Hamlin Beach State Park Cooperative Beach Erosion Control Project, Lake
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FINAL ENV IRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMEIiT HAMLIN BEACH STATE PARK COOPERATIVE BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECT LAKE ONTARIO, MONROE COUNTY, NEU YORK Prepared by: " , ' ' r — !- •• EuCCcJo, !’ -iT ” o-k HAMLIN BEACH STATE PARK COOPERATIVE BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECT LAKE ONTARIO, MONROE COUNTY, NEW YORK ( ) Draft (X) Final Environmental Impact Statement Responsible Officer: TJ. S. Army Engineer District, Buffalo, New York 1. Name of Action: (x) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Improvement of a portion of the Lake Ontario frontage of Hamlin Beach State Park. The project includes seven groins and placement of sand fill along about A,250 feet of frontage to provide a beach that will adequately accommodate up to 11,600 persons at peak capacity. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: The existing shore will continue to be used as a public bathing beach. Its natural appearance will be _maintained_and even enhanced by the widening of the sand beach. b. Adverse Environmental Impacts: Temporary effects of con struction, such as turbidity, extensive truck traffic, and disfigure- . meat of the park by access roads. Ncne permanent. A. Alternatives: Alternatives to the proposed project are: a. No project. b. Offshore breakwater. c. Groins arranged normal to the existing shoreline. d. Obtain sand from lake rather than upland source. 5. Comcnfs Requested: Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Environmental Protection Agency, Region V Bureau of Sport Fisheries, Boston, Mass. League of ‘.'omen Voters of the Rochester Metropolitan Area Director, New York State Historic Trust Director. Dent, of Enviropmonrai Cutwcrvefion Geneses State Park Commission Ninth Coast Guard District Monroe County Environmental Management Council Central New York Regional Planning Board Genesee Finger Lakes Regional Planning Board Office of Environmental Project Review, Department of the Interior 6. Draft Statement to CEQ 24 May 1972 Final Statement to CEQ 1 P£C \ S / l . HAMLIN BEACH STATE PARK COOPERATIVE BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECT LAKE ONTARIO, MONROE COUNTY, NEW YORK ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT t. 1. Project Description. The project plan provides for the Improve ment of a portion of the Lake Ontario frontage of Hamlin Beach State P^rk in the town of Hamlin, Monroe County, New York, about 20 miles westerly of Rochester, New York. The proposed sand beach will be provided by placement of approximately 250,000 cubic yards of sand fill along about A,250 feet of the frontage near the middle of the 3-1/2 mile total frontage. It will provide protection against further erosion and a bathing beach that will adequately accommodate up to 11,600 persons at peak capacity. Sand fill will be obtained from upland sources. The lake sand discussed in the 1970 reprint by Sutton et al suggests that the relatively high percentage of fines (average 30%) may limit its economic use. It is considered too fine for this application. The project also includes seven groins, six of which will be new stone groins and the seventh will be a modification of an existing concrete groin. The groins will be constructed perpendicular to the direction of the stabilised beach. The project was authorized by the 195S River and Harbor Act in accordance with the plan described in House Document No. 138, 84th Congress, 1st Session. Minor changes were made in the project plan during the preconstruction planning. A design nenerandun was approved by the Chief of Engineers on 12 October 19/0. Plans and Specifications are being prepared by the State of New York. State funds have teen appropriated for initiating construction and bids will be invited as soon as plans and specifications are completed and approved. Construction should be undertaken during the summer of 1972. The project is estimated to return annual recreational benefits of $220,000 at an average annual cost of $115,800 showing a benefit-cost ratio of about 1.8. 2. Environmental Setting Without the Project. a. There are very few natural sand beaches along the south shore of Lake Ontario. Those that exist are generally the result of accretion over many years adjacent to major harbor structures. The largest of these in the vicinity of Rochester is the city-owned Ontario Beach just westerly of the U. S. West Pier at the mouth of the Genesee River. However, this public bathing beach and other public beaches Co the east, at DuranJ-ha-stwi* Park and Webster Par!:, have been closed for several years becu.*oe of pollution coning fren the Genesee River and nearby city sewer outfalls. Ilamlin Beach State Park is updrift of and far enough removed from these major sources of pollution to be free from dangerous contamination. A letter report on tests of all beaches in the Rochester area by the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, now the Environmental Protection Agency, in January 1970, states that the water quality at Hamlin Beach has met and probably will continue to meet its standards for bathing beaches. , b. The park comprises approximately 1,100 acres vhlch front on about 18,200 feet of lake shoreline. It provides a number of recreational activities including bathing, picnicking, camping and nature study. Preconstruction planning is underway on an authorized federal project for a small boat harbor within the park limits. A list of the indigenous flora and fauna has been provided by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife and is attached to this report. c. Beach erosion has long been a problem at Hamlin. Strong ■ littoral currents are generated predominantly in a west-to-east direction. These, along with frequent storm action, have in the past eroded the beaches and low bluffs at Hamlin Beach, without replacing the lost material. A continuous history of erosion cf the park frontage in its natural state and the absence of an adequate source of suitable beach-building material indicate that the natural supply of sand by littoral movement is inadequate \ o provide beaches within the park limits to the extent desired. As a result, the existing beaches at Hamlin are too narrow to provide full protection to the shore and upland property or to provide sufficient beach area to meet the present demands for public bathing beaches in the Rochester area. d. The trend of development at Hamlin Beach State Park has been toward anticipation of increased usage. Presently there arc trailer campsites and cabins, picnic and playground areas and quite adequate bathhouse facilities. Parking facilities have been expanded in anticipation of increased park usage and presently exceed current needs. 3. The Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action. a. The proposed action will not change the environmental aspects of the park frontage. The shore will continue to be used as a public bathing beach. Its natural appearance will be maintained and even enhanced by the widening of the sand beach. The quality of urban life in the area will be improved, and additional bathers attracted, by the additional recreational resources the project will provide. The proposed improvement should have no harmful effects on adjacent shores and any losses of fill from the improvement will provide nourishment of adjacent beaches. The groins are designed to retain, rather than to trap sand. In general, the project should have a minimal environmental impact on an area that is already extensively used for bathing, swimming and other water-oriented activities. b. The State of New York, as a part of its cooperation, has agreed to control water pollution to the extent necessary to safe guard the health of bathers, and to provide suitable access and bathhouse, comfort, parking, and recreational facilities adequate to insure realization of anticipated recreational benefits. 4. Any Adverse Environmental Effects which cannot be Avoided Should the Proposed Project be Implemented. a. During construction, unavoidable interference with public use of the beach will occur. Depending upon the source and quality of the beach fill, temporary turbidity may occur due to loss of fine material during construction. Extensive truck traffic will interfere with normal park use. Some temporary disfigurement of the park by access roads and the presence of construction equipment will occur. Noise and dust from construction activities are un avoidable. These effects have been recognized and special conditions in the plans and specifications will control construction activities to reduce the detrimental effects to minimum levels. b. The Contractor will be required to obtain his construction materials in a manner so that allowable dust standards are not exceeded, and with a minimum of blemish to the earth. _ 5 . Alternatives to the Proposed Action. a. One alternative to the proposed action would be to forego the proposed project, and to continue to use the beach in its present condition. Net recreational benefits of about $100,000 annually would be foregone. Considering, however, that this alternative may lead to a recreational slum due to increased demand and overuse, the $100,000 figure may actually be an overestimate. b. An offshore breakwater of stone or steel sheet piling to protect the beach would be an acceptable solution in so far as pro tecting the beach. However, either type of construction would be aesthetically unacceptable to the State of New York, and would be likely to trap algae during the bathing season. In addition, this scheme would not provide a larger beach. c. Another alternative considered involved the use of groins arranged normal to the existing shoreline. This would provide an extremely wide beach at the updrift side of each groin. In addition to requiring longer groins and more beach fill, thus increasing the cost, the extreme width of beach at the updrift side of each groin would not be attractive or used except for a narrow strip at the water’s edge. d. It would have been desirable to exploit other than an upland source of beach sand.