DOCSLIB.ORG

Coastal Erosion, Sediment Transport, and Prioritization Management Strategy Assessment for Shoreline Protection Scituate, Massachusetts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Coastal Erosion, Sediment Transport, and Prioritization Management Strategy Assessment for Shoreline Protection Scituate, Massachusetts Coastal Erosion, Sediment Transport, and Prioritization Management Strategy Assessment for Shoreline Protection Scituate, Massachusetts August 2016 Photo by Kevin Ham Prepared by: Applied Coastal Research and Engineering, Inc. 766 Falmouth Road, Suite A1 Mashpee, Massachusetts 02649 Prepared for: Town of Scituate 600 Chief Justice Cushing Highway Scituate, Massachusetts 02066 Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management 251 Causeway Street, Suite 800 Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Prioritization Management Strategy for Shoreline Protection Scituate, MA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Analysis of Coastal Change and Sediment Transport Processes ................................. 2 1.2 Assessment of Historical Storm Damage Based on Storm Severity ............................. 4 1.3 Development of Prioritization Criteria for Coastal Resiliency ........................................ 4 1.4 Determination of Appropriate Shore Protection and/or Coastal Management Approaches ................................................................................................................. 5 1.5 Evaluation of Shore Protection and/or Management Strategies by Shoreline Stretch ........................................................................................................................ 6 1.6 Public Working Sessions.............................................................................................. 6 2.0 Historical Coastal Change ............................................................................................ 7 2.1 Shoreline Change Analysis .......................................................................................... 8 2.2 Topographic/Bathymetric Change Analysis .................................................................16 3.0 Wave and Sediment Transport Modeling ....................................................................26 3.1 Wave and Wind Data ..................................................................................................26 3.2 SWAN Model Development ........................................................................................27 3.3 Sea Level Rise Considerations ...................................................................................37 3.4 Sediment Transport and Shoreline Evolution Modeling ...............................................39 3.4.1 Formulation of Sediment Transport and Shoreline Model ....................................40 3.4.2 Model Calibration Example ..................................................................................42 4.0 Historical Storm Damage .............................................................................................49 4.1 FEMA Repetitive Loss Claims by Storm (1978-2015) .................................................50 4.2 Selected Storms .........................................................................................................52 4.2.1 Blizzard of 1978 ...................................................................................................54 4.2.2 1991 No-Name Storm ..........................................................................................56 4.2.3 Recent Storms – Winter Storm Nemo (2013) and Winter Storm Juno (2015) .......58 5.0 Prioritization Criteria ....................................................................................................63 5.1 Study Areas ................................................................................................................63 5.2 Damage Susceptibility of Private Properties................................................................66 5.3 Landform Elevation .....................................................................................................72 5.4 Damage Susceptibility of Public Utilities ......................................................................74 5.5 Emergency Egress ......................................................................................................79 5.6 Breaching Potential .....................................................................................................80 5.7 Coastal Engineering Structure Condition ....................................................................83 5.8 Prioritization Matrix .....................................................................................................86 6.0 Engineered Shore Protection Approaches .................................................................88 6.1 Maintain Status Quo ...................................................................................................88 6.2 Seawalls and Revetments ...........................................................................................90 6.3 Beach Nourishment ....................................................................................................96 6.4 Constructed Dunes .....................................................................................................99 6.5 Offshore Breakwaters ...............................................................................................101 6.6 Boulder Dike .............................................................................................................104 6.7 Elevate Road ............................................................................................................107 i Prioritization Management Strategy for Shoreline Protection Scituate, MA 6.8 Drainage Improvements for the Basins .....................................................................108 6.9 Protection Improvements for Pump Stations .............................................................109 6.10 Managed Retreat ......................................................................................................110 6.11 Elevate Buildings ......................................................................................................111 6.12 Other Innovative Approaches ....................................................................................111 7.0 Shore Protection Approaches by Study Area ..........................................................116 7.1 Minot Beach ..............................................................................................................117 7.2 North Scituate Beach ................................................................................................123 7.3 Surfside Road ...........................................................................................................127 7.4 Mann Hill Beach ........................................................................................................129 7.5 Egypt Beach .............................................................................................................132 7.6 Oceanside Drive .......................................................................................................136 7.7 Cedar Point ...............................................................................................................140 7.8 First Cliff ...................................................................................................................145 7.9 Edward Foster Road ................................................................................................. 147 7.10 Second Cliff ..............................................................................................................151 7.11 Peggotty Beach ........................................................................................................153 7.12 Third Cliff ..................................................................................................................163 7.13 Fourth Cliff ................................................................................................................166 7.14 Humarock North ........................................................................................................167 7.15 Humarock South .......................................................................................................176 8.0 References ..................................................................................................................181 Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................... Glossary-1 Appendix A ............................................................................................................................ A-1 Appendix B ............................................................................................................................ B-1 Appendix C ............................................................................................................................ C-1 Appendix D ............................................................................................................................ D-1 Appendix E ............................................................................................................................ E-1 Appendix F ............................................................................................................................ F-1 ii Prioritization Management Strategy for Shoreline Protection Scituate, MA LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Map of Massachusetts showing the location and orientation of the Scituate coastline. ...........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Massachusetts Commercial Fishing Port Profiles
    MASSACHUSETTS COMMERCIAL FISHING PORT PROFILES The Massachusetts Commercial Fishing Port Profiles were developed through a collaboration between the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, the University of Massachusetts Boston’s Urban Harbors Institute, and the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance. Using data from commercial regional permits, the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program’s (ACCSP) Standard Atlantic Fisheries Information System (SAFIS) Dealer Database, and harbormaster and fishermen surveys, these profiles provide an overview of the commercial fishing activity and infrastructure within each municipality. The Port Profiles are part of a larger report which describes the status of the Commonwealth’s commercial fishing and port infrastructure, as well as how profile data can inform policy, programming, funding, infrastructure improvements, and other important industry- related decisions. For the full report, visit the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries website. Key Terms: Permitted Harvesters: Commercially permitted harvesters residing in the municipality Vessels: Commercially permitted vessels with the municipality listed as the homeport Trips: Discrete commercial trips unloading fish or shellfish in this municipality Active Permitted Harvesters: Commercially permitted harvesters with at least one reported trans- action in a given year Active Dealers: Permitted dealers with at least one reported purchase from a harvester in a given year Ex-Vessel Value: Total amount ($) paid directly to permitted harvesters by dealers at the first point of sale file Port Port SCITUATE Pro Located on the South Shore, Scituate has three harbors: Scituate, North River, and South River- Humarock. Permitted commercial fisheries, which may or may not be active during the survey period, include: Lobster Pot, Dragger, Gillnetter, Clam Dredge, Scallop Dredge, Rod & Reel, For Hire/ Charter.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Sedimentation and Drivers of Variability in the Boulder Patch
    Environmental Studies Program: Ongoing Study Title Impacts of Sedimentation and Drivers of Variability in the Boulder Patch Community, Beaufort Sea (AK-19-01) Administered by Anchorage, Alaska Office BOEM Contact(s) Rick Raymond [email protected] Conducting Organizations(s) University of Texas at Austin and UAF Total BOEM Cost $750,000 Performance Period FY 2019–2024 Final Report Due June 2024 Date Revised October 4, 2019 PICOC Summary Problem The Boulder Patch provides complex and unique habitat and supports high biodiversity in an area of considerable oil and gas interest, which includes the proposed construction of Liberty Island (less than half a mile away). Impacts of industry activity may smother/bury/kill productive biological area, but mitigation measures may be possible. Intervention This study will conduct a monitoring program to examine long-term drivers of community variability during Liberty development activities. In addition, it will test possible mitigation measures using common industry materials to “reseed” or replace habitat lost due to Liberty Island development activities. Comparison The post-development community structure will be compared against historic data to assess impacts of O&G activity. Further, artificial substrate will be compared to buried boulders to test efficacy of using industry materials to mitigate development impacts. Outcome Results will include defined spatial gradients and temporal trends in environmental conditions, benthic community structure, and kelp production in the Boulder Patch community; evaluation of the effect of sediments on Boulder Patch community; and assessment of test artificial substrates as possible habitat mitigation. Context Impacts of Sedimentation and Drivers of Variability in the Boulder Patch Community, Beaufort Sea (AK-19-01) BOEM Information Need(s): Impacts to the Boulder Patch from proposed gravel island construction were identified by local communities as a concern during scoping for Liberty Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Distinguishing Outewash, Ablation Till and Basal Till
    DISTINGUISHING OUTWASH, ABLATION TILL, AND BASAL TILL WITHIN THE SRSNE SITE POTENTIAL OVERBURDEN NAPL ZONE Purpose and Background The purpose of distinguishing between outwash, ablation till, and basal till is to help understand the migration pathways and general distribution of NAPL in the overburden at the SRSNE Site. NAPLs at the site have densities that range from less dense than water (LNAPL) to denser than water (DNAPL). The LNAPL density has not been measured. The DNAPL densities have been measured as between 1.1 and 1.2 g/ml. The NAPLs all have viscosity similar to that of water, and low interfacial tension. The outwash contains stratification that would be expected to promote lateral spreading of NAPLs, but it is not believed to contain laterally extensive capillary barriers that would preclude downward movement of dense NAPLs (DNAPLs). In addition, outwash typically contains isolated layers, lenses, and "shoestrings" of well-sorted, sand and or gravel where NAPL may have preferentially migrated. It is believed that relatively coarse-grained, linear features, where present, are relict stream channels, generally oriented north-south, parallel to the Quinnipiac River valley. Ablation till contains a significant component of fines (typically silt but also occasional clay), and it can be significantly denser than outwash. Typically outwash has split-spoon blow counts of <10 per 6 inches; ablation till commonly has blow counts >30 per 6 inches. According to TtNUS, till with noteworthy layering or stratification is considered ablation till. BBL interprets that ablation till is generally an effective capillary barrier that would resist or prevent downward NAPL movement (except where compromised by drilling).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Michael Graikoski and Porter Hoagland1 I. Introduction Along The
    COMPARING POLICIES FOR ENCOURAGING RETREAT FROM THE MASSACHUSETTS COAST Michael Graikoski and Porter Hoagland1 I. Introduction Along the US Atlantic coast, the lands and infrastructure located on barrier islands and beaches and in backbay estuarine environments face mounting threats from king tides, storm surges, and sea-level rise.2 From the late 19th century to the present, sea-level rise on the United States’ Atlantic coast has been more rapid than any other century-scale increase over the last 2000 years.3 Even slight increases in sea-level rise now have been hypothesized to significantly increase the risks of coastal flooding in many places.4 In New England, some of the most severe northeast storms (“nor’easters”) have become notorious for consequent extreme losses of coastal properties. Some 1 Michael Graikoski, Guest Student, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution & Porter Hoagland, Senior Research Specialist, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. This article was prepared under award number NA10OAR4170083 (WHOI Sea Grant Omnibus) from the US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Northeast Regional Sea Grant Consortium project 2014-R/P-NERR- 14-1-REG); award number AGS-1518503 from the US National Science Foundation (Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems [CNH]); award number OCE-1333826 from the US National Science Foundation (Science and Engineering for Sustainability [SEES]) to the Virginia Institute of Marine Science; and with support from the J. Seward Johnson Fund in Support of the Marine Policy Center. The authors thank Chris Hein, John Duff, Di Jin, Peter Rosen, Andy Fallon, Billy Phalen, and Sarah Ertle for helpful insights and suggestions and Jun Qiu for help with the map of Plum Island in Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vision for Scituate's Coast in 2070
    AUGUST 2020 A Vision for Scituate’s Coast in 2070 1 APhoto Vision courtesy for Scituate’sof Theresa O’Connor, Coast in Flickr. 2070 | August 2020 Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................... 2 Ten-year Action Plan ................................................... 36 Acknowledgments ......................................................... 3 Priorities and Wrestling With Trade-offs to Achieve a Resilient Future .................................... 37 Executive Summary ..................................... 4 Overarching Considerations ...................................... 37 Key components of the community’s vision Impermanence ........................................................ 37 for Scituate’s coast in 2070 ......................................... 6 Coastal Connectivity .............................................. 38 The Vision: A Vibrant and Prioritizing Beaches ............................................... 38 Resilient Coast .............................................. 8 The Harbor ................................................................ 41 Coastal Risks .............................................. 12 Zoning ....................................................................... 42 Utilities ...................................................................... 42 Issues to Plan For .......................................................... 14 Managed Retreat .................................................... 43 Beach Erosion .........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NSRWA October 01 Newsletter
    RiverWaAptril 200c8 h therivershed.org THE NORTH AND SOUTH RIVERS WATERSHED ASSOCIATION, INC. Looking Back and Looking Forward nnual report time is a great time to take stock of NSRWA’s many ac- complishments during 2007. With a small staff, a cadre of loyal volun- Here are some resolutions from some of teers, and an active, engaged board, we were able to see many projects our more prominent watershed citizens: come to fruition and many goals fulfilled. Some highlights: Kezia Bacon Bernstein, Mari- A• The opening of 50 more acres of clam flats in the North River; ner Newspapers Correspon- • The completion of an interactive Herring Kiosk for display at area libraries; dent - “This year I am trying to • Started the process for designation of a No Discharge Zone for the coastal waters be more vigilant about reducing of Marshfield, Scituate and Cohasset - including the North and South Rivers; and my use of plastic grocery bags. I • Successfully advocated for a condition to be placed on Scituate’s Water keep a mesh shopping bag in my Withdrawal Permit that requires the town to investigate restoring flows to sup- car at all times, and bring mesh port the herring run on First Herring Brook. and canvas bags along with me to the grocery store. The next step will be to use We added new events like our Cranberry Harvest Walk, the North to South these reusable shopping bags in places other than River Paddle, and Rivershed Jeopardy; saw signs installed to denote the Third Her- the grocery store.” ring Brook; installed more rain gardens in the watershed and on the South Shore; and continued to provide input on local and state permit processes for decreasing Representative Frank Hynes, impacts to the watershed from significant development projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Mid Miocene – Early Pliocene Depositional Environment on the Northern Part of the Mid- Norwegian Continental Shelf
    Faculty of Science & Technology Department of Geology Mid Miocene – Early Pliocene depositional environment on the northern part of the Mid- Norwegian Continental Shelf Bendik Skjevik Blakstad Master thesis in Geology, GEO-3900 May 2016 Abstract Based on the study of 2D seismic data, this thesis have focused on the depositional environment during the deposition of the Kai formation (Mid-Miocene – Early Pliocene) on the Mid-Norwegian continental margin, in order to increase our knowledge of the evolution of the paleo-environment in the time-period right before the development of the large Northern Hemisphere ice sheets. Based on a seismic stratigraphic analysis, correlated to selected well logs, the deposits comprising the Kai formation were divided into seismic sub-units. The stratigraphy of the formation and the sub-units, as well as the geometry of multiple paleo-sea- floor surfaces have been described and discussed in relation to the development of the ocean circulation pattern in the Norwegian Sea during this time. The study area were subdivided into an inner- (Trøndelag Platform) and outer (Vøring Basin) part of the continental shelf. The Kai formation is dominated ooze sediments in the deeper basins, and mainly clayey sediments on the inner shelf. Multiple anticlinal highs and structures can be observed within the study area. Based on observations near the flanks of these highs, it is evident that the highs have played a larger role in the distribution and flow pattern of ocean currents under the deposition of the Kai formation. The largest high is the Helland-Hansen Arch, which separates the Kai formation on the inner and outer shelf by an area of non-deposition, located on top of the arch.
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Boulder Concentration on Turbulence and Sediment
    PUBLICATIONS Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface RESEARCH ARTICLE Influence of Boulder Concentration on Turbulence 10.1002/2017JF004221 and Sediment Transport in Open-Channel Flow Key Points: Over Submerged Boulders • The presence of large immobile boulders significantly influences the H. W. Fang1, Y. Liu1, and T. Stoesser2 flow and turbulence field in the vicinity of submerged boulders 1Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 2School of Civil Engineering, Cardiff University, • The boulder concentration plays an important role in forming skimming to Cardiff, UK isolated roughness flows and predicting bed load transport rates • The bed load transport rate will be Abstract In this paper the effects of boulder concentration on hydrodynamics and local and underestimated when using the reach-averaged sediment transport properties with a flow over submerged boulder arrays are investigated. reach-averaged shear stress, ’ compared with that based on local Four numerical simulations are performed in which the boulders streamwise spacings are varied. Statistics shear stress of near-bed velocity, Reynolds shear stresses, and turbulent events are collected and used to predict bed load transport rates. The results demonstrate that the presence of boulders at various interboulder spacings fl fi fl Supporting Information: altered the ow eld in their vicinity causing (1) ow deceleration, wake formation, and vortex shedding; • Supporting Information S1 (2) enhanced outward and inward interaction turbulence events downstream of the boulders; and (3) a • Movie S1 redistribution of the local bed shear stress around the boulder consisting of pockets of high and low bed shear stresses. The spatial variety of the predicted bed load transport rate qs based on local bed shear stress is Correspondence to: Y.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Longshore Size Grading on a Boulder Beach
    LONGSHORE SIZE GRADING ON A BOULDER BEACH ANDREW GREEN, ANDREW COOPER, AND LESLEE SALZMANN ABSTRACT Longshore size sorting on boulder beaches has not previously been reported. In a boulder beach comprising beachrock slabs, we report systematic longshore clast size grading. The boulder beach at Mission Rocks, South Africa is deposited on an elevated (þ3 m MSL) shore platform and comprises imbricated clasts up to 5 m in the a-axis dimension (9 tonnes). The clasts are derived from adjacent intertidal beachrock and eolianite outcrops and are emplaced during high-magnitude wave events. Four distinct downdrift-fining cells are present. Each is 40–50 m long. The sorting is attributed to post-emplacement clast redistribution in which the smallest clasts are transported most frequently (by lower-magnitude storms) and therefore travel farthest downdrift. The updrift cell boundary is marked by boulders (5 m in length) that exceed the transport threshold for all but the most energetic of storms while the downdrift limit contains clasts 0.3 m in length. This mechanism of longshore size sorting does not rely on variations in longshore wave power as does cell development on sand and gravel beaches. The alongshore sorting via multiple high- (and variable-) magnitude events over a period of time, distinguishes these coarse clast deposits from those of single extreme events (whether storms or tsunamis). INTRODUCTION The longshore sorting of beach sediment by waves has received much attention. On sand and gravel beaches longshore sorting is manifest in variability of size (Komar 1977; Stapor and May 1983) and shape (Bluck 1967; Carr 1969; Carr 1971; Illenberger 1991) and may also be reflected in heavy- mineral distributions (Frihy and Komar 1991; Li and Komar 1992; Frihy and Lotfy 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Quarrernary GEOLOGY of MINNESOTA and PARTS of ADJACENT STATES
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Ray Lyman ,Wilbur, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. C. Mendenhall, Director P~ofessional Paper 161 . QUArrERNARY GEOLOGY OF MINNESOTA AND PARTS OF ADJACENT STATES BY FRANK LEVERETT WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY FREDERICK w. SARDE;30N Investigations made in cooperation with the MINNESOTA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1932 ·For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ________________________________________ _ 1 Wisconsin red drift-Continued. Introduction _____________________________________ _ 1 Weak moraines, etc.-Continued. Scope of field work ____________________________ _ 1 Beroun moraine _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 47 Earlier reports ________________________________ _ .2 Location__________ _ __ ____ _ _ __ ___ ______ 47 Glacial gathering grounds and ice lobes _________ _ 3 Topography___________________________ 47 Outline of the Pleistocene series of glacial deposits_ 3 Constitution of the drift in relation to rock The oldest or Nebraskan drift ______________ _ 5 outcrops____________________________ 48 Aftonian soil and Nebraskan gumbotiL ______ _ 5 Striae _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 48 Kansan drift _____________________________ _ 5 Ground moraine inside of Beroun moraine_ 48 Yarmouth beds and Kansan gumbotiL ______ _ 5 Mille Lacs morainic system_____________________ 48 Pre-Illinoian loess (Loveland loess) __________ _ 6 Location__________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • 1 El Niño and Intertidal Boulder Field Sedimentation at Point Reyes
    Blair Conklin El Niño Sedimentation Spring 2017 El Niño and intertidal boulder field sedimentation at Point Reyes National Seashore Blair Conklin ABSTRACT Wave-exposed boulder fields, a common feature of the California coast, encounter drastic fluctuations in the amount of sand within them. This study examined the inter-annual and seasonal differences of sedimentation in an intertidal boulder field from September 2014 to March 2017. The study period included one El Niño winter, characterized by increased wave energy, and two ENSO-neutral winters. I used monthly photographs to qualitatively monitor sedimentation at two intertidal boulder fields in northern California. Sand depth was also measured within the boulder fields, and those measurements were positively correlated to the photographic assessments of sedimentation. Only one of the sites exhibited a strong seasonal cycle in sedimentation. Additionally, there were no differences in sedimentation between El Niño and ENSO-neutral winters. The results of this study indicate that sedimentation and erosion on beaches can vary dramatically between adjacent shorelines based on physical factors, such as exposure to swell conditions. Monitoring and understanding coastal sedimentation can inform land management decisions, marine resource reserves, and erosional processes during climate anomalies. KEYWORDS sand; beach morphology; wave energy; intertidal; seasonal; El Niño; 1 Blair Conklin El Niño Sedimentation Spring 2017 INTRODUCTION Beach morphology can undergo drastic changes over time. Wave energy plays an important role in the transport of sediments and the transformation of sandy beach systems (Moore et al. 1999; Charlier et al. 1998; Cooper et al. 2013). Many regions of the California coast are exposed to wave energies that are produced from storms formed in the southern and northern hemispheres of the Pacific Ocean.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Boulder Map of Campus Has Been Created As an Educational Educational an As Created Been Has Campus of Map Boulder Geologic The
    Adam Larsen, Kevin Ansdell and Tim Prokopiuk Tim and Ansdell Kevin Larsen, Adam What is Geology? Igneous Geo-walk ing of marine creatures when the limestone was deposited. It also contains by edited and Written Geology is the study of the Earth, from the highest mountains to the core of The root of “igneous” is from the Latin word ignis meaning fire. Outlined in red, numerous fossils including gastropods, brachiopods, receptaculita and rugose the planet, and has traditionally been divided into physical geology and his- this path takes you across campus looking at these ancient “fire” rocks, some coral. The best example of these are in the Geology Building where the stone torical geology. Physical geology concentrates on the materials that compose of which may have been formed at great depths in the Earth’s crust. Created was hand-picked for its fossil display. Campus of the Earth and the natural processes that take place within the earth to shape by the cooling of magma or lava, they can widely vary in both grain size and Granite is another common building stone used on campus. When compa- its surface. Historical geology focuses on Earth history from its fiery begin- mineral composition. This walk stops at examples showing this variety to help nies sell granite, they do not use the same classification system as geologists. nings to the present. Geology also explores the interactions between the you understand what the change in circumstances will do to the appearance Granite is sold in many different colours and mineral compositions that a Map Boulder Geologic lithosphere (the solid Earth), the atmosphere, the biosphere (plants, animals of the rock.
    [Show full text]