) n v l Pte. aux la a .52nd Avenue 36 14.25 .005 � Trembles de la Rousseliere 24 19.27 .02 () .... . 42nd Avenue ' 12 nj.a , n/a n . Po 35th Avenue 18 19. 20 .025 Po ..: 24th Avenue 54 22.4 nja 0.:: St. Jean Baptiste St. 102 2.0 .061 z

Montreal East Place de l'Eglise 48 rJa . n/a .

Elevation in feet ab ove M. S.L. ref. to G.S.C. *

,n/a = Not ava ilable or unknown (-\ U o o

TABLE NO. 35 WATER INTAKES SEWER OUT��LS BASIC DATA& INVENTORY ZONE I (Cont 'd.) (SOUTH SHORE) 110NTREAL TO VARENNES

County City or Town . Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation"'- . Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface Longueuil Normandie St. 150 5.66 .006 72

.

Western Limit of #1 ** 132 2.00 .005 2,300' East. from #1 24 4,100' East from #1 24 � oj Jacques 4,600' East from #1 132 s:: ? Cartier Jacques Cartier Bl. 132 10.80 .001 1,100' East from J. Cartier

Bl. 60 n/a .017 CD 1,300' East L.H. Lafontaine 132 4.00 .001 .... � 0 de la Barre St. OM 24 10.00 .013 .... Frechette St. 36 n/a Po Cicot St. 15 16.27 oj � Bachand St. 12 n/a a- s:: Lot # 40 41 48 7.50 .027 � Chambly Boucherville Marguerite& Bourgeois St. 30 Desmarteaux St. 10 Guerin St. 10 � 110n tarville St. 10 s:: 350 ' East from Dumontier 24 Demy St. � 12 14.18 0 St. Pierre St. 24 17.67 s:: de Varennes St. 30 12.49 l10ntmagny St. 30 � �le zy St. � 48 s:: o o o

TAilLE NO. 35

- 2 - ZONE I (Cont 'd.) (SOUTH SHORE) County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation"" Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface

Birts St. 9 d'Argenson St. 42 Pierre Boucher St. 12 Q) .0 8 § § .... Chambly Bouchervill� de Grand Pre St, 0 0 I\l Grosbois St.. 10 0 \ ..... Lafontaine St. 10 .... p. Lapierre St. 10 � � � Montbrun St. 12 .: z0 Varennes East from St. Charles Riv. 36 8.55 .002

Vercheres Paroisse Ste. Hichel Nessier St. 36 12.00 .017 Anne de Varennes

Note ,

627 ** Sewer number which can be found in Plan No. St. L.S.C. , D.O.T. Elevation in feet ab ove M. S.L. ref. to G. S.C. * n/a = Not available or unknown o o o

'l'AinE NO. 36 WATER INTAKES SEWER OUTFALLS & BAS IC DA�A INVENTORY ZONE n (NORTH SHORE) VARENNES TO VERCHEHES

County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Iva ter Intakes Diameter Elevation""'- Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface

Des Bouleaux St. Legardeur Bridge Robert St . 700 ' West from St. Louis St. 1 St. Louis St. . - Bonaventure St. 24 Jean Talon St . 18 Levesque Blvd. n/a D'Argenson Blvd. , 72 700 ' East from D'Argenson 36

Place Elmirador 18 Q) L'Assomption Repentigny Des Chevaliers n/a .... Thouin St . 30 � ! 0 }lB.lo St . � � 'M Claude St. 0 0 -"a, Florin St . � � >1 300 ' East from Florin St. '" i i 0 1,100' East from Florin St. :0; LaSalle St. 24 Denis Ave . Camille St. � LeFran<;ois St. '" BelleFeuille Ave. Prud 'homme Blvd. 72 Gagne St. n/a 2,250 ' East from Babin St. 36 \J( -�\ o o

TAB LE NO. 37

,WATER INTAKES SEWER OUTI!'ALLS & BASIC DATA INVEllTORY . ZONE III (NORTH SHORE) V,;;aCHERES TO LA.!{QRAIE

County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Dl.ameter Elevatl.on"': tilope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface

. ,Berthier Lavaltrie' Arcand St. 21

St. Joseph de Lanoraie Arpin St. 12 13.41 nla

(SOUTH SHORE)

Ve rcheres Village de St. Joseph St . 48 n/a .02 Contrecoeur St. Joseph St . 30 n/a n/a 2 x 10 Contrecoeur Wharf

Paro isse de 12 n a n Contrecoeur Viau St. :! / /a

Elevation in feet above M. S.L. ref. to G.S.C. *

n a • Not ava ilable or l unknown u o o

TABLE NO. 38 WATER INTAKES SEWER OUTFALLS BASIC DATA& INVENTORY -ZONE IV (NORTH SHORE) LANORAIE TO ST. PETER LAKE County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation'" Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface

Riviere Bayonne · Ste •. Genevieve 1,500 ' East from St. 15 9.4 .002 de Berthier' Lawrence River

Riviere Chaloupe 12 11.5 nla

'" .... Riviere Bayonne 1,500' West � 0 from St. Lawrence River 12 14.02 'M .... Bienville St. 12 nla p. Jacques Cartier St. 12 13.31 � d'Iberville St. 8 13.48 0<1 Barthier Berthierville Champlain St. 12 13.03 :<; 2,300 ' North from Champlain 24 13.22 800 ' No rth from Champlain 42 11.80 � St . Genevieve St. 12 14. 00 du College St. 30 12.77 i de Laval St. 12 12.71 1,100' South from Laval St. 10 14.50

* Elevation in feet above M. S.L. ref. to G.S. C.

nla = not available or unknown u (J o

TABLE NO. 39 WATER TI�TAKES S OUTFALLS BASIC DATA& INVENTORYEWER ZONE (Cont 'd.) (SOUTllIV SHORE) LANOHAn; TO ST. PBTER LAKE - County City or Town Location Sewer Outfa11s Water Int�kes Diameter Blevation"" Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface

Sorel HI ** 72 2 22 3 36 4 42 5 22 6 18 . Riche lieu Sorel 7 24 Q) 8 n/a .... 9 12 � 0 10 12 ...... 11 12 0� 0� Po 12 15 .>:.: .: � 13 36 § § 0.: 14- 12 "" 15 60 16 36 17 42 18 42 . Ste. Anne de . Sorel 30 n/a n/a (] o o

TABLE NO. 39 - 2 -

Cont 'd. ) ZONE IV ( (SOUTH SHORE)

County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation"'"' Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch Surface

Richelieu Tracy Lot fi36 30 8.30 .02 N.A. Tache St. 48 7.20 .01 N.A. Na.ndeville St. 48 nla • 02 N.A • Langevin St. 36 7.30 • 025 N.A•

Note . **'Numbers in Location column correspond to sewer numbers to be , Found in Plan #851 St. L.S.C. - D.O.T.

* Elevation in feet above M. S.L. ref. to G.S.C.

nla = Not available or unknown

N.A. = Non Applicable G o ()

TABLE NO. 40 OUTb"'A1I.'3 WATER INTAKES & SE.'WER BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE V (NORTH SHORE) LAKE ST. PETER County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation'" Slope Diameter . in inch at Water in inch Surface St. Martin St. (a) )6 15.97 220 ' North from St. Martin St. (a) 12 20.98 620 ' North from St. Martin St. (a) . 10 20.64 St. Jacques St. (a) )6 1).40 )75 ' North from St. Jacques St. (a) nla 21.96 St. Lauren� St. (a) 12 20.00 � Ql 0 ..... Maskinonge Louiseville 225 ' North from St. Laurent ,:: .0'" St. (a) 6 nla 0 ..... )65 ' North from St. Laurent § ..... "" St. (a) 8 nla "" 90' North from Ste. Dorothe <>l ,:: St. (aj 18 22.00 0 500 ' South from Ste. Dorothe z St. (a) 6 17.68 1,100' South from Ste. Dorothe St. (a) 8 14.68 50 ' North from Railroad (b) 12 16.00 .06 100 ' South from St. Jacques St. (b) 12 22.66 St. Elisabeth (b) 24 18. 20 Pare Avenue (b) 15 2).09 -? Lupien St. (b) 18 n/a () o u

TAB LE NO. 41 - 2 -

ZON� V (Cont 'd. ) (SOUTH SHORE)

. County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Wa ter Intakes Diameter Elevat ion"'- Slope Diameter in inch at Water in inch - Surface

Yamaska Village de de i'Eglise St. :30 8.0 (c ) n/a 6 Pierreville

Ball St . :30 n/a Unknown 48 .08. • Lasalle St. 24 � .01 0 • Nicolet Nicolet Cresse St . 12 I:l :z; Leprohon St. 12 1- Pan et St. :38 § St. Laurent St. 18

�: (a) Sewer outlet at Riviere du Loup (b ) Sewer outlet at Petite Riviere du Loup· (c ) Sewer outlet at Riviere St. Frangois

Elevation in feet ab ove M. S.L. ref. * to G. S.C. n/a = Not available or unknown N.A. = Non Applicable (J o o

TAB LE NO. 42

WATER INTAKES & SEWER OUTFALLS BASIC DATA INVENTORY ZONE VI (NORTH SHORE) LAKE ST. PETER TO TROIS-RIVIERES County City or Town Location Sewer Outfalls Water Intakes Diameter Elevation'" Slope Diameter , in inch at Water in inch Surface Deniel St. 96 10.01 Trois Boulet St. 60 - 3.00 � Rivieres Rene St. 60 - 3.00

*Elevation in feet ab ove M.S.L. ref. to G.S.C.

n/a = Not available or unknown TAB LE NO. 43

SHORES OF ST_LAWRENCE RIVER o THE (Montreal to Tro is-Rivieres ) Including Islands

LENGTH OF SHORE IN MILES

TOTAL 92.8 588.0

(ZONE 1 TO ZONE 6)

N.A ••non applicable -

------() TABLE NO. 44 PHESENT SHORELINE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEhT

MONTREAL _ TROIS_RIVIERES

OF SHORE HILES LENGTH IN TOTAL LENGTH ZONE III ZONE ZONE ZONE VI IN NILES Shoreline ZONE I ZONE II IV V economic classification

Industrial and commercial 17.4 0.3 2.8 2.2 3.1 25.8 N.A.

Municipa.l 22.1 6.6 4.5 4.6 0.7 0.6 39.1

0 Reaidential 8.0 6.1 13.1 26.6 5.8 6.6 66.2 Recreational 1.8 0.4 1.0 2.6 1.8 0.1 7.7

Farming 51.8 33·9 47.2 210.7 86.9 5.9 436.4

Firing range 12.8 12.8 :I.A. N.A. H.A. N.A. N.A.

TOTAL LENGTH IN MILES 101.1 68.6 246.7 108.0 16.3 588.0

N.A•• non applicable (I o o �

TABLE NO. 45 Total Present Property Values In Dollars Cost of Land Per Acre * Montreal - Trois Rivieres (Zone I to Zone VI)

Zone I Zone II III -Zone IV Zone V Zone VI Zone . BORTii SHORE Industrial and Commercial Unknown N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,534 Municipal Unknown 18,478 . N.A.5,792 1l,965 6,098 9,146 Residential Unknown 10,499 4,036- 3,571 8ll 6,190 Recreational Unknown 16,1l7 4,036 3,182 - 5,227 5,227 Farming Unknown 2,198 215 91 91 1,299

SOUTH SHORE , Industrial and Commercial 10 ,000 3,1l8 11,836 10,890 N.A. N.A. Municipal 51,026 8,712 10,359 13,068 N.A. N.A.

Residential 10 ,000 3,267 _ 3,302 II ,490 6,534 6,534 Recreational 10 ,000 N.A. _ 2,732 2,613 6,534 6,534 Farming 928 179 207 N.A. 105 296 N.A. 1� .A. N.A. Firing Range Ii.i.. N.A.. 200 ISLANDS

Municipal . N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,534 N.A• N.A� Residential 200 N.A. N.A. 2,178 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. Recreational 200 B.A. 1,880 N.A. Farming 200 200 234 389 389 N.A.

*Base year taken for appraisal is 1970.

B.A•• Non Applicable o

TABLE NO. 46 PHESENT SHORELINE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMSNT* ZONE I

Length of Shore in Miles Cost of Land Per Acre* ' North Shore South Shore Islands

Industrial and Commercial 17.4 Unknown $10,000. N.A.

Municipal 22.1 Unknown $51 ,026. N.A.

Residential 8.0 Unknown $10,000. $200. o Recreational 1.8 Unknown SlO,OOO. $200.

Farming 51.B" Unknown $ 928. $200.

, Total Length in Miles 101.1

N.A. I Non Applicable *Base year taken for appraisa� is 1970 o

TABLE NO. 47 PRESENT SHORELINE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT* , ZONE II

Length of Shore in Miles Cost of Land Per Acre� ' North Shore South Shore Islands

Industrial and Commercial 0.3 N.A. $3,118. N.A.

, MuniCipal 6.6 $18,478. $8,712. N.A.

Residential 6.1 $10,499. $3 ,267. N.A. o Recreational 0.4 $16 ,117. N.A. N.A.

Farming 33.9 $ 2,198. $ 179. $200.'

Total Length in 1111es 47.3

,!'l.A. : Non Applicable ' Base year taken for appraisal is 1970. *

---'--" ------... ---- -_ ... o

TABLE NO. 48 PRESENT SHORELINE . ECONO!lIC DEVEWPMENT* ZONE III

Length of Shore in Miles Cost of Land Per Acre*. North Shore South Shore Islands

Industrial and Commercial 2.8 N.A. $1l ,836. N.A.

Municipal 4.5 $5,792. $10,359. N.A.

Residential 13.1 $4,036. $ 3,302. N.A. o Recreational 1.0 $4,036. $ 2,132. N.A.

Farming 47.2 $ 215. i 207. $234.

- Total Length in Miles 68.6

N.A. : Non Applicable

*Base year taken for appraisal is 1970 o

TABLE NO. 49 * PRESENT SHORELINE ECCJI'WllIC DEVE LCJPMENT

ZOHE IV

* Length of Shore in Miles Cost of Lend Per Acre North Shore South Shore Islands

Industrial and Commercial 2.2 N.A. $10,890. N.A.

Municipal 4. 6 :ill ,965. $13 ,068. $6 ,534.

Residential 26.6 $ 3,571- �1l ,490. $2 ,178.

Recreational 2.6 3,182. 2,613. lil ,840. o i $

Farming 91. II.A. 389 . 210.7 $ i

Total Length in Hiles 246. 7

N.A•• Non Applicable

* Base year taken for appraisal is 1970

() o

TABLE NO. 50 PRESENT SHORELINE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT* ZONE V

Length of Shore in Miles Cost of Lend Per Acre* North Sho"re South Shore Islands

Industrial and Commercial , N.A. N.A.- N.A.

Municipal 0.7 $6,098. N.A. N.!.

Residential 5.8 $ 811. $6,5:34. N.A. o Recreational 1.8 '5 ,227. '6,5:34. '100.

Farming 86.9 $ 91. $ 105. ':389.

Firing Range 12.8 N.A. $ 200. N.A.

Total Length in Miles 108.0

N.A. I Non Applicable

Base year taken for appraisal is 1970 * o

TABLE NO. 51 PRESENT SHORELINE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT*'

ZONE VI

Length of Shore in Miles Cost of Land Per Acre* North ShorE South Shore Islands

Industrial and , Commercial :3.1 16 ,5:34. N.A. N.A.

�!un icipal 0.6 $9 ,146. N.A. N.A.

I Residential 6.6 $6,190. 16,5:34. N.A. o Recreational 0.1 $5,227. a6,5:34. N.A.

Farming 5.9 $1 ,299. $ 296. N.A.

Total Length in Miles 16. :3

N.A.: · Non Appl icable

Base year taken for appraisal is 1970 *

1(:.]