[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
I I TC 224 .v8 T52 1992 FY '91 Task 64 Final Product VA Coastal Resources Mgt. Program 12/31/92 Tidal Shoreline Erosion in Northern Virginia Prepared by the Northern Virginia Planning District Commission September, 1992 Preparation of this document was funded by the Virginia Council on the Environment, through a grant provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended and administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. CRMP Grant# NA170Z0359-01. Tidal Shoreline Erosion in Northern Virginia Prepared by the Northern Virginia Planning District Commission September, 1992 Property of CSC Library U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413 NVPDC September, 1992 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Northern Virginia Planning District Commission wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to this project: Michael Kakuska, project manager; Susan Frank, contractual shoreline erosion specialist; Lawrence Frank, student intern; Bill Vaughan, geographic information systems specialist; and Betty Morris, administrative secretary. NVPDC also wishes to extend special thanks to Lee Hill and Ned Burger of the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Shoreline Erosion Advisory Service (SEAS) for their valuable assistance and guidance; as well as representatives of the other state and local permitting agencies and research institutions who assisted in this effort. This report is an NVPDC staff product to the Virginia Council on the Environment in partial fulfillment of a grant received from the 1992 Coastal Zone Management Act, as administrated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Any assessments and conclusions contained in this report represent the results of the staff's technical investigation, and do not represent policy positions of the Northern Virginia Planning District Commission unless so stated in an adopted resolution of said Commission. TIDAL SHORELINE EROSION IN NORTHERN VIRGINIA Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................1 111. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................4 Study Area ....................................................................................................................4 Tidal Shorelines ............................................................................................................6 III. SHORELINE EROSION .......................................................................................................7 Waves ............................................................................................................................8 Currents .........................................................................................................................8 Tides ...........................................................................................................*....................8 Sea Level ........................................................................................................................9 Land Characteristics ....................................................................................................9 Human Activities ........................................................................................................ 10 IV. ARTIFICIAL SHORELINE STABILIZATION ................................................................ 12 V. METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................: ......................... 14 Reference Maps .......................................................................................................... 14 Shoreline Changes Maps ........................................................................................... 19 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization Maps .................................................................. 20 Map Text ..................................................................................................................... 20 VI. SUM[NIARY .......................................................................................................................... 2.2 V11. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 26 FIGURES Figure 1: Water Bodies Located Along The Study Area .......................................................5 Figure 2: Northern Virginia's Tidal Shoreline and Associated USGS 7.5 minute Topographic Quadrangles ....................................................... 16 Figure 3: Northern Virginia's Tidal Shoreline Segment Maps ........................................... 17 Figure 4: Northern Virginia's Tidal Shoreline Segments ..................................................... 18 TABLES Table 1: Summary of Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Fairfax, Prince William and Arlington Counties, and the City of Alexandria ........................................................................ 23 Table 1 (a): Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Prince William County ............................................................................... 23 Table l(b): Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Fairfax County ............................................................................................. 24 Table 1(c).- Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Arlington County and the City of Alexandria ....................................... 2-5 i APPENDICES Appendix 1: Northern Virginia Shoreline Segments ................................................................ 27 Map 1: Prince William County Line to Shipping Point ............................ 27-30 Map 2: Shipping Point to Possum Point ...................................................... 31-34 Map 3- Possum Point to Cockpit Point ........................................................ 35-38 Map 4: Cockpit Point to Freestone Point ..................................................... 39-42 Map 5: Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek ................................. 43-46 Map 6: Mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point ................................. 47-50 Map 7: Deephole Point to Occoquan River Dam ....................................... 51-54 Map 8: Occoquan River Dam to Route 1 Bridge ........................................ 55-58 Map 9: Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek ........................................................ 59-62 Map 10: Kanes Creek to Sandy Point ............................................................. 63-66 Map 11: Sandy Point to Sycamore Point ....................................................... 67-71 Map 12: Sycamore Point to Hallowing Point ............................................... 71-74 Map 13: Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay ........................................................ 75-78 Map 14: Pohick Bay to Whitestone Point ...................................................... 79-82 Map 15: Whitestone Point to Ferry Point ...................................................... 83-86 Map 16: Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek ................................................ 87-90 Map 17: Little Hunting Creek to Hog Island ................................................ 91-94 Map 18: Hog Island to Hunting Creek ........................................................... 95-98 Map 19: Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run .................................................. 99-102 Map 20: Four Mile Run to Theodore Roosevelt Bridge ........................... 103-106 Map 21: Theodore Roosevelt Bridge to Little Falls .................................. 107-110 Appendix 2: Shoreline Situation Review ................................................................................. 111 Attachment 2A-1: Physiographic Data for Northern Virginia ..................... 118 Attachment 2A-2: Summary Physiographic Data for Northern Virginia ... 119 Attachment 2B: Northern Virginia Alternate Shore Uses ......................... 120 Attachment 20 Northern Virginia Flood Hazard, Water Quality, and Beach Quality .............................................................. 122 Attachment 213: Northern Virginia Shoreline Erosion Situation .............. 123 Appendix 3: Northern Virginia Shoreline Erosion Mailing List ........................................... 126 Appendix 4: Summary of New and Potential Shoreline Erosion Information Sources in Northern Virginia ........................................................ 129 ii NVPDC September, 1992 Tidal Shoreline Erosion in Northern Virginia 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation's Shoreline Erosion Advisory Service (SEAS) provides technical advice, site specific planning, and partial financial assistance for installation of erosion control measures to property owners of tidal shoreline properties in Virginia, who request this service. The program is intended to reduce the amount of sediment entering tidal waters from uncontrolled shoreline erosion from surface runoff, wave or tidal action. Intended to provide assistance to all tidal shoreline property owners in Virginia, SEAS does not have the personnel, nor the financial resources at this time to prepare a complete data base of applicable property owners for purposes of program outreach and technical support. To assist SEAS, and also provide valuable information to local jurisdictions, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; a grant was provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, through the Virginia Council on the Environment to the Northern Virginia Planning District Commission (NVPDC), to pursue this investigation and update the erosion findings contained in the original 1976 and 1979 Shoreline Situation Reports, produced by the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences (VIMS) for Arlington, Fairfax and Prince William counties, and the City of Alexandria. This report update identifies more recent "priority" locations of actual and potential shoreline erosion concern, as well as locations of shoreline currently protected. The ultimate objective of this effort being: targeting and eliminating tidal shoreline erosion, thereby leading to improved water quality in the Potomac River and its tidal tributaries. Within this report, the Northern Virginia tidal shoreline is divided for purposes of analysis into twenty-one separate shoreline segments. Appendix 1 contains descriptions of each segment in terms of the erosion situation and artificial shoreline stabilization. Also described are approximate erosion rates for significant erosion areas that have been identified through this investigation. Maps showing the locations of "priority" erosion concern and locations of already protected shoreline areas have also been included. This update is intended to serve as a valuable resource document for state and local officials to assist them in planning for shoreline and erosion control throughout Northern Virginia. In order to ensure useful and valuable final products, the following project tasks were performed: NVPDC met with the Shoreline Erosion Advisory Service (SEAS) representative at the outset to coordinate the project, obtain important NVPDC September, 1992 information and discuss the shoreline surveys. This initial meeting was tremendously informative and helped ensure the project was conducted in the proper manner from the beginning. The Shoreline Situation Reports (SSR), produced by the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences for Prince William Coun!y (Roberts, et. al. 1976) and for the Counties of Fairfax and Arlington, and the Ci!y of Alexandria (Owen, et. al. 1979), were reviewed. A summary of the information contained in the SSR, including original sources of information, is detailed in Appendix 2. The reader should note, however, that the techniques used to measure and define shoreline lengths, length of artificial stabilization structures and overall study area, although comparable, differ slightly between this investigation and previous SSRs. Care must therefore be exercised when comparing results between the two fame periods, that any conclusions that are drawn take into consideration these minor differences. � A set of basemaps was prepared and used as working drafts in the* field, to assist in identifying the shoreline subsegments used in the SSR, and also used to mark areas identified as eroding or artificially stabilized in the SSR. These maps have since been revised and incorporated into the final maps as part of this report. � Agencies were identified that would be interested in tidal shoreline erosion in Northern Virginia. A mailing list of those agencies is included in Appendix 3. � A meeting was subsequently held with the various agencies interested in tidal shoreline erosion to further guide the project and receive necessary feedback. � Research was conducted to ascertain what information other agencies use to delineate the inland extent of tidal influence in Northern Virginia. The working basemaps were subsequently revised to include the inland extent of tidal influence, and incorporated into the final maps found in this report. � A review of the literature, maps, and charts was similarily conducted and new sources of information identified that was not used in the original SSRs, including other ongoing research activities that involve the shorelines in the study area. A summary report on new and potential sources of information on shoreline erosion in Northern Virginia is included in Appendix 4. � An aerial survey was conducted of the study area and a set of oblique photographic slides taken 500 feet above the water, along the entire Potomac River from National Airport south to Quantico, Virginia - later used for interpretation and analysis. The study area in controlled airspace north of National was surveyed by boat. Structures were subsequently noted along the entire Northern Virginia Potomac'River shoreline and each of the embayments. 2 NVPDC September, 1992 Finally, a workshop was coordinated with the interested agencies to view the slides and get their input and comments. The photographs and boat survey results were subsequently used to identify and map shore protection structures along the entire length of the Northern Virginia Potomac River shoreline, and later compared with property tax maps and shoreline changes maps (described below), to target specific property owners in high priority areas for future SEAS outreach and technical support. In summary, this report highlights areas of erosion, erosion rates and locations of erosion control structures along the entire Northern Virginia tidal Potomac shoreline. In addition, this report augments a DBase IV computer data file, also created by NVPDC, that contains the names, mailing addresses, and tax parcel numbers of tidal Potomac shoreline property owners, that have been distributed to SEAS and Northern Virginia local governments. Combined with the set of approximately 360 low altitude aerial photographs, these work products shall serve as an excellent historical record for current planning efforts, and also future research. 3 NVPDC September, 1992 II. INTRODUCTION In the interest of protecting and preserving private property, recreational areas, cultural and historic resources, wetland habitat, and water quality; information on the shoreline erosion situation of Northern Virginia's tidal shorelines is needed. The main purpose of this report is to identify particular areas of Northern Virginia's tidal shoreline that need priority shoreline erosion planning and implementation action. In order to accomplish this objective, included in this report are a series of maps of the tidal shorelines of Northern Virginia, delineating shoreline changes as well as locations of shoreline stabilization structures. These maps and their associated textual descriptions can serve as an information base from which planners and scientists can identify problem areas requiring further investigation and target remedial action. Study Area Prince William, Fairfax, and Arlington Counties and the City of Alexandria all have tidal shorelines along the Potomac River and its associated embayments and tributaries. The southern boundary of this study is the jurisdictional boundary between Prince William and Stafford counties, occurring just south of Quantico at Chopawamsic Creek. The northern boundary of the study area is the head of tide of the Potomac River, near Little Falls, in the vicinity of Chain Bridge. The Potomac River is the largest tributary to the ancient Susquehanna River, whose lower valley basin was flooded during the retreat of the last great ice age, becoming what is now known as the Chesapeake Bay. The Potomac River's tidal portion extends about 98 nautical miles from Little Falls to the confluence with the Bay. As shown in Figure 1, this report covers the approximate upper 33 nautical miles of the Potomac River, draining approximately 355,360 acres of land from the City of Alexandria, and Arlington, Fairfax, and Prince William Counties (LIPPSON, et al., 1979). In addition to the Potomac River shoreline of Northern Virginia, the shorelines of the tidal portions of the following areas have also been included in this study: Quantico Creek, Powells Creek, Neabsco Creek, Occoquan Bay, Farm Creek, Marumsco Creek, Belmont Bay, the Occoquan River, Massey Creek, Kanes Creek, Gunston Cove, Pohick Bay, Accotink Bay, Dogue Creek, Little Hunting Creek, Hunting Creek, Fourmile Run, Roaches Run, and the Boundary Lagoon. 4 NVPDC September 1992 CHAIN Boundary L BRIDGE DC FAIR COUFAV Raache5 Rui? MTV WOODROW. PRINI-F VIRGINIA WILSO, G Four Kle EORGES ORIOGi cotjfs@ C- PRINCE 141- %%1LUAM Nwk I COVNrV MARYLAND Mlitin -ee CHARLES COUKTV P- T.- R-, ow-ft F@ . *, P@ STAFFORD COUNTY RIM 0 30? UTE "'IDGE I- C- KING GEORGE C_, 0A, Little lj&17tjn-# 01M C311k A7qije OwAr Occoqual) Ri ver Bay .ck awy Cree* V,75 It, 017 r, 0 V, e lVarLIM75CO OwAr M67,05CV Cree* Occoquan Bay Cree* Potomac River 9mantica Creek Figure 1: Water Bodies Located Along The Study Area. 5 NVPDC September, 1992 Tidal Shorelines Delineation of the tidal shorelines of Northern Virginia requires the identification of the inland extent of tidal influence along tributaries of the Potomac River. A natural barrier in the river can limit the tidal penetration; for example, the tidal waters of the Potomac River are blocked from upstream passage at the Fall Line, a natural line of demarcation, which occurs around Little Falls. A man-made barricade can also limit tidal influence, for example, along the Occoquan River tidal influence only extends to the Lower Occoquan Dam. Without natural or man-made barricades, the inland extent of tidal influence is not a permanent boundary; rather, it changes seasonally with land use changes, withwind direction and storms. The best method of identifying the limit of tidal penetration along the tributaries is through observation. For this report, the observations made on tidal influence at road crossings, in the publication: Use of Virginia's Tributaries of the Potomac River by Anadromous Fishes (ODOM, et al., 1988), were used to. assist in establishing the inland penetration of the tidal head in tributaries of the Potomac River. 6 NVPDC September, 1992 III. SHORELINE EROSION The shoreline is the boundary between the land and the water. Both the water and the land are dynamic through time, resulting in receding shorelines (erosion) or advancing shorelines (accretion). Over long periods of time sea level rise, drought cycles, and land use influences water levels and therefore the position of the shoreline. Changes in land use, such as deforestation and development, will change the patterns of runoff, as well as the level of the water table and baseflow. Seasonal changes in precipitation and runoff, and human controlled additions and withdrawal of water from the Potomac River, and its tributaries also affect water levels. Over shorter periods of time, the water level is affected by daily tides and atmospheric conditions. Shoreline erosion occurs when natural forces remove more material from the boundary than is deposited, resulting in an advance of the water towards the land, or recession of the boundary. Shoreline accretion occurs when more material is deposited than is removed, so that the boundary between the water and the land moves towards the water. If the amount of material removed is equivalent to the amount of material accumulated, the shoreline is said to be in dynamic equilibrium. Shoreline changes are time dependent. Although some shorelines appear to continuously erode or accrete, the most significant shoreline changes are usually episodic and are associated with storm events. For example, a shoreline that has been accreting for a period of time can erode during a single storm. Relative shoreline changes must therefore be associated with a specific time frame. It is important to identify locations of shoreline erosion because of the potential loss of private property, recreational areas, cultural and historic resources, waterfront access, wetlands and wildlife habitat. Additionally, eroded sediment and nutrients can affect the water quality and ecological resources of adjacent bodies of water. Tidal shoreline erosion in Northern Virginia contributes to the non-point source pollution in the Potomac River and also the Chesapeake Bay. Unlike point-source pollution, which is traceable to a well defined source, non- point source pollution occurs over large areas. Identification of eroding areas will assist in the evaluation of the sources of sediments and associated nutrients. Areas of rapid accretion are also important to identify because they may be indicative of extreme sediment runoff from inland, or from downdrift shorelme erosion. Wind-induced waves, littoral currents, tidal currents, sea-level rise, boat wake, and also storm runoff are the main assailing forces that result in shoreline erosion of the tidal Potomac River and its tributaries. The impact of these forces are influenced by the physical characteristics of the shorezone such as topography, type of shoreline, and resistance or cohesiveness of coastal materials. 7 NVPDC September, 1992 Waves Wave energy is a function of the wind velocity, duration, and the fetch length or distance of open water across which the wind blows. Along the Potomac River, winds from the north and northwest are dominant from October to April, and south and southwest winds are dominant between May and September. (MILLER, A. J., 1987). The north and northwest winds are generally stronger, but the south and southeast winds are more likely to cause substantial rise in water levels by driving water up the Potomac River. Less frequent but severe storms with strong northeast winds generate waves that can do significant damage in relatively short periods of time. Currents Waves and tidal activity produce currents. Waves approaching the shoreline refract as they enter shallow water, to break approximately shore parallel; but the refraction process is not complete, and a current is generated along the shore in the direction of refraction. The strength of the longshore current and its transportation capacity is a function of the wave energy and amount of refraction, as well as the interactions of other currents. Although the direction of longshore transport changes with changing wave conditions, the net effect over time can produce "downdrift" accumulation of eroded sediments. For example, the longshore current may transport sediment downdrift of an eroding cliff to form a beach. If the cliff erosion is reduced or eliminated by artificial stabilization of the shoreline, the downdrift beach may become sediment-starved and subsequently erode. The flood (upstream) and ebb (downstream) of the tide also produce tidal currents in the Potomac River. Peak velocities generally occur only for short periods of time during the rising or falling tide. Ebb currents generally have a higher velocity than flood currents, and often follow different paths, thereby having different affects on sediment transportation. The astronomical tidal cycles also influence the strengths of the currents. The strongest tidal currents in the study area occur around Hallowing Point where the ebb current has a peak velocity of about 1.8 ft/sec (LIPPSON, et al., 1979). Tides The tidal range and coastal topography determine the width of the shore zone over which waves and currents impact the coast. On a steep coast, the width of the zone over which the hydraulic forces are spread is less wide than for a gently sloping coast with the same tidal range. In two coastal areas with similar topography, the shore zone is wider for the area with the larger tidal range. The 8 NVPDC September, 1992 waves strike the coast at a higher elevation at high tide than at low tide and therefore, the position of the tide during a storm event is significant. Tidal fluctuations exhibit daily, monthly, and annual patterns due to the astronomical relationships between the earth, the sun, and the moon. Each day there are two high and two low tides along the Potomac River. These semidiurnal tides have a period of 12 hours and 25 minutes so that the high tides occur 50 minutes later on a subsequent day. The amplitude of the tide varies such that there is a higher-high tide, and lower-high tide each day. Bimonthly, when the sun and moon are in line with the earth, spring tides of greater amplitude occur. Approximately two weeks later, when the sun and moon are at right angles, neap tides of the least amplitude occur. When the earth is closest to the sun in the winter, larger spring tides occur than during summer months. The tidal range varies spatially with the primary determinant being the shape of the coast. Tidal amplitudes can actually increase as a progressive tidal wave attenuates upstream in a funnel shaped tributary. As the cross section of a tributary gets smaller, the bore of tidal water has a greater effect. For example, along the Potomac Estuary, the river decreases in width upstream from nearly 10 miles at its confluence with the Chesapeake Bay to just over 200 ft at Chain Bridge. Therefore, the tidal range is significantly greater at Chain Bridge (approximately 2.9 ft.) than at mouth of the Potomac River (approximately 1.2 ft.) (LIPMN, et al., 1979). Sea Level The Potomac River Valley was flooded as sea level rose when glaciers started melting between 15,000 and 20,000 years ago to attain its approximate shape as we know it today (KOMAR et al., 1991). Sea level continues to rise at approximately 0.01 ft/year in the vicinity of Washington D.C. (HICKS and HICKMAN, 1988). The distance of inland inundation associated with sea level rise depends on the coastal slope and relief. A relatively flat slope permits a small rise in sea level to cause a large distance of shoreline recession. Rosen (1978) estimated that all of the long term shoreline retreat that has been observed along the shorelines of the Chesapeake Bay can be accounted for by local rates of sea level rise. Although other processes contribute to shoreline erosion, sea level rise is the single most consistent factor causing shoreline recession over long periods of time. Land Characteristics The underlying geology and topographic conditions determine the type of shoreline. Low bluffs, high bluffs, flat sloping plains, beaches, and wetlands are 9 NVPDC September, 1992 the common types of tidal shorelines in Northern Virginia. Unconsolidated sedimentary deposits forming beaches and wetlands can accrete and erode by sediment transportation along shore, or in an onshore/offshore direction. Accretion on a bluff shoreline can only occur from an accumulation of material at the base of the bluff as a talus deposit or a beach. The bluffs themselves can only erode. Variations in the composition and cohesiveness of the exposed materials at the shoreline are the key factors in the resistance of the coast to erosion. For example, a bluff section composed of sand will erode faster than an adjoining bluff section composed of rock when exposed to similar conditions, resulting in a faster rate of shoreline retreat along the less resistive section. Similarly, in a bluff composed of layers of various sedimentary materials, the layers can erode at different rates. For example, a bluff with a layer of gravel behind a layer of sand and exposed at the coastline may erode fairly rapidly until the sandy layer is completely gone; at which time the layer of gravel becomes exposed and the erosion rate decreases. If a layer of sand is at the toe of a Cliff overlain by a layer of gravel, the underlying layer will erode more rapidly, thereby undermining the stability of the bank and resulting in periodic mass movement of debris from the head to the toe of the cliff. The toe is then temporarily protected by the talus, which eventually erodes away - once again exposing the base of the cliff to erosive forces. Similar slope processes occur due to spatial variations in exposure to erosive processes; for example, in a bluff of homogeneous composition the toe is exposed to the direct impact of waves and currents which will result in the undermining process described above. Human Activities Land use, dredging river channels and harbors, building artificial shoreline stabilization structures, and boat wake can all influence coastal erosion. During the early settling of the Northern Virginia area, forests were cleared and tobacco was planted. Increased soil runoff to the coast, sedimentation in tributary areas, and changes in storm runoff patterns caused shoreline changes and pollution of the Potomac River with sediment and nutrients. The history of land use has influenced the observed shoreline changes. A good example of human influenced shoreline changes is occurring in Dike Marsh, located along the George Washington Memorial Highway. For years, the area was a dumping ground for dirt and gravel removed from other sites. A raised road was built so that dump trucks could drive their loads out into the marsh. The dumped sediments would at first choke the marsh vegetation, but then would settle and provide new areas for marsh expansion. Eventually the dumping was outlawed and the existing marsh began to erode due to the lack of new sediments. Intentional human modifications of the shoreline, including channel dredging and artificial shoreline stabilization, often affect shorelines that have not been 10 NVPDC September, 1992 directly modified. Other indirect affects from human activities, such as aeating boat wake, may impact areas sensitive to erosion, and the influence humans have on climatological changes is not well understood, but will also modify the natural driving forces of coastal erosion. NVPDC September, 1992 IV. ARTTFICIAL SHORELINE STABILIZATION To combat the loss of shoreland property and to prevent damage to buildings, roads, and other landward resources, some individual property owners along Northern Virginia's tidal shoreline have used structural and nonstructural erosion control measures. Structural shoreline protection uses "hard" structures such as bulkheads, revetments, and breakwaters to armor the shoreline. Nonstructural alternatives use "soft" erosion control techniques such as slope gradation, tree setback, and vegetation planting. The two most common types of artificial shoreline stabilization structures used along Northern Virginia's tidal shoreline are wooden bulkheads and riprap revetments. There are several breakwaters and groins in the region also. Several properties have soft techniques employed in conjunction with hardened shorelines. Bulkheads, seawalls, and revetments are structures built approximately shore parallel to separate the land from the water. Bulkheads are designed primarily to retain soil and prevent sliding of the land immediately behind them. ihey can provide support at the toe of a high bluff, or retention for the full height of a low bluff. Bulkheads are primarily retaining walls, however, a secondary function is they protect the shoreline against direct attack by waves and currents. The term seawall is often used interchangeably with bulkhead; however, the primary function of a seawall is to protect the shoreline against severe wave action, while their secondary function is that of a retaining wall. Revetments armor erodable bluffs or embankments, and primarily serve to absorb the energy of incoming waves. Bulkheads and seawalls usually have a smooth surface and are constructed with treated timber, steel, or concrete. Revetments are usually composed of large quarry stones, rubble, or gabions. Gabions are rectangular baskets of steel wire mesh filled with large stones. The lack of a smooth surface of a revetment makes it more flexible to settlement and better able to absorb energy. The vertical surface of bulkheads and seawalls may reflect wave energy causing scour in front of the structure. Bulkheads., seawalls, and revetments protect only the land immediately behind them and may even exacerbate erosion of adjacent shorelines. Reflection of waves may increase erosion on either side of the structures. Downdrift shorelines may experience increased erosion if the bulkhead protects a former sediment source. Breakwaters are often shore parallel structures; however, they are built offshore and are designed to protect the shore from wave attack, by creating a protected water area behind them. Breakwaters are often used at marinas and boat ramps to create an area of calm water, while simultaneously protecting the shore. There is often an accumulation of sediment shoreward of a breakwater. However, the reflection of waves and alteration of littoral transport may have detrimental effects beyond the immediate shoreline area. 12 NVPDC September, 1992 Groins are built perpendicular to the shoreline, and are designed to trap littoral drift in order to build a beach or to retard shoreline erosion Often, a series of groins, called a groin field, are built to affect larger areas. Groins only trap sediment on their updrift sides, and usually cause erosion of downdrift shorelines. A series of properly spaced groins are usually more effective than a single groin. Soft control methods include slope stabilization techniques. Surface runoff can be a significant cause of erosion along the bluffed shorelines. Drainage control of surface runoff is almost always beneficial with high bluffs, and is sometimes effective with low bluffs. Slope regradation is usually effective with low bluffs, but is rarely feasible with high bluffs. Planting ground cover can help stabilize slopes, especially after regradation. Although vegetation may stabilize slopes on the shoreline, large trees very close to the land's edge may actually increase erosion. Trees often provide too much shade for slope-stabilizing vegetative ground cover to prosper. Additionally, when large trees at the head of bluffs fall, from undermining by erosion or other natural causes, they often remove a large volume of sediment with them. Creating a tree set-back line can help to stabilize bluffs. For a more detailed description of the various alternatives for shoreline protection, the reader may wish to refer to the Chesal2eake Bay Shoreline Erosion Study (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1990). 13 NVPDC September, 1992 IV. METHODOLOGY The tidal shorelines from Quantico to Little Falls were divided into twenty-one shoreline segments, based on jurisdictional boundaries and physiographic features. In addition, the shoreline segments were chosen to fit in a T' x 10" rectangle, at a scale of 1:24,000. It was determined that an 8.5" x 11" format was the best size to work with, and so the maps were designed to fit in 7" x 10" rectangles to allow for borders and binding. For each of the twenty-one segments; a reference map, a shoreline changes map, and an artificial shoreline stabilization map accompany the textual description. Reference Maps Twenty-one reference maps were made from the most recent set of United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute topographic quadrangles (USGS, topo quads), that cover Northern Virginia. The seven maps used were: Alexandria (1983), Fort Belvoir (1983), Indian Head (1982), Mount Vernon (1983), Occoquan (1984), Quantico (1983), and Washington West (1983) (see Figure 2). Although these maps are all dated from the early 1980s, they are the most recent USGS topo quads available. The twenty-one maps and shoreline segments are as follows, and as illustrated in Figures 3 and 4; they have also been included in Appendix 1 to accompany each of the twenty-one shoreline segments: Map 1 County Line to Shipping Point Map 2 Shipping Point to Possum'Point Map 3 Possum Point to Cockpit Point Map 4 Cockpit Point to Freestone Point Map 5 Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek Map 6 Mouth of Neabsco, Creek to Deephole Point Map 7 Deephole Point to Occoquan River Dam Map 8 Occoquan River Dam to Route 1 Bridge Map 9 Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek Map 10 Kanes Creek to Sandy Point Map 11 Sandy Point to Sycamore Point Map 12 Sycamore Point to Hallowing Point Map 13 Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay Map 14 Pohick Bay to Whitestone Point Map 15 Whitestone Point to Ferry Point Map 16 Ferry Point to little Hunting Creek Map 17 Little Hunting Creek to Hog Island Map 18 Hog Island to Hunting Creek 14 NVPDC September, 1992 Map 19 Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run Map 20 Fourn-dle Run to Theodore Roosevelt Bridge Map 21 Theodore Roosevelt Bridge to Little Falls 15 Figure 2: Northem Virginia's Tidal Shoreline and Associated USGS 1:24,000 7.5 minute Topographic Quadrangles FOPt ge.IYOIP OCCIOWC717 #04yl7t yervan 1/701idn A880, 16 A(W Pi AW M Figure 3: Northern Virginia's Tidal Shoreline Segment Maps, AW 1:200,000 A AQp &P 17 A (Up f5 Afr3p Map ,vap A f3p 5 4p wIp- Qp V-I. 17 AOp VfS t07 KA@ -"-TAf3 AW f 17 Little F811s Roosevelt Figure 4.- Northern Virginia's Tidal Shoreline Segments, grjo, qe 1:200,000 F0111wile RIM 111inting Cme* Little AWting CPeek Island Iffafles rpee* R011te J grij, qe Feppy Pojflt Occoquan Rivep BaIll h1A7 testone Paint P017jck gay 11811olvin _q Point sycalmore Pojnt Point Point - Nedbsco Cpeek .4 -Fpeestooe Pojflt Cockpit Point Possuff/ Pojnt Slljppjflq Point prince *I j,71-jap Cauflty Line 18 NVPDC September, 1992 Shoreline Changes Maps The USGS topo quads have five different types of lines that represent the shoreline: (1) A solid blue line represents the high water fine; (2) a light blue line represents the assumed high water line; (3) a dotted blue line represents the low water line, (4) a black line represents an artificial structure along the shoreline; and (5) a purple line represents a photo revision of an earlier shoreline. For each of the twenty-one shoreline segments (Appendix 1), a shoreline changes map was also made by digitizing the high water line from two sets of mylar (stable material) USGS topo quads. The seven topo quad editions mentioned above were used as the most recent set of maps available from the USGS. The second set of maps used were the following editions: Alexandria (1971), Fort Belvoir (1965), Indian Head (1966), Mount Vernon (1966), Occoquan (1966), Quantico (1966), and Washington West (1971). The two digitized shorelines were plotted for each segment; and the areas where the shoreline eroded were shaded red, and areas where the shoreline accreted were shaded blue. The user should be aware of the potential errors associated with the shoreline changes maps. Mylar USGS topo quads were used for digitizing, to minimize distortions associated with paper prints, and a visual comparison of the digitized shoreline plots with the mylar USGS topo quads was used, to minimize operator errors associated with the digitizing process. According to the USGS, the 1:24,000 topo, maps meet National Map Accuracy Standards of +/- 40 feet, however, the positions of the shorelines on the maps were subject to interpretation. The maps were made from field survey data and aerial photo analyses. One important consideration must be emphasized: the high water line along marshes is highly variable depending on the time of year, the tide, recent storm activity, and vegetation changes. The shoreline change maps, therefore, show very high rates of change for many marsh areas that may be associated with the spatial and temporal dynamics of marshes, rather than with high rates of sediment movement. Also, in areas with high bluffs, the shoreline change maps provide only a two- dimensional picture of erosion; the volume of sediment displaced from a cliff is not adequately represented by the horizontal shoreline change. In addition, erosion at the head of a cliff can be masked in a two dimensional analysis by the accumulation of debris at the toe of the cliff. Therefore, small changes along bluffs may be more significant than large changes in marsh areas. The shoreline changes maps should be used in conjunction with the topographic reference maps. Asterisks have been placed on the maps adjacent to the areas of significant shoreline change. The text accompanying each map also includes estimates of the recession rates in the areas of significant erosion. The categories used are moderate (< 3 ft/yr), severe (> 3 ft/yr), and extreme (> 15 ft/yr). Because the shoreline changes were interpreted at a scale of 1" = 2000' and from 19 NVPDC September, 1992 sets of maps ranging from 13 to 19 years apart, the shoreline change maps should not be used to indicate areas of slight or no change (< 1 ft/yr), slight changes may not be captured by these maps. Due to the scale of the maps, the potential errors associated with them, and the high spatial and temporal variability of erosion rates, this information should not be used for site-specific planning purposes. On the other hand, these maps are very useful for targeting shoreline erosion priority areas for additional investigation, as well as for identifying areas requiring remedial action. Artiftcial Shoreline Stabilization Maps Artificial shoreline stabilization maps were produced for each of the shoreline segments (Appendix 1) . The locations and lengths of the stabilized areas are rough estimates made from examinations of aerial slides, videos and boat survey. Stabilized shoreline lengths and percentages may differ slightly from previous Shoreline Situation ReRorts, primarily as a result of variations in interpreting marshland along shorelines. Also, the scale of these maps is not conducive to pinpointing precise locations of artificial stabilization; however, they do provide an overview of the approximate locations and lengths of shorelines that have been stabilized. The type of structure is indicated on the maps as follows: B = bulkhead, R riprap, G = groin, BW = breakwater, and C = channel gabion. A rough estimate of the percent of each of the types of structures is included in the text accompanying each map. For more detailed information on more precise locations of artificial shoreline stabilization in Northern Virginia, the user may also wish to refer to the individual parcel and property owner data base, and the aerial slides and videos that were produced in conjunction with this report. This additional information is principally available through the Northern Virginia Planning District Commission in Annandale, Virginia among various other sources. Map Text The textual descriptions that accompany the maps for each of the shoreline segments found in Appendix 1 contain the following information: � Map Number � Shoreline segment: the names of the starting and ending locations of the shoreline covered in this segment. 20 NVPDC September, 1992 � USGS Quadrangle(s): the name of the United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle map that covers the area. The USGS quadrangles are based on an even 7.5 minute grid system independent of physiographic features. In several cases, quadrangle boundaries cross the shoreline segment, and therefore more than one quadrangle is listed. � County or City: the name of the jurisdiction that the shoreline segment is part. � Property Maps: the page numbers of the real estate tax assessment maps that cover the shoreline segment. Each jurisdiction has a separate mapping program, and therefore the numbering systems differ. � Water Body or Bodies: the name of the body or bodies of water that the shoreline is adjacent to. � Shoreline Description: an approximate shoreline length, and a brief description of the distinguishing features of the segment. The shoreline length measurements were made from the shorelines digitized from the recent set of USGS topo quads. � Erosion Situation: the areas of cartographically identified shoreline erosion are described. � Artificial Stabilization: the approximate length and percent (%) of shoreline that has been artificially stabilized, and a brief description of the type of stabilization. 21 NVPDC September, 1992 V. SUMMARY There are a total of 156.6 miles of tidal shoreline included in this study for Prince William, Fairfax, and Arlington Counties and the City of Alexandria (see Table 1); 45.3 miles of the tidal shoreline lies directly on the Potomac River, and the remainder along tributaries, including the Occoquan River and several large creeks and bays. Overall, 20 % of the shoreline has been artificially stabilized with 32.0 miles of hard structures: Prince William County is 47.6 miles in length and has 8.7 miles of artificial shoreline stabilization structures. Fairfax has the most tidal shoreline in Northern Virginia (86.9 miles), and the most artificial stabilization (13.3 miles), but the smallest percent of shoreline stabilized (15%). The City of Alexandria has the shortest shoreline length (8.8 miles), with the largest percent stabilized (58%, or 5.1 miles). Arlington County has 13.3 miles of tidal shoreline, with 4.9 miles of hardened shoreline (37%). The shoreline rate of change maps present the differences in shorelines on USGS topo quads, between the mid 1960s and the 1980s. These maps should be used in conjunction with the topographic reference maps to assist in interpretation. Large areas of shoreline change at the head of creeks are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels, rather than large sediment fluxes. In addition, there are several areas where the shoreline has changed due to human intervention, such as the channelization of Four Mile Run. The areas that should be periodically monitored are the steadily eroding bluffs. While the two dimensional changes may appear smaller for these areas than for low-lying coasts, the total volume of sediment input into the adjacent water body from the eroding cliffs is often significant. The shoreline changes maps from Appendix I show that there are two areas along the Potomac River that have undergone extreme rates of erosion (> 15 ft/yr); these are the airfield at Quantico, and Dyke Marsh to the south of Little Hunting Creek. There are other areas that have apparently undergone significant shoreline changes at the heads of the large tidal creeks and in other marsh areas; however, these shifting shorelines are probably not due to large sediment fluxes. According to the shoreline change maps many areas throughout the Northern Virginia study area have had severe (> 3 ft/yr) and moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion. The artificial shoreline stabilization maps from Appendix I show approximate locations of hardened shoreline. As indicated in the maps and throughout the text, 59% of the stabilized shoreline is armored with riprap, and 36% with bulkhead. The remaining 5% of the shoreline has breakwaters, groins, and channel gabion. In the 1976 and 1979 Shoreline Situation ftgrts (ROGERS, et al., 1976, and OWEN et al., 1979),13% of the 144.5 miles of tidal shoreline studied in Northern Virginia were armored; or 19.5 miles. Although the techniques used to measure the shoreline length and length of artificial shoreline stabilization structures were different for this study, and the study area differed slightly, it is 22 NVPDC September, 1992 County or City Shoreline Length Artificial Stabilization % (Miles) (miles) Fairfax 86.9 13.3 15% Prince William 47.6 8.7 18% Arlington 13.3 4.9 37% City of Alexandria 8.8 5.1 58% Total 156.6 32.0 20% Potomac River 45.3 TABLE 1: Summary of Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilizationfor Fairfax, Prince William and Arlington Counties, and the City of Alexandria (as detailed below). Map Segment County Water Body Shoreline Artificial % or Length Stabilization city (miles) (miles) 1 County Line to Shipping Point PW Potomac River 3.71 1.7 47% 2 Shipping Point to Possum Point PW Potomac River 0.9 Quantico Creek 9.3 total 10.2 0.4 4% 3 Possum Point to Cockpit Point PW Potomac River 2.5 IA 55% 4 Cockpit Point to Freestone Point PW Potomac River 2.9 Powells Creek 3.7 total 6.6 -0.6 10% 5 Freestone Point to Neabsco Creek mac River 1.0 Neabsco Creek 6.0 PW Poto total 7.0 0.3 5 6 Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point PW Occoquan Bay 4.1 Farm Creek 32 Marumsco Creek 3A unnamed tributaries 0.9 total 11.6 1.8 15% 7 Deephole Point to Occoquan River PW Belmont Bay 1.6 Dam Occoquan River 4A total 6.0, 2A 140%, r City ,@a m an@ia TABLE 1(a): Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Prince William County. 23 NVPDC September, 1992 map Segment County Water Body Shoreline Artificial % or Length Stabilization City (miles) (miles) 8 Occoquan River Dam to Route 1 River 2.11 0.2 8%1 Bridge FX Occoquan 9 Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek FX Occoquan River 12 Massey Creek 2.6 Belmont Bay 2.1 unnamed tributary 0.9 total 6.8 1.7 25% 10 Kanes Creek to Sandy Point FX Kanes Creek 5.0 Belmont Bay 1.7 total -6.6 0.0 0% 11 Sandy Point tc) Sycamore Point FX Occoquan Bay 1.7 Potomac River 2.0 total 3.7 0.6 16% 12 Sycamore Point to Hallowing Point FX Potomac River 2.8 unnamed tributaries 5.2 total 8.0 1.2 15% 13 Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay FX Potomac River 2.1 Gunston Cove 2.1 unnamed tributaries 0.5 total 4.7 0.5 12% 14 Pohick. Bay to Whitestone Point FX Pohick Bay 4A Pohick Creek 1.8 Accotink Bay 2.1 Accotink Creek 6A Gunston Cove 1.8 total 16.6 0.6 4% 15 Whitestone Point to Ferry Point FX Potomac Bay 1.9 Dogue, Creek 4.9 Whitestone Point Basin 0.6 Mount Vernon Yacht 0.7 Basin total 8.1 3.3 41% 16 Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek FX Potomac River 1.8 Little Hunting Creek 92 total 11 1.7 15% --------------- 17 Little Hunting Creek to Hog Island FX Potomac River 4.4 2.0 46% 18 Hog Island to,Hunting Creek FX Potomac River 4A Hunting Creek 0.9 unnamed tributaries 9.6 total 1 14.91 1.4 9% TABLE lNe Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Fairfax County. 24 NVPDC September, 1992 Map Segment County Water Body Shoreline Artificial % or Length Stabilization Citv I (miles) (miles) 19 Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run AL Hooff Run 0.7 Hunting Creek 1.2 Potomac River 6.6 Four Mile Run total 0.3 8.8 5.1 58% 20 Four Mile Run to Theodore AR Four Mile Run 0.5 Roosevelt Bridge Potomac River 3.9 Roaches Run 2.2 Boundary Lagoon 1.6 Little River total 0.1 83 3.9 47% 21 Theodore Roosevelt Bridge to Little AR Little River 0.6 River Potomac River 4.4 total 1 5.01 1.0 121%1 TABLE 1(c): Tidal Shoreline and Artificial Stabilization for Arlington County and the City of Alexandria. nonetheless apparent that more of Northern Virginia's tidal shoreline is armored in 1992: 20% of 156.6 miles, or 32.1 miles (approximately 12.6 more n-dles than in the late 1970s). Due to the scale of the maps, the potential errors associated with them, and the high spatial and temporal variability of erosion rates this information should not be used for site-specific planning purposes. However, these maps are useful for targeting shoreline erosion priority areas for additional investigation. Future work should include a three-dimensional analysis of sediment transport from bluffs, as well as a photogrammetric two-dimensional analysis of rates of shoreline change. A more detailed study of the effectiveness of artificial stabilization structures should also be done. Finally, critical areas should be identified that consider the effect of land use, the proximity of buildings and roads to the shoreline, the physiographic and topographic features of the coast, and the relative rate of shoreline change. 25 NVPDC September, 1992 REFERENCES 1. HICKS, S. D, AND L. E. HICKMAN, JR, 1988. United States Sea Level Variations Through 1986. Shore and Beach, July, 1988, pp. 3 - 7. 2. KOMAR, P, ET AL., 1991. The response of beaches to sea level changes: a review of predictive models. Journal of Coastal Research, 1(1), 1-9. 3. LiPPSON, A. J., ET AL., 1979. Environmental Atlas of the Potomac Estuary. Environmental Center, Martin Marietta Corporation. 4. MILLER , A. J., 1987. Shore Erosion as a Sediment Source to the Tidal Potomac River, Maryland and Virginia United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2234-E. United States Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C. 5. ODOM, M. C., R. J. NEvES, AND J. J. NEY, 1988. Use of Virginia's Tributaries of the Potomac River by Anadromous Fishes. Final Report for Phase Four of an Analysis of the Impediments to Spawning Migrations of Anadromous Fish in Virginia Rivers. Sponsored by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 6. OWEN, D. W., L. MORGAN, AND NANCY M. STURM, 1979. Shoreline Situation Rp port: Counties of Fairfax and Arlington, Cijy of Alexandria. SRAMSOE #166 of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science. 7. ROGERS, L. M., D. W. OWEN, AND M. H. PEOPLES, 1976. Shoreline Situation Report: Prince William County, Virginia. SRAMSOE #119 of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science. 8. ROSEN, P.S., 1978. A Regional Test of the Bruun Rule on Shoreline Erosion. Marine Geology. 26:M7-M16. 9. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 1990. ChesaRgake Bay Shoreline Erosion StLdy- Feasibility Report, October 1990. Department of the Army, Baltimore and Norfolk Districts, Corps of Engineers. 26 NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 1 Shoreline Segment: Prince William County Line to Shipping Point USGS Quadrangle: Quantico, Count3r. Prince William Property Maps: 1S, 1N, 2S Water Body: Potomac River Shoreline Description: There are approximately 3.7 miles of shoreline on the Potomac River from the Prince William County line to Shipping Point, including the shoreline of Chopawamsic Island which is roughly 0.8 mile in circumference. The southern boundary of this shoreline segment is the county line between Prince William and Stafford counties. The mouth of Chopawarnsic Creek was at the county line prior to the 1930s construction of the U.S. Marine Corps (Quantico) airfield using artificial fill. The county line now runs across the airfield and the mouth of Chopawamsic Creek has been diverted to the south. The entire shoreline in this segment is along the U.S. Marine Corps Development and Education Command Center (Quantico). The town of Quantico is located behind the large boat dock. There are two large piers and numerous boat slips at the boat dock, and there are two smaller docks on Chopawarnsic Island. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that extreme (> 15 ft/yr) erosion has occurred in this segment along the Quantico airfield shoreline. The map also shows that moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion occurred on Chopawamsic Island and south of Shipping Point. According to the Rogers et al., 1976, the house at the northern end of Chopawarnsic Island is endangered by bluff erosion. Artificial Stabilization: Overall, 47% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 1.7 miles of riprap (65%) and bulkhead (35%). There is some riprap along the airfield and along the waterfront adjacent to the Quantico, Boat Dock, where there is bulkheading. There is also some bulkheading on Chopawarnsic Island, which Rogers et al., 1976, indicated is totally ineffective. 27 7U--- ............ 0 a@ dy 28 ine 1:24,000 MAP 1-B Prince William County Line to Shipping Point 1966 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICATN EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X MAP 1-C Prince William County Line to Shipping Point 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 NUP 2 Shoreline Segment: Shipping Point to Possum Point USGS Quadrangle: Quantico County: Prince William Property Maps: 2S, 2N, 5S, 6S, 11S, 6N, 5N Water Body: Potomac River Quantico Creek Shoreline Descriptiow. There are 10.2 miles of shoreline from Shipping Point to Possum Point. The Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad bridge crosses at the mouth of the creek. The 0.9 mile of the shoreline is on the Potomac side of the railroad bridge, and the remaining 9.3 miles of shoreline are on Quantico Creek The 2.5 miles of shoreline to the northwest of Shipping Point is along the U.S. Marine Corps Development and Education Command Center (Quantico). The Town of Dumfries is located near the limit of tidal influence along Quantico Creek. Graham Park Shores residential area is located on the south side of the creek and a small residential area is located along Possum Point Road on the north side of the creek. There are several private piers in the residential areas. There are two sewage disposal areas behind marshes along Quantico Creek, one in Graham Park Shores, and one near the Town of Dumfries. The VEPCO Power Plant occupies the area around Possum Point. Two outlet pipes empty into Quantico Creek from the power substation. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows erosion and accretion along the marshes in Quantico Creek, however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. Some moderate (<3 ft/yr) to severe W ft/yr) bluff erosion has occurred on the north side of Quantico Creek and to the south of Possum Point. Artificial Stabilization: Only 4% of the total shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with .4 miles of bulkhead at Shipping Point and the residential area on the north side of Quantico Creek. There are some gaps between protected properties in the residential areas. 31 ?71A 0 ose4 U va rA pe, LAW ul IPO Map 2-A Shipping Point to Possum Point 1:24,000 PW (Quantico) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: ((3ft./yr.) M Severe: Wft./yr.) S Extreme: 0 1 5ft./yr/) X ( Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles I M-S M Q U a n t i NP 2-B C C 5b 1P , q Point 0 Z@J/@ r to P ssu/// PO-iflt 11:24,000 e e k J966 S170P61jil7e 1-983 .517oreline M S/ /0/ ?f Z IM - f ROSION SHO, qf Z IM - , 4 CC) W TION B B B 2-C Q Sb -717g PO-717t U a to POj17t 11:24,000 n t i c AP t. i fiCid. I A Me- 1j) 7e 0 C Stg r ,#jj7jZgt.igfl - - - - - - - e ( Estimated from NVPDc e aerial survey 1992 k R: Riprap B : Bulkhead IZ710 Ao@@ai G: Groins K: Breakwater B C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 3 Shoreline Segmenb Possum Point to Cockpit Point USGS Quadrangle: Quantico County: Prince William Property Maps: 2N, 5S, 4S, 4N Water Body: Potomac River Shoreline Description: There are 2.5 miles of shoreline along the Potomac River from Possum Point to Cockpit Point. The VEPCO Power Plant occupies the area around Possum Point. There is a large pier at the plant. The remainder of the segment is along the Cockpit Point Industrial Park, but is largely undeveloped. The Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad is close to the shore along this segment and limits shorelands access. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that some moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion has occurred along several bluffs between Possum Point and Possum Nose. Artificial Stabilization: Overall, 55% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 1.4 miles of bulkhead (15%) and riprap (85%). There is some bulkhead around the pier at the substation site north of Possum Point and riprap, extending in both directions. There is more riprap to the north near Possum Nose, much of which is old and washed out. 35 Map 3-A Possum Point to Cockpit Point 1:24,000 PW (Quantico) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- %=7- _QW A-4 Liu LL91 TW i Point _3j U Urs, PoihL,- NP 3-B P0551JI11 POil7t tO N cockPit PO,717t 1:24,000 jg66 Sbopejjl7e -- _f g83 5bopejjne 571017f Z INE 690,510N SNORFLINE ACCRETrON ( Shoreline change map from digitized usGs quadrangles Potomac SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: Wft./yr.) M Severe: b3ft./yr.) S Extreme: 0 1 5ft./yr/) X *M MAP 3-C Possum Point to Cockpit Point 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NYPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 4 Shoreline Segment: Cockpit Point to Freestone Point USGS Quadrangles: Quantico Indian Head County: Prince William Property Maps: 4N, 9S, 9N, 14S, 15S, 13S Water Bodies: Potomac River Powells Creek Shoreline Description: There are 6.6 miles of shoreline from Cockpit Point to Freestone Point. The Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad bridge crosses approximately at the mouth of Powells Creek. There are 2.9 miles of shoreline along the Potomac River, and 3.7 miles of shoreline along Powells Creek. The land around Cockpit Point is part of the Cockpit Point Industrial Park. There is a small residential area at Cherry Hill, but most of the land between Cockpit Point and the mouth of Powells Creek is undeveloped. The Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad is very close to the shoreline near Cherry Hill. Most of the land around Powells Creek is wooded and undeveloped except for a residential complex near the limit of tidal influence, Georgetown Village. The shoreline along the Potomac to the north of Powells Creek is now part of the newly developed Leesylvania State Park. There is a new boat ramp at the park. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion has occurred to the north of Cockpit Point, along bluffs on the south side of the mouth of Powells Creek, to the north of Powells Creek, and to the south of Freestone Point. The map also shows that many shoreline changes have occurred along the marsh shorelines of Powells Creek; however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. Artificial Stabilization: Only 10% of the shoreline in this segment is artificially stabilized with .6 mile of structures. There is a single groin (5%) in the Cherry Hill area that Rogers et al., 1976, indicated is effective. There is some riprap around the north side of the railroad bridge and to the south of Freestone Point. Nearly 20% of the shoreline armoring is with riprap and 75% is with breakwaters. The recent renovations of Leesylvania State Park included a new boat launching facility which has some bulkhead and is protected by breakwaters. Additional breakwaters were built around the north side of the entrance to Powells creek. 39 @'@ @Nv Ml@: S @j < 110 'Will mmi Map 4-A Cockpit Point to Freestone Point 1:24,000 PW (Quantico and Indian Head) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- MAP 4-B Cockpit Point to Freestone Point 1:24,000 1966 Shoreline 1982, 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X MAP 4-C Cockpit Point to Freestone Point 1:24,000 R: Riprap B: Bulkhead Artificial Shoreline G: Groins Stabilization K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 5 Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek Shoreline Segment. USGS Quadrangles: Quantico Indian Head County: Prince William Property Maps: 13S, 14S, 14N, 20S Water Body: Potomac River Neabsco Creek Shoreline Description: There are 7.0 miles of shoreline from Freestone Point to the northern side of the mouth of Neabsco Creek. The Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad bridge crosses approximately at the mouth of Neabsco Creek. Approximately 1.0 mile of this segment is along the Potomac River, and the remaining 6.0 miles of shoreline are along Neabsco Creek. The land around Freestone Point is all part of the newly developed Leesylvania State Park. There is a large fishing pier at Freestone Point. There are several commercial marinas with numerous piers and several boat ramps at Neabsco at the southern side of the mouth of Neabsco Creek. There is a sewage disposal area behind the marsh at the head of the creek. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that shoreline changes have occurred along the marsh shorelines of Neabsco Creek; however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. The map also shows moderate (< 3 ft/yr) bluff erosion around Neabsco to the south of the railroad bridge, and on the north side of Freestone Point. Artificial Stabilization: Only 5% of the total shoreline is armored with .3 mile riprap (40%) and bulkhead (60%). There is some riprap on either side of the railroad bridge, and bulkhead in the marinas on the south side of Neabsco Creek. Rogers et al., 1976, indicated that the bulkheading is mainly for cosmetic and commercial purposes. 43 34V PO X84 ea M Map 5-A Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek 1:24,000 7 Pw (Quantico to Indian Head) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: (<3ft./y Severe: 03ft./y Extreme: 0 1 5ft./ ( Shoreline change map digitized USGS quadra Neabsco N Creek 1 1:24,000 NP 5 -B Fl-eeStO/70 POifit to Potomac Aoutb of Neo3bsco CPeek M River -19466 sbore-lifle 1982, f9835)50p6P,7j17e 5//0) 9FZ INE f )- 90SION 5110M Z M -,4Mqf 71-ON MAP 5-C Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 NUP 6 Shoreline Segment: Mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point USGS Quadrangles: Quantico Indian Head Fort Belvoir Occoquan County: Prince William Property Maps: 14NI 20S, 19S, 19N, 20N, 29S, 28S, 28N Water Body: Occoquan Bay Farm Creek Marumsco Creek unnamed tributaries Shoreline Description: There are 11.6 miles of shoreline from the northern side of the mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point. Approximately 4.1 miles of this segment Hes directly on the Potomac River, 3.4 miles are along Marurnsco Creek, 3.2 miles of the shoreline is along Farm Creek, and the remaining 0.9 mile is along smaller unnamed tributaries. There are two residential areas, Featherstone Shores and Bayside Park located in this segment between Farm Creek and Marumsco Creek. Marumsco National Wildlife Refuge, Veterans Memorial Park, and the Marumsco Creek Community Center are located along Marumsco Creek. The shoreline to the north of Marumsco Creek is part of the Diamond Laboratories U.S. Military Reservation. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that erosion and accretion have occurred along the Farm Creek and Marumsco Creek marsh shorelines; however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sedirnent fluxes. The residential areas of Featherstone Shores and Bayside Park have experienced moderately (<3 ftlyr) eroding shorelines. The shoreline changes shown for the small area of open water between Featherstone Shores and Bayside Park indicate that this area was established between the late 60s and early 80s; therefore the "erosion" of this basin is not a continuous trend. Artificial Stabilization: Only 15% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 1.8 miles of riprap (50%), bulkhead (45%), and several groins (5%). Most of the riprap is just south of Deephole Point along the military reservation. There is also some riprap on either side of the basin between Featherstone Shores and Bayside Park with bulkheading inside the basin. Bulkhead extends along Featherstone Shores and Bayside Park with some gaps, and a small groin field. Rogers et al., 1976, indicated that the bulkheading at the marina is mainly used for commercial purposes. 47 off"i on ICKSS -F T TERANS M .......... 0 so " C+ CD C: W9 El A) cr ti 0 t:jj0 Cb Ln C) 0 0 0tic 10 CL 0- A3 00 t3 @i' :) IVA @e Y-vad Occoquan Bay MAP 6-B Mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point 1:24,000 1965, 1966 Shoreline 1982, 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X MAP 6-C Mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion Occoquan Bay NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 7 Shoreline Segment: Deephole Point to Occoquan River Dam USGS Quadrangles: Fort Belvoir Occoquan County: Prince William Property Maps: 28N, 42S, 42N, 56S, 57S, 57N Water Bodies: Belmont Bay Occoquan River Shoreline Description: There are 6.0 miles of shoreline from Deephole Point to the Occoquan River Dam. Approximately 1.6 miles of shoreline are along Belmont Bay; the remaining 4.4 miles are along the Occoquan River. The shoreline around Deephole Point is part of the Diamond Laboratories U.S. Mlitary Reservation site. There is a good deal of development along the Occoquan River. Both Woodbridge and the Town of Occoquan have residential areas along the shoreline. There are also several commercial and industrial areas. There are numerous piers and several marinas along this segment. There is a sewage disposal station to the south of Occoquan, and several large water tanks and a pumping station to the north of Occoquan. There are several bridges across the Occoquan River for the Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad, Route 1, Interstate 95, and Route 123. Erosion Situation: The shoreline ch'anges map shows that some of the shoreline along the Occoquan River has experienced moderate (<3 ft/yr) to severe (>3 ft/yr) erosion. The shorelines of some of the low lying areas have changed due to shifting marsh and beach shoreline. Artificial Stabilization: Approximately 40% of the total shoreline is hardened with 2.4 miles of bulkhead (60%) and riprap (40%). There are also two attached marsh islands along the Occoquan River that are old overgrown breakwaters. There is bulkheading along the commercial and industrial areas, and along most of Occoquan. The riprap is mainly along the military reservation. 51 0 0 x86 @,4 40- X34 I -Nil A X's16 0 e -ont r Es y ii s10 a 1 68 T - D LAAPB-OP,*T E ITA S VAT in E Pf"', Map 7-A Deephole Point to Occoquan River Dam 1:24,000 PW (Fort Belvoir and Occoquan) P -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- _Q1 11 (636I&L., -- @,@ x I *M Occoquan River (South Shore) S S M MP 7-B AOeephO-161 POil7t tO N 0 17 j 1/, P '0 7 1:24,000 _fg65 - f966 f 993, J984 5b0PeJj178 S MORE IM - 590510N 0 51101Y ZINE 4CMETION ( Shoreune change map from digitized USGS quadrangies SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: ((3ft./yr.) M severe: 03ft-/Yr.) s Extreme: 0 1 5ft./yr/) X Occoquan River (South Shore) MAP 7-C Deephole Point to Occoquan River Dam 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 NIAP 8 Shoreline Segment: Occoquan River Dam to Route 1 Bridge USGS Quadrangles: Fort Belvoir Occoquan County: Fairfax Property Maps: 112-2,112-4,113-3 Water Body: Occoquan River Shoreline Description: There are 2.1 miles of shoreline from the Occoquan River Dam to the Route 1 Bridge. This segment is entirely on the Occoquan River. The District of Columbia Department of Corrections (Lorton Reformatory) occupies part of this segment. There is a large quarry close to the shore and a sewage disposal area. There are several bridges across the Occoquan River for Route 123, Interstate 95, Route 1, and the Richmond, Fredricksburg, and Potomac Railroad. The shoreline runs along the Occoquan Regional Park between Route 123 to near Interstate 95. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that there was a change in the open water area at the mouth of an unnamed creek to the north of the Interstate 95 bridge; this change happened in the late 60s or 70s and does not necessarily represent a significant trend. There map also shows moderate (< 3 ft/yr) bluff erosion to the south of the Interstate 95 bridge. Artificial Stabilization: Only 8% of the shoreline is stabilized with .2 mile of artificial structures, 60% of which is bulkhead and 40% riprap. Owen et al., 1979, indicated that the structures were mainly erected for cosmetic and commercial purposes. 55 VP 611 77SJ Al X 8 X34 Q) X,56 N s 68 D ED) E d i 7dwgd-r I. > t, ILIT s AT E z Map 8-A Occoquan River Dam to Route I Bridge 1:24,000 FX (Fort Belvoir and Occoquan) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- (6ml" Occoquan River (North Shore) MAP 8-B Occoquan River Dam to Route 1 Bridge 1:24,000 1965, 1966 Shoreline 1983, 1984 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X Occoquan River (North Shore) MAP 8-C Occoquan River Dam to Route 1 Bridge 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 9 Shoreline Segment: Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek USGS Quadrangle: Fort Belvoir County. Fairfax Property Maps: 113-3,117-1,117-2,113-4,118-1,118-3 Water Bodies: Occoquan River Massey Creek Belmont Bay unnamed tributary Shoreline Description: There are 6.8 miles of shoreline from Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek. Approximately 1.2 miles of the shoreline are along the Occoquan River, 2.6 miles are along Massey Creek, 2.1 miles are along Belmont Bay, and the remaining 0.9 mile of shoreline is along a marshy tributary to the northwest of Kanes Creek. There are several piers and boat ramps in this segment. To the southeast of the Route 1 Bridge, is the Colchester residential area and the Fairfax Yacht Club. The shoreline on the west side of Massey Creek is now almost entirely developed. There are a few houses at the southeast mouth of Massey Creek, around Frenchmans Point. There are several more houses between Frenchmans Point and the tributary just northwest of Kanes Creek. The boundary for Mason Neck State Park lies between the tributary and Kanes Creek. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that there have been shifting marsh shorelines along Massey Creek, in the marsh area just to the north of the creek, and along the unnamed tributary at the mouth of Kanes Creek, however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. There has also been some moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion along several bluffs on Belmont Bay. Artificial Stabilization: Only 25% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 1.7 miles of bulkhead (65%), riprap (30%), and groins (5%). The structures are spread throughout the segment. Most of the residences along Massey Creek are armored with only a few gaps. 59 M 14 n @2 42 40 X34 10 X 34 ont -e6 Q:) S\ /0 B -CM 0 N Y L N Map 9-A Route I Bridge to Kanes Creek 1 1:24,000 FX (Fort Belvoir)-Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- I + @.y I MAP 9-B Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek 1:24,000 1965 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X Belmont Bay MAP 9-C Route 1 Bridge to Kanes Creek 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater G: Channel Gabion Belmont Bay NVPDC September, 1992 M" 10 Shoreline Segment: Kanes Creek to Sandy Point USGS Quadrangle: Fort Belvoir County: Fairfax Property Maps: 118-3,118-4,121-1,120-2 Water Bodies: Kanes Creek Belmont Bay Shoreline Description: There are 6.6 miles of shoreline from Kanes Creek to Sandy Point. Approximately 5 miles are along the convoluted shoreline of Kanes Creek, and the remaining 1.7 miles are along the relatively smooth shoreline of Belmont Bay. The entire shoreline borders Mason Neck State Park. The park's Visitors Center is along the Belmont Bay shoreline. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that the Kanes Creek shoreline has changed significantly. Some marsh areas along the Belmont Bay shoreline have also changed; however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. Artificial Stabilization: None of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized. 63 g M err,- U I r,11lKj t ........... B MONT Y 0 E M30 -tp,7 40 Map I O-A Kanes Creek to Sandy Point FX (Fort Belvoir)-Reference map from i @em n. MAP 10-B SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Kanes Creek to Sand Point 1:24,000 Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X 1965 Shoreline (Shoreline change map from 1983 Shoreline digitized USGS quadrangles) SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION Belmont Bay R: Riprap MAP io-c B: Bulkhead G: Groins Kanes Creek to 1:24,000 K: Breakwater Sandy Point C: Channel Gabion EstImated from NVPDC Artificial Shoreline (aerlal survey 1992 Stabilization Kanes Creek Belmont Bay NVPDC Septeinber, 1992 MAP 11 Shoreline Segment-. Sandy Point to Sycamore Point USGS Quadrangles: Indian Head Fort Belvoir County: Fairfax Property Maps: 120-2,121-1,121-3 Water Bodies: Occoquan Bay Potomac River Shoreline Description: There are 3.7 miles of shoreline from Sandy Point to Sycamore Point. Approximately 1.7 miles of shoreline from Sandy Point to 11igh Point are on the Occoquan Bay, and the remaining 2.0 miles are on the Potomac River. This segment contains shoreline along Mason Neck State Park, Potomac Shoreline Regional Park, and Mason Neck Wildlife Sanctuary. There are also a few houses along the shore. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion has occurred on the Belmont Bay shoreline and severe (> 3 ft/yr) erosion has occurred around High Point. Owen et al., 1979, indicated that most of the shoreline in this segment has experienced moderate bluff erosion (1 to 3 ft/yr). Miller, 1987, did a detailed field study of High Point from February 1980 to July 1981; his results indicated that there was a mean recession rate of 1.3 to 1.6 ft/yr. He also did cartographic and photogrammetric analyses that gave rates of 0.7 ft/yr and 2.0 ft/yr for this part of Mason Neck. Artificial Stabilization: Only 16% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with .6 mile of riprap (80%) and bulkheads (20%). The area to the south of Sandy Point has two sections of riprap and a small section of bulkhead. Some more riprap was used along the levee in Potomac Shoreline Regional Park. Another small section of bulkhead is along the shoreline of a private residence to the East of Mgh Point. 67 s 20 B ON Y 4j s E M 30 z ndy 30 "0 0 A E N RK 0 tv Light X36 >36 G A K 4 Map I 1-A Sandy Point to S r BA Y P0 t FX (Indian Head and -Reference map fro MAP 11-B Sandy Point to Sycamore Point 1:24,000 1965, 1966 Shoreline 1982, 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X Belmont Bay Potomac River MAP 11-C Sandy Point to Sycamore Point 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion Belmont Bay Potomac River NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 12 Shoreline Segment: Sycamore Point to Hallowing Point USGS Quadrangle: Fort Belvoir County: Fairfax Property Maps: 121-3,121-4,122-1,122-2 Water Body: Potomac River unnamed tributaries Shoreline Description: There are 8.0 miles of shoreline from Sycamore Point to Hallowing Point. Approximately 2.8 miles of the shoreline lies directly on the Potomac River, and the remaining 5.2 miles are along tributaries in the marsh. The 1.4 miles of shoreline from the eastern edge of the marsh to Hallowing Point are heavily developed as part of Hallowing Point Estates; many of these homes have docks. The shoreline from Sycamore Point to the residential area is part of Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that there have been significant changes in the marsh area to the northeast of Sycamore Point; however, the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. Artificial Stabilization: Only 15% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 1.2 mile of bulkheads (65%), riprap (30%), and a few groins (5%). All of these structures are along the shoreline of Hallowing Point Estates and were generally constructed on a property to property basis with some gaps in front of individual residences. Owens et al., 1979, indicate that the gaps between the structures reduce their overall effectiveness. 71 B 4 10 20 768 A ON 38 unsto man 600 30 41 T Ilowl M30 AV -1 X7 f A K Map 12-A Sycamore Point to Hallowin FX (Fort Belvoir)-Reference map 0 Y MAP 12-B Sycamore Point SIGNIFICANT EROSION * to Hallowing Point 1:24,000 Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X 1965 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline (Shoreline change map from SHORELINE EROSION digitized USGS quadrangles) SHORELINE ACCRETION Potomac River MAP 12-C Sycamore Point to Hallowing Point 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion Potomac River NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 13 Shoreline Segment: Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay USGS Quadrangle: Fort Belvoir County: Fairfax Property Maps: 122-2,119-4,119-1,115-3,114-4 Water Bodies: Potomac River Gunston Cove unnamed tributary Shoreline Description: There are 4.7 miles of shoreline from Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay. Approximately 2.1 miles of this is on the Potomac River, and 2.1 miles are along Gunston Cove. The remaining 0.5 mile of shoreline is along a small tributary. There are two residential areas to the north of Hallowing Point, Hallowing Point Estates' and Gunston Manor. The shoreline of this segment continues along past Gunston Hall Plantation, to approximately the mouth of Pohick Bay at the head of Gunston Cove. The northern portion of this segment is part of the Pohick Bay Regional Park where there is a large boat ramp. There are also several docks in this segment. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that moderate (<3 ft/yr) bluff erosion has occurred in several places along this segment. The bluff erosion in the Gunston Manor residential area could threaten the houses that are close to the shoreline. Owen et al., 1979, indicated that this segment is undergoing moderate (1 to 3 ft/yr) erosion from Hallowing Point to the inside of Gunston Cove, and that one house at the mouth of Gunston Cove is endangered by the erosion situation. Artificial Stabilization: Only 12% of this segment has been artificially stabilized with .5 mile of bulkhead (55%), riprap (40%), and several groins (5%). Most of the structures are along individual properties of Hallowing Point Estates and Gunston Manor with some gaps between structures. There is also some riprap near the Pohick boat ramp. 75 ns Pohick oat P 0 4- U e 4 4C 20 n768 W& N N 40 C) A ON Uunsto Mano U 30 30 LU, 0 gh ej rO Map 13-A Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay 1:24,000 FX (Fort Belvoir)-Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- Gunston Cove Potomac River MAP 13-B Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay 1:24,000 1965 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION (Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles) SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X Gunston Cove Potomac River MAP 13-C Hallowing Point to Pohick Bay 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 14 Shoreline Segment: Pohick Bay to Whitestone Point USGS Quadrangle: Fort Belvoir County: Fairfax Property Maps: 114-4,114-2,115-1,115-3,115-4 Water Bodies: Pohick Bay Pohick Creek Accotink Bay Accotink Creek Gunston Cove Shoreline Description: There are 16.6 miles of shoreline included from Pohick Bay to Whitestone Point. The shoreline in this segment is highly convoluted and only about half of the total shoreline is on Pohick Bay, Accotink Bay, and Gunston Cove. The limit of tidewaters along Pohick and Accotink Creeks is further inland than the portions included in this segment. Approximately 4.4 miles of shoreline are along Pohick Bay, and 1.8 miles are included along Pohick Creek. Approximately 2.1 miles are along Accotink Bay and 6.4 miles are along Accotink Creek, with 2.1 miles of that being island shorelines. The remaining 1.8 miles of shoreline are along Gunston Cove. The first stretch of shoreline in this segment is along Pohick Bay regional park. The remainder of the shoreline is along the U.S. Army Fort Belvoir Military Reservation. There are a few residential buildings, and several buildings on the military base along the shoreline, but most of the shoreline is undeveloped. There are several docks and boat ramps in Gunston Cove. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that there has been some moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion at the mouth of Pohick Bay, and near the Fort Belvoir military boat facility. Artificial Stabilization: Only 4% of this shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with .6 mile of breakwater (50%), bulkhead (30%), and riprap (20%). There is a small section of bulkhead and some riprap to the northwest of the Pohick boat ramp. There is a large breakwater and some bulkheading at the Fort Belvoir military boat facility. There is also a dock and a stretch of bulkhead along the shoreline along Gunston Cove. 79 UKI 59'A IN nll- CK B . . . ......... -AV 14 lie ?Oil'Lt Quadl 4LO V hitte St 13SGS 'fOPO 'a frOVOL OjLj'Ct IPF p 'Reference 4- P@- .?,@ -L 14 (Fort l3elvoir MAP 14-B Pohick Bay to 1:24,000 SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Whitestone Point Moderate: (<3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S Extreme: (>15ft./yr/) X 1965 Shoreline (Shoreline change map from 1983 Shoreline digitized USGS quadrangles) SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION MAP 14-C Pohick Bay to Whitestone Point 1:24,000 R: Riprap B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater Artificial Shoreline C: Channel Gabion Stabilization (Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992) NVPDC September, 1992 Shoreline Segment: Whitestone Point to Ferry Point USGS Quadrangles: Fort Belvoir Mount Vernon County: Fairfax Property Maps: 115-4,115-2,109-4,110-3 Water Bodies: Potomac River Dogue Creek Shoreline Description: There are 8.1 miles of shoreline from Whitestone Point to Ferry Point. Around 1.9 miles lies directly on the Potomac and 4.9 n-dles; are on Dogue Creek. The basin at Whitestone Point encompasses another 0.6 mile, and the basin at the Mount Vernon Yacht Club includes another 0.7 mile. The shoreline from Whitestone Point to the head of Dogue Creek is all adjacent to the U.S. Army Fort Belvoir Military Reservation. There are only a few buildings near the shore. There is a boat ramp and docking facility on the upper northeast side of Dogue Creek on the military reservation. From the lower northeast side of Dogue Creek to Ferry Point, there are numerous residential areas including Mount Vernon Terrace, Mount Vernon on the Potomac, Yacht Haven Estates, and Oxford. The Mount Vernon Yacht Club is in this section. There are numerous piers and docks along this stretch. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that there has been moderate (< 3 ft/yr) along several bluffs on both sides of Dogue Creek. The shoreline has also changed in several marsh areas; the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels rather than large sediment fluxes. There have also been moderate (< 3 ft/yr) shoreline changes in both the basin at Whitestone Point and the basin at the Mount Vernon Yacht Club. The slight to moderate accretion to the north of VVI-dtestone Point has occurred along the base of eroding bluffs. Owens et al., 1979, indicated that the bluffs to the north of Whitestone Point are experiencing moderate (1 to 3 ft/yr). Artificial Stabilization: Overall, 41% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 3.3 miles of bulkhead (60%) and riprap (40%). The Fort Belvoir Military Reservation has hardened shorelines at the basin at VAfitestone Point, which has riprap on either side and bulkhead inside; there is a stretch of bulkhead south of Dogue Creek; and also some riprap on the north bank of the creek. The remaining shoreline on the north side of Dogue Creek is almost entirely structured with alternating bulkheading and riprap. 83 Cn, ar A Ts J' 3 ha me M 14 Z7 Grist Mill P t h 0 NT v M unt S 10 6. wa 0 sa 5 M C( all all ns Map 15-A Whitestone Point to Perry Point 1:24,000 FX (Fort Belvoir, and Mount Vernon) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- L \\J MAP 15-B Whitestone Point 1:24,000 to Ferry Point 1965, 1966 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION M* M* M SIGNIFICANT EROSION Dogue Moderate: 3ft./yr.) M Creek Severe: 3ft./Yr.) Extreme: (15ft/yr) ( Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles MAP 15-C Whitestone Point to Ferry Point 1:24,000 Artificial Shoreline Stabilization ( Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992 B R B R R: Riprap B: Bulkhead B G: Groins R K: Breakwater B C Channel Gabion R B Dogue Creek B R NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 16 Shoreline Degment: Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek USGS Quadrangle: Mount Vernon County: Fairfax Property Maps: 110-3,110-4,111-3,111-1,102-3 Water Bodies: Potomac River Little Hunting Creek Shoreline Description: There are 11 miles of shoreline from Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek. Approximately 1.8 miles of shoreline are on the Potomac River and the remaining 9.2 miles are along Little Hunting Creek. Northeast of Ferry point are the Belle River and Riverwood residential areas and the Mansion House Yacht Club. The stretch of shoreline beyond these residential areas and around the western side of the mouth of Little Hunting Creek is along the historic Mount Vernon estate. There are numerous residential areas along Little Hunting Creek including Wessynton, Woodland Park, Waldon Woods Riverside Estates, Sunnyview, Huntington at Mount Vernon, Stratford Landing, Fort Hunt, and Stratford on the Potomac. There are also a sewage disposal area, a U.S. Coast Guard Radio Station, the Martin Luther King Jr. Park, the Williamsburg Manor Park and the Little Hunting Creek Park on Little Hunting Creek. The George Washington Memorial Parkway and the Mount Vernon Bike Trail cross Little Hunting Creek near the mouth. The shoreline at the end of this segment is Riverside Park along the George Washington Memorial Parkway. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that moderate (< 3 ft/yr) to severe W ft yr) erosion has taken place along Stratford on the Potomac residential area at the mouth of Little Hunting Creek. The map also shows other shoreline changes near the mouth of, and along Little Hunting Creek, that are mainly associated with marsh shorelines; and therefore, probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels, rather than large sediment fluxes. Owens et al., 1979, indicated that the bluffs to the north of Ferry Point are experiencing moderate (1 to 3 ft/yr) erosion. Artificial Stabilization: There are 1.7 miles of artificial shoreline stabilization in this segment along 15% of the shoreline. Approximately 60% of the structures are bulkheading and 40 % are riprap. There is riprap just to the north of Ferry Point and near Mount Vernon. Most of the bulkheading is in Little Hunting Creek. 87 EAD&S. PAR K ch Y R. T R Be hern P, rk t Vern b v S cly 6 31 Ne V00 Mt ernon H.n S< fman Ch er rt t k t 5 23 629) x \to Map 16-A Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek 1:24,000 FX (Mount Vern on)-Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- MAP 16-B 1:24,000 Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek SIGNIFICANT EROSION * Moderate: ((3ft./yr.) M Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S S Extreme: (> I 5ft./yr) X Shoreline change map from Little (digitized USGS quadrangles Hunting Creek Potomac River 1966 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION B R:: Riprap B B: bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater C: Channel Gabion Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992 B Little POtOMac River Hunting Creek R MAP 16C Ferry Point to Little Hunting Creek Artificial Shoreline Stabilization NVPDC September, 1992 NW 17 Shoreline Segmenb Little Hunting Creek to Hog Island USGS Quadrangles: Alexandria Mount Vernon County: Fairfax Property Maps: 111-1, 111-2,102-4,102-2 Water Body: Potomac River Shoreline Description: There are 4.4 miles of shoreline from Little Hunting Creek to Hog Island. The entire segment runs along a bend in the Potomac River. The shoreline starts at Riverside park and continues along the George Washington Memorial Parkway past Fort Hunt around Sheridian Point. The National Park Service land continues around the bend in the Potomac River up to the residential areas of Collingwood, Herbert Springs, Arcturus, and Wellington Villa, which are adjacent to the shoreline at the end of the segment. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that moderate (< 3 ft/yr) to severe (>3 ft/yr) erosion has taken place to the north of Sheridan Point. There has also been some moderate erosion (<3 ft/yr) along the shoreline to the north of Arcturus. The erosion at the very north end of the segment is related to the marsh changes around Hog Island. Artificial Stabilization: There are 2.0 miles of artificial shoreline stabilization along 46% of the shoreline in this segment. 70% of the shoreline armoring is riprap and the remaining 30% is bulkheading. There are some areas with riprap along the George Washington Memorial Parkway. The residential areas have a n-dx of bulkheading and riprap, but not all of the properties have shoreline armoring. 91 d \j Ch hem PCbU 1 Iw u a u r Kin r. Vo.. Hun hS a dS@ y t 4S t 629 eri n Map 17-A Little Hunting Creek to Hog Islan 1:24.000 FX (Alexandria and Mount Vernon) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- M M M MAP 17-B P Little Hunting Creek 1:24,000 0 to Hog Island t 0 1966 Shoreline M a 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION Shoreline change map from I digitized USGS quadrangles./ SIGNIFICANT EROSION e Moderate: (3ft./yr.) M Severe: (3ft./Yr.) S Extreme: 15ft./yr) X S R B R B MAP 17-C Little Hunting Creek 0qp to Hog Island 1:24,000 B 0 t B 0 M Artificial Shoreline a Stabilization c ( Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992 R R: Riprap V B: Bulkhead e G: Groins K: Breakwater r C: Channel Gabion R NVPDC September, 1992 M" 18 Shoreline Segment: Hog Island to Hunting Creek USGS Quadrangle: Alexandria Count3r. Fairfax Property Maps: 102-2,93-4,93-2,83-4,83-2,83-1 Water Bodies: Potomac River Hunting Creek unnamed tributaries Shoreline Description: There are 14.9 miles of shoreline from Hog Island to Hunting Creek. This shoreline segment ends at the jurisdictional boundary between the City of Alexandria and Fairfax County which is approximately at Hooff Run, 1.2 miles above the mouth of Hunting Creek. Hooff Run also marks the transition between Cameron Run to the west and Hunting Creek to the east. Approximately 4.4 miles of this segment lie directly on the Potomac River, 0.9 mile is on Hunting Creek, and 1.0 mile of the shoreline is along a tributary of Hunting Creek. The remaining 8.6 miles of shoreline are along unnamed channels in the large marsh area at the beginning of the segment. The entire stretch of shoreline from Hog Island to the mouth of Hunting Creek is along the George Washington Memorial Parkway. The Belle Haven boat ramp and marina is in this reach, just north of the large marsh area. The George Washington Memorial Parkway crosses Hunting Creek at its confluence with the Potomac. The tributary at the mouth of the Creek runs along the western side of the Parkway. The western side of the tributary and the first stretch of Hunting Creek border the Belle Haven Country Club. The shoreline along Hunting Creek also runs along the Grosvenor Riverside commercial areas where Route 1 crosses the creek. Tidal influence continues up Cameron Run to an undefined point prior to where Interstate-95 crosses the run. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows extreme (> 15 ft /yr) erosion in the marsh area; while some of the shifting marsh shorelines are probably due to vegetation changes and meandering channels, there also has been a loss of sediment along this stretch of the Potomac River. The marina to the north of the marsh has experienced severe erosion (> 3 ft/yr). The shoreline near the mouth of Hunting Creek has also experienced moderate (< 3 ft/yr) to severe (> 3 ft/yr) erosion. The strip of erosion just inside the Creek is land that used to be marsh and is now open water. Some moderate (< 3 ft/yr) erosion has also occurred along Hunting Creek. Artificial Stabilization: Only 9% of the total shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized. 60% of the 1.4 mile shoreline armoring is riprap and 40% is bulkhead. There is a single section of bulkheading in Hunting Creek, and the remaining structures run from the marina above the marsh to near the entrance to the creek. 95 2040 v @XANDRIA N@ I L Park 0 6. . . . . n P11 k @4 P)RIq r avqnj, U. 1) Cj@ Z C) N A e n 7 ;@[z z B I I V V Saii I ........... 0 71- Map 18-A Hog Island to Hunting Creek 1:24,000 I S1 nd FX (Alexandria)-Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- Z2 :.-"A 6,26 4, @ @6@A *M Hunting Creek M-S P 1:24,000 0 MAP 18-B t Hog Island to Hunting Creek 0 M a 1971 Shoreline *S 1983 Shoreline R SHORELINE EROSION E Shoreline change map from e digitized USGS quadrangles r SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: (3ft/yr) M Severe: (3ft./Yr.) S Extreme: I 5ft./yr) x Hunting Creek 1:24,000 MAP 18-C Hog Island to Hunting Creek R Artificial Shoreline Stabilization 0 t Estimated from NVPDC 0 aerial survey 1992 m R: Riprap a B. Bulkhead c G: Groins K: Breakwater C. Channel Gabion R i V e r NVPDC September, 1992 MAP 19 Shoreline Segment: Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run USGS Quadrangle: Alexandria City: Alexandria Property Maps: 82.00, 83-01, 83-03, 83.04, 83-02, 84-01, 84.03, 81.03, 81-01, 75-03, 75-01, 65-03, 65.01, 55-03, 55.01, 36-00, 26.00, 17.00, 25.00, 16-00, 08.00 Water Bodies: Hooff Run Hunting Creek Potomac River Four Mile Run Shoreline Description: There are 8.8 miles of shoreline from Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run. The segment begins at the jurisdictional boundary between the City of Alexandria and Fairfax County which is approximately at Hooff Run, 1.2 miles above the mouth of Hunting Creek. Approximately 0.7 mile of shoreline is included along Hooff Run. The shoreline extends for 6.6 miles along the Potomac River, and another 0.3 mile along Four Mile Run. This shoreline segment ends at the jurisdictional boundary between the City of Alexandria and Arlington County, which occurs approximately at the Route I bridge. The shoreline at Hooff Run is crossed by Interstate-95, and the shoreline along Hunting Creek is crossed by Route 1 and the George Washington Memorial Parkway, which becomes Washington Street on the Alexandria side of the creek. The shorelands along this segment are industrial and residential. There are several large apartment buildings near the shoreline at the mouth of Hunting Creek called Hunting Towers. The Potomac shoreline begins at Jones Point near the Jones Point Lighthouse. This segment covers the entire waterfront of the City of Alexandria, and continues past Dangerfield Island to the mouth of Four Mile Run. There are many piers and docks, and several boat ramps in this section. The waterfront is extensively developed with a combination of recreational, industrial, and commercial uses. The Four Mile Run shoreline is mainly occupied by the Route 1, multiple railroad, and George Washington Memorial Parkway bridges. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that large shoreline changes have occurred along Four Mile Run; this is due to the channelization done by the Army Corps of Engineers -as a flood control measure and therefore does not represent an erosional trend. There are five small areas where the shoreline has changed moderately (< 3 ftlyr) to severely (>3 ft/yr). Artificial Stabilization: Overall, 58% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized. Of the 5.1 miles of shoreline armoring, 75% is riprap, 20% is bulkhead, and the remaining 5% is channel gabion along Four Mile run. The bulkheading and riprap is spread out along most of the Alexandria waterfront, with only a few gaps. 99 ta No Pcii iFs DS r I n 196 L th St 1MA sm 5. L___j rA _VE E EFO 0 R erds( din S7' n e t@$Ian( SC Disc ..Sp@ ZJ or 04@ 'I- Map 19-A Hunting Creek to Fourmile Run 1:24,000 tF AL (Alexandria)-Reference map from USGS Topo Quadranggless- EN 11-J N\ Parl Q-4 111 Spoil Area F ones Coint 1, MEMORIAL BR/4(kr_;. o ,,P k 31 In 10 / DSA 17 0 *M M S MAP 19-B P Hunting Creek to 1:24,000 0 Fourmile Run t 0 1971 Shoreline M 1983 Shoreline a SHORELINE EROSION C SHORELINE ACCRETION ( Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles V SIGNIFICANT EROSION e Moderate: (3ft./Yr) M r Severe: (3ft./yr) S Extreme: (15ft./yr) X S Hunting S Creek R R R MAP 19-C p Hunting Creek to R 0 t Fourmile Run 1:24,000 R 0 M Artificial Shoreline Stabilization a Estimated from NVPDC R i aerial survey 1992 B V )R e R: Riprap I B: Bulkhead It I R r G: GrOin W K: Breakwater B C: Channel Gabion B B R R Hunting B Creek R NVPDC SeptembeT, 1992 NW 20 Shoreline Segment: Four Mile Run to Theodore Roosevelt Bridge USGS Quadrangles: Washington West Alexandria Count3r. Arlington Property Maps: None (all Federal) Water Bodies: Four Mile Run Potomac River Roaches Run and Waterfowl Sanctuary Boundary Lagoon Little River Shoreline Description: There are 8.3 miles of shoreline from Four Mile Run to Theodore Roosevelt Bridge. The first 0.5 mile runs along Four Mile Run under Route 1, multiple railroad, and George Washington Memorial Parkway bridges. The Washington National Airport is adjacent to 2.9 miles of shoreline along the Potomac, from the mouth of Four Mile Run to Roaches Run. Roaches Run and the Waterfowl Sanctuary have 2.2 miles of shoreline. The shoreline from the mouth of Roaches Run to the mouth of Boundary Lagoon extends for 1.0 mile along the Potomac River The remaining 1.6 miles of shoreline is mainly along Boundary Lagoon behind Columbia Island, with the exception of 0.1 mile before Theodore Roosevelt Bridge which is at the mouth of Little River. All of the shoreline in this segment is controlled by the Federal Government. There is a sewage Disposal area on Boundary Lagoon. Numerous bridges cross the shoreline along this segment. Erosion Situatiow. The shoreline changes map shows that there are a few small areas of moderate k 3 ft/yr) erosion in this segment. The map also shows severe (> 3 ft/yr) erosion around the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge. Artificial Stabilization: Overall, 47% of the shoreline in this segment has been artificially stabilized with 3.9 miles of structures. Approximately 90% of the shoreline armoring is riprap at several locations throughout the segment, and the remaining 10% of the hardened shoreline is along the north side of Four Mile Run, which has been channelized with gabion. 103 VIAU 0 9 ing E rr.7on Al M OQugfe Ion K M Tid 1 Basin k@AW on JO 0. K EAS MAC th er a _n elf Co 4y 5 T 1 1111 W A I rONG@ .1Z G N ti N _/h\ Map 20-A Four mile Run to Theodore Roosevelt Bridg 1:24,000 AR (Washington West and Alexandria) -Reference map from USGS Topo Quadrangles- POI S C aK (,j - ___ 1-1 " , @ @rQ: *S *M Potomac River 1:24,000 MAP 20-B M Fourmile Run to M Theodore Roosevelt Bridge 1971 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION Shoreline change map from digitized USGS quadrangles SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: (3ft./Yr.) M Severe: (3ft./yr.) S Extreme: I 5ft./yr) X R R R N Potomac River R: Riprap R B: Bulkhead G: Groins K: Breakwater R C: Channel Gabion Estimated from NVPDC aerial survey 1992 R MAP 20-C 1:24,000 R Fourmile Run to Theodore Roosevelt Bridge R Artificial Shoreline Stabilization R C N R NVPDC September, 1992 NIAP 21 Shoreline Segment: Theodore Roosevelt Bridge to Little Falls USGS Quadrangle: Washington West Count3r. Arlmigton Property Maps: None (all Federal) Water Body: Little River Potomac River Shoreline Description: There are 5.0 miles of shoreline from Theodore Roosevelt Bridge to Little Falls. The first 0.6 mile is along Little River behind Theodore Roosevelt Island, and the remaining 4.4 miles of shoreline are along the Potomac River. The shoreline is crossed by Theodore Roosevelt, Key and Chain Bridges. All of the shorelands in this segment are governmental. The George Washington Memorial Parkway runs along the entire shoreline to Chain Bridge. Erosion Situation: The shoreline changes map shows that the area near the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge has experienced severe erosion (>3 ft/yr). Artificial Stabilization: There are 1.0 mile of riprap along 21% of the shoreline in this segment. The riprap is along the south end of the segment. 107 C-: rdon kx a -ev or tle Falls Little Falls MAP 21 -B Theodore Roosevelt Bridge to little Falls 1971 Shoreline 1983 Shoreline SHORELINE EROSION SHORELINE ACCRETION Potomac River SIGNIFICANT EROSION Moderate: (<3ft./yr) M Little Little River Severe: (>3ft./yr.) S River Extreme: (> I 5ft./yr) X ( Shoreline change map rrom digitized USGS quadrangles *S 0 Little Falls ~4qMP 21~-C ~ql~4qo~4qe~0qa~4qd~4qo~0qp~4qe ~qi~0qq~4qo~4qo~4qs~4qe~0qy~4qe~4ql~0qt Potomac River to Little ~4qF~4qd~-~0q1~-~0q1~4q5 1:24~q,0 A~0qf~0qt~0qi~4qf~4qi~6qC~0qJ~q0~q7~.~4q1~0q2~0qo~6qp~6qe~8qn~0qf~0ql~6qe ~4qS~0qt~0qO~q7~,~0q#~4qj~.~0qj~4qj~6qZ~qO~q7t~0qj~6qg~6qf~6ql R R R Riprap ~q%R B Bulkhead G Groins K Breakwater R ~0qF~q@ C: Channel Gabion Litde Estimated from NVPDC River aerial survey 1992 NVPDC September, 1992 ApRendix 2 SHORELINE SITUATION REVIEW The Shoreline Situation Rel2orts (SSR) produced by the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences (VIMS) for Prince William CounjY (Rogers, et. al., 1976), and for the Counties of Fairfax and ArlingLon, Cily of Alexandria (Owen, et. al., 1979) covered 155.4 miles of tidal shoreline. The shoreline descriptions given in the report were for subsegment divisions which were based on changes in shoreline configuration, physical properties, or locality boundaries. The subsegments were identified in the SSR as follows: Prince William County (PW), Fairfax County (FX), the City of Alexandria (AL), and Arlington County (AR): PW-5B: Chopawarnsic Creek (2.7 mi.), PW-5A: County Line to Shipping Point (3.6 mi.), PW-4: Shipping Point to Possum Point (11.1 mi.), PW-3B: Possum Point to Cockpit Point (2.5 mi.), PW-3A: Cockpit Point to Freestone Point (6.8 mi.), PW-2B: Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek (9.8 mi.), PW-2-A: Mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point (14.8 mi.), PW-1B: Deephole Point to 1-95 Bridge (3.8 mi.), PW-1A: 1-95 Bridge to Occoquan River Dam (2.3 mi.), FX-1: Occoquan River Dam to Sandy Point (10.9 mi.), FX-2: Sandy Point to Hallowing Point (12.3 mi.), FX-3A: Hallowing Point to Pohick Creek (8.7 mi.), FX-3B: Pohick Creek to Whitestone Point (13.3 mi.), FX-4A: Whitestone Point to Ferry Point (8.1 mi.), FX-4B: Ferry Point to Sheridan Point (10.2 mi.), FX-5: Sheridan Point to Hunting Creek (13.6 mQ, AL-6: Hunting Creek to Fourmile Run (9.8 mi.), and AR-7: Fourmile Run to, Little Falls (11.1 mi.). The shoreline characteristics which were described in the SSR include: (1) Shorelands physiographic classification, (2) Shorelands use classification, (3) Shorelands ownership classification, (4) Limitations to shore use and potential or alternative shore uses, (5) Flood hazards level, (6) Beach quality, (7) Water quality, and (8) Shore erosion situation. NVPDC September, 1992 The shorelands physiographic classification included descriptions of- the fastlands: the zone landward of the shore, the shore: the zone of beaches and marshes, and the nearshore: the zone from the shore to MLW (the mean low water datum). The shoreline was taken either as, the fastland/shore boundary, or the shore/nearshore boundary. The measurements of shoreline length were given for each subsegment along the shore/nearshore boundary. The fastlands were described by the average slope within 400 feet of the fastland/shore boundary. The classifications included: low shore: 20 feet or less of relief, moderately low shore: 20 - 40 feet of relief, moderately high shore: 40 - 60 feet of relief, and high shore: 60 feet or more of relief. In addition, the presence or absence of bluffs along the fastland/shore boundary were noted. The shore zone was defined as the buffer between the fastlands and the body of water. The landward limit of the shore zone was delineated by the line representing one and a half times the mean tide range above low water, and the seaward limit of the shore zone was given as the break in slope between the relatively steeper shoreface and the less steep nearshore zone. The SSR used the inner fringe of the marsh symbols on United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps as the landward limit of the shore zone, and the mean high water line on the USGS topographic maps as the shoreline, or seaward limit of the shore zone. The following categories were used to describe the shore zone: beach, fringe marsh, extensive marsh, embayed marsh, and artificially stabilized. The distinctions between the various types of marshes were related to their size and potential functions. The SSR defined a ftinge marsh as one that occurs in a band less than 400 feet in width and approximately parallel to the shore, and- indicated that this type of marsh usually provides a buffer to wave erosion of the fastland. An extensive marsh was defined as a marsh that projects into the adjacent water body, and has extensive acreage. An 112 NVPDC September, 1992 embayed marsh was defined as a marsh that occupies a re-entrant or drowned creek valley. The SSR indicated that in general an extensive marsh is likely to be a more efficient transporter of detritus and nutrients than an embayed marsh due to its greater drainage density. In the SSR, the nearshore zone includes tidal Rats, and extends from the shoreline which was taken as the mean low water line (MLW) to the 12-foot isobath. The nearshore zone was described as: � Narrow: 12-foot isobath is < 400 yards from shore, � Intermediate: 12-foot isobath is 400 - 1400 yards from shore, or � Wide: 12-foot isobath is > 1400 yards from shore. The shorelands physiographic classifications were graphically represented on the maps in the SSR, and were described in terms of the percent of the shoreline covered by the categories defined for the fastland, shore, and nearshore zones. The physiographic descriptions and data were derived from United States Geological Survey topographic maps and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration bathymetric charts. In addition, the Tidal Marsh Inventory reports produced by VIMS for Prince William County (1975), and Fairfax County (1976) were used. A summary spreadsheet of the shorelands physiographic data included in the SSR for Northern Virginia is included (Attachment 1A). The physiographic descriptions of the fastlands and nearshore zones of the subsegments in Northern Virginia will not have significantly changed since the publication of the SSR. The shore zone designations will have changed, especially the amount of artificial stabilization. In addition, the marsh areas Will have changed slightly since the publication of the SSR. (2) The shorelands use classification was also separated into the primary uses of the fastland, shore, and nearshore zones. The following uses were included: Fastlands Zone: - Residential - Commercial - Industrial - Governmental - Recreational and Public Open Spaces - Preserved - Agricultural - Unmanaged: - Open, or - Wooded. 113 NVPDC Septanber, 1992 � Shore Zone: - Bathing - Boat Launching - Bird Watching - Waterfowl Hunting � Nearshore Zone: - Pound Net Fishing - Shellfishing - Sport Fishing - Extraction of non-living Resources - Boating - Water Sports (3) The shorelands ownership dassffication used in the SSR was divided into the following classes: Private, or Governmental: - Federal - State - County or City The attached spreadsheets contain a summary of the shorelands use and ownership of the Northern Virginia segments as designated in the SSR (Attachment 1A). It is likely that changes have occurred in fastland use, especially regarding development, since the SSR were published in the 1970s. The shore and nearshore uses, however, probably have not significantly changed. The shorelands ownership classification may or may not have undergone changes. (4) The limitations to shore use and potential or alternative shore uses category in the SSR described specific factors which impose limits on the type or extent of shoreline development, as well as the potential for recreational uses of the shore zone. Both physical and political limitations were included; a subsegments topography, proximity to marshes, vulnerability to erosion, flooding potential, local development policy and zoning regulations, or current uses were defined as possible limits to potential or alternative shore uses. The alternative shore uses category is useful for identifying the areas that may have undergone changes in use or ownership since the SSR were published. In addition this category is extremely useful for identifying new areas of potential beach access and public recreational activities. 114 NVPDC September, 1992 Attachment 1B lists the alternative shore uses as given in the SSR. Some changes have occurred; this category should updated at some point because of its inherent use to planners and shoreline managers in Northern Virginia. (5) The flood hazards level information in the Prince William County SSR were derived from United States Army Corps of Engineers reports; the reports indicated that the Intermediate Regional Flood (an average recurrence time of 100 years) has an average water level of 8 feet above the mean water level. Flood data for Fairfax and Arlington Counties were extracted from the Federal Insurance Administration "Flood Hazard Boundary Maps." The reports indicated that most of the flooding is due to heavy rains, extreme runoff, and swelling of the river. The maps indicated that the 100-year flood would range from 9.3 to 9.8 feet above MSL (mean sea level) in Fairfax County, and up to 21 feet above MSL for some portions of Arlington County. Flood data for Alexandria were extracted from the City of Alexandria's "Flood Plain Map, 1977" (Ordinance No. 2182). The map indicated that the 100-year flood would range from 12 to 15 feet above MSL. The flood hazards section also indicated areas where structures are in danger of flooding. This section could be updated at some future point with revised flood level information and the reidentification of endangered structures. The flood hazards assessments from the SSR are included in Attachment 1C along with the beach quality and water quality assessments. (6) The beach quality evaluation was based on the nature of the beach material, length and width of the beach, and the general aesthetic appeal of the beach setting. Most of the beaches were rated poor to fair because the beaches in Northern Virginia are mainly thin and usually vegetated. This category reflects a subjective judgment, and is unlikely to have significantly changed. (7) The water quality evaluation category was included in the SSR for Fairfax and ArlingLon, Ci!y of Alexandria but was not included for Prince William Counjy However, the text of the Prince William County report indicated that several creeks were experiencing water quality problems (in 1976), and that discharges into several creeks did not meet the State Water Control Board's Embayment Standards. For example, the SSR indicated that "Neabsco Creek is sterile due to a chlorine overdose several years ago." The data for the water quality section were derived from the Virginia State Water Control Board's publications Water Qualfty Standard (November, 1974), and Water Oualily InvenM (305 b) (April, 1976). According to the 1979 SSR, no area of the Upper Potomac River met the Virginia water quality standard all of the time. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments - March 1978, "208 Water Quality Plan" stated that "the capacity of @;e estuary to absorb waste loads is limited and is heavily dependent on Potomac flows to overcome tidal action which confines 115 NVPDC September, 1992 wastes in the upper estuary." The data in this category are outdated and should not be used; the water quality evaluations should be revised. (8) The shore erosion situation category contained the following information: * Erosion rate, * Endangered Structures, and 9 Shore protective structures. A review of the information contained in the SSR reveals that there was no data on erosion rates for any of the subsegments. However, the maps provided in the reports showed areas of moderate erosion (1 to 3 feet/year) in subsegments: FX-1: Occoquan River Dam to Sandy Point, FX-2: Sandy Point to Hallowing Point, FX-3A: Hallowing Point to Pohick. Creek, FX-4A: Whitestone Point to Ferry Point, and FX-413: Ferry Point to Sheridan Point. Additionally, the text described the erosion situation for each subsegment. Attachment 1D presents a summary of the text descriptions of the erosion situation for each of the segments as presented in the SSR. The Summary of Shoreline Situation ReRorts for Virginia's Tidewater Localities (C. Hobbs, D. Owen, and L. Morgan, 1979) indicated that there were 27 separate SSR produced for the 34 counties and cities bordering approximately 5000 miles of Virginia's tidal waters. The erosion rate information in the SSR were, in part, obtained from a mid 1970s VIMS study that was published in 1977 as Shoreline Erosion in Tidewater Virginia by Robert Byrne and Gary Anderson. The study established long term erosion rates by comparing the high water shoreline positions on maps from the 1850's and the 1940s. In addition, aerial photographs of the late 1930s and mid 1970s were used to assess more recent trends. However, the comparisons were not made for the Northern Virginia shorelines, and hence the "no data" for erosion rates in these SSFL The evaluations of the erosion situation that are in the SSR were made from field investigations and interviews with local inhabitants. The reports indicated that both wave attack and downhill rain runoff contribute to the slight to moderate erosion occurring in some sections of the study area. However, the reports concluded, "Generally, erosion is not considered to be a significant problem for this area of the Potomac River. Populated shoreline areas have been largely artificially stabilized." The reports indicated that only one house on the northern end of Chopawarnsic Island, and one house at the mouth of Gunston Cove were endangered by continuing erosion. The SSR contained maps with areas of artificial stabilization and areas of moderate erosion represented by symbols. However, the quality of the graphics was poor, and not all of the areas described in the text as 116 NVPDC September, 1992 experiencing slight erosion were depicted. The descriptions and extent of artificial shoreline stabilization structures were derived from oblique aerial photography. Attachment 1D contains a summary of the artificial shoreline stabilization structures. This information should be updated. 117 Attachment 2A-1 PHYSIOGRAPHIC DATA FOR NORTHERN VIRGINIA, 1976/1979 (Miles) Subsegments PW~-5B PW~-~q5A PW4 PW~-3B PW~-3A PW~-2B PW~-2A PW~8qA~qB PW~-1A FX~-1 FX~-2 FX~-~q3A FX~-~q3B FX~12q4A Shore~qla~nds Physiography FAST~qLANDS Artificial Fill nd nd nd ~nd nd nd nd nd nd 0 0 0 0 0 ~L~w Shore ~qi~qs 0.6 ~q1 0.3 2 1.2 7.7 19 0 S~6qS 0.5 2.6 9.5 42 Moderately Low Shore 0.6 2.7 6.1 OA 1.7 12 02 0 1 A 8.9 8A 2.9 2A 2.1 Mod. Low Shore with Bluffs 0 0.1 0~q3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 3.1 1 A 0 0 Moderately High Shore 0.8 0 1.3 0.7 1.3 1.6 0 0.8 OA 0.1 0 0.4 09 0.3 Mod. High Shore with Bluffs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~q0~q.~4q1 H~ighShore 0.8 0 0.8 0.7 1.2 1.2 0 02 0.6 1.6 0 ~q1 0.3 0.3 ~F~ligh Shore with Bluffs 0 0 0.3 0.6 OA 0~6q3 0 0.2 0 0.5 0 ~q1 0 1.1 SHORE I I Artificially Stabilized 0 1A 0.3 0.6 ~q0~.~q1 0~2q2 1.3 0.6 1.3 ~q0~6q2 ~q-0~.9 0~.~q5 0~q5 1A Beach 0 1A 2.8 1.9 22 1.1 0.~q5 1.7 0.1 0.6 3.9 3.9 1A 2.8 Fringe Marsh 1.2 0 2.7 0 1~.9 2.3 1.1 0.3 ~q0~.~q9 6.3 0.6 2.9 9.8 2.5 Embayed Marsh 1~.~q5 OA 3.4 0.1 2.6 62 6A 02 0 3.8 7 1A 1.7 1~16q3 Extensive Marsh 0 OA 1.9 0 0. 0 ~q5~q5 ~q1 0 0 0 0 0 0 NEARSHORE Narrow nd* ~q1 nd~* 2.5 1.3 0 0 nd~* nd* 0 1.3 ~q1~q1 0 1.6 Intermediate nd~* 1.6 nd* 0 0 0 0 nd* nd~* 0 ~q0~.~q9 ~qi~qs 0 0 Wide nd* 0 nd* 0 1.1 1 1.1 4 nd~* nd* 1 0 4.1 0 ~q0 ~q1 ~q0 Sho~re~qla~nd~s Use I I Agricultural nd nd nd- nd nd nd nd nd nd 0.4 0 0.2 0 0 Commercial 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 Govemmental 3.6 2.8 2.8 0 0 0 ~q1~.~q8 1.2 0 0 0 0 13.2 5.9 Industrial 0 0 2.3 0.9 ~q1 0.2 OA 0 OA 1.8 0 0 0 0 Perserved 0 0 0 0 0 0 1~.~q5 ~q0 ~q1 0 8.7 1.1 1.1 0 0 Recreational 0 0 0 0 ~q0 0 ~q0~.~q5 0 0 0 8.7 3.8 0 0.3 Residential 0 0.5 1.1 0 ~-0~.~q5 0.2 1.2 0.6 1.1 1.8 1.8 2.2 0 is Unmanag~ed, Open 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 ~q0~.~q1 0 0 0 0.3 U~~~nanaged, Wooded 0 0 3A 1.8 5.2 4A 2.5 1.1 0.3 4A 0.5 2 0 0.2 Oumer~ship Private 0 ~qO~.~qS 6.9 2.7 6.7 4 4.1 1.9 2.3 7.1 2.3 5.6 0 22 Federal 3.6 2.8 2.8 0 0 0 3.3 12 0 0 0 0 132 5.9 State nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 8.7 1.1 0 0 0 County/City 0 0 0 0 0 1 A ~q0~.~q5 0 0 1.3 8.6 3.8 0 0 Total Mika Fastland 3.6 3A 9.6 2.7 6.7 5.4 3.1 2.3 17.1 12 93 ~q13~.2 8.1 Shoreline 2.7 3 ~q-2.5 6.8 9.8 14~-98 3.8 2.3 10.9 12.3 8.7 13.3 8.1 7 nd = no data; not included in original report nd~ = nd data (too shallow to measure) NVPDC September, 1992 Attadunent 2A-2 SUMMARY PHYSIOGRAPHIC DATA FOR NORTHERN VIRGINIA, 1976/1979 Prince Win. Fairfax city of Arlington County Countv Alexandria County Shorelands Physiography (miles) (miles) (miles) (miles) (Total) FASTLANDS Artificial Fill *nd 1.7 13 02 Low Shore 162 29.6 7.1 4.8 57.7 Moderately Low Shore 14.3 31.4 1A 2.0 49.1 Mod. Low Shore with Bluffs OA 5.0 0 0 5.4 Moderately High Shore 6.9 3.5 0 OA 10.8 Mod. High Shore with Bluffs 0 0.3 0 0 0.3 Bgh Shore 5.5 4.2 0 OA 10.1 High Shore with Bluffs 1.8 3.1 0 3.2 8.1_ SHORE Artificially Stabilized 5.8 6.7 4.0 3.0 19.5 Beach 11.7 16.7 1.3 2.1 31.8 Fringe Marsh 10A 28.9 4A 5.9 49.6 Embayed Marsh 20.8 18.5 0.1 0 39.4 Extensive Marsh 8.8 6.3 15.1 NFARSHORE Narrow 4.8 5.5 4.7 7-3 22.3 Intermediate 1.6 11.2 0.8 1.6 15.2 Wide 6.2 4.1 0 0 10.3 SHORELANDS USE Agricultural *nd 0.6 0 0 0.6 Commercial 1.1 0.2 OA 0 1.7 Governmental 12.2 19.1 0.8 0.8 32.9 Indusirial 5.2 2.0 4.2 3.6 15.0 Perserved 1.5 12.5 0 0 14.0 Recreational 0.5 20.3 3.2 6.1 30.1 Residential 5.2 16.1 0.6 OA 22.3 Unmanaged, Open 0.2 0.9 0.5 0 1.6 Unmanaged, Wooded 18.7 7.6 0 0 26.3 Ownership Private 29.1 28.9 2.2 0.9 61.1 Federal 13.7 26.4 6.9 8.0 55.0 State *nd 9.8 0 2.2 12.0 County/City 1.9 13.9 0.7 0 16.5 Total Miles Fastland 44.7 78.9 9.8 11.1 144.5 Shoreline 57A 1 77.1 1 9.8 1 11.1 155.4 *no data 119 NVPDC September, 1992 Attadunent 2B NORTHERN VIRGINIA ALTERNATE SHORE USES, 1976/1979 The limitations to shore use and potential or alternate shore uses listed in the SSR are as follows (verbatim) (note - the italicized rating refers to potential for alternative uses): PW-5B: Chopawamsic Creek. None. The present government ownership and use of this subsegment prohibits alternate development. PW-5A.- County Line to Shipping Point. Low. The present use and ownership of this subsegment precludes alternate development. PW-4: Shipping Point to Possum Point. Low. The area near the town of Dumfries could be developed as a low intensity recreational park. Other alternate uses for this segment are limited due to e)dsting use and ownership. PW-3B: Possum Point to Cockpit Point. Low. For 66% of the shore lands which are presently unused, development depends upon access across the railroad tracks. PW-3A: Cockpit Point to Freestone Point. Low. Two areas have development potential, although any construction should ensure against adding pollutants to the waters. A low intensity recreational park would be possible along the shore lands near Georgetown Village. PW-2B: Freestone Point to Mouth of Neabsco Creek. Low. Although 54% of the shoreline is presently unused, development here would be costly because of the lack of access to the area. PW-2A: Mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point. Low. This subsegment already has a county owned recreational park and a wildlife refuge along the shoreline. Little alternate use seems necessary for the unused, wooded lands located in this subsegment. PW-1B: Deephole Point to 1-95 Bridge. Moderate. The unmanaged, wooded area located in front of River Bend Estates has the possibility of becoming a low intensity recreational area. PW-IA: 1-95 Bridge to Occoquan River Dam. Low. The present use of the shoreline restricts alternate development. FX-1: Occoquan River Dam to Sandy Point. Moderate. The 41% of the shore lands which are private are being developed for residential purposes. 120 NVPDC September, 1992 FX-2: Sandy Point to Hallowing Point. Low. Given that 81 % of the shore lands are owned by the state and local governments, there are few private lands available for development. FX-3A: Hallowing Point to Pohick Creek. Low. The 40% of the shore lands which are privately owned are already largely developed. Some continued residential development is possible in some areas of the shoreline. FX-3B: Pohick Creek to Whitestone Point. Low. No private development is possible unless the government relinquishes control of the area. FX-4A.- Whitestone Point to Ferry Point. Moderate. The unused areas of the subsegment are located near residential sections. These areas win probably be developed for residences also. FX-4B: Ferry Point to Sheridan Point. Low. Most of the private lands have already been developed for residential purposes. FX-5: Sheridan Point to Hunting Creek. Low. Most of the segment is either preserved or is already consumed. There are few privately owned and unused lands. AL-6: Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run. High. The City of Alexandria plans to revitalize its waterfront for recreational open space, small businesses, and commercial shipping. However, any development of the Alexandria waterfront depends upon the outcome of the shore ownership dispute between the city and the federal government. AR-7. Four Mile Run to Little Falls. Low. All shore lands are being used. Any new use would be via redevelopment of existing areas. 121 NVPDC September, 1992 Attachment 2C NORTHERN VIRGINIA FLOOD HAZARD, WATER QUALITY, AND BEACH QUALITY, 1976,/1979 Subse~4qgment Flood Hazard Water Quality Beach Quality PW~-~8q5B Low not listed No Beaches PW~-~2q5A LOW not fisted Poor PW~-4 LOW not listed Poor PW~-3B LOW not listed Poor to Fair PW~-~q3A LOW not listed Fair to Good PW~-2B LOW not listed Poor to Good PW~-2A LOW to Moderate not listed Poor PW~-IB Low to Moderate not listed Fair to Poor PW~-1A LOW not listed Poor FX~-1 Moderate to ~8qM~6qLh Good Poor FX~-2 Moderate Good Fair FX~-~q3A Moderate Good Fair FX~-3B Moderate Good Fair FX~-~q4A Moderate Good Fair FX~-~q4B Moderate Good Fair FX~-5 Moderate to Hi~0qLh Poor to Fair Fair A~2qL~-6 High Poor to Fair Poor AR-7 Low to Moderate Poor to Fair Poor 122 NVPDC Septeff6er, 1992 Attachment 2D NORTHERN VIRGINIA SHORELINE EROSION SITUATION, 1976/1979 The Shoreline Situation Rep2rts produced by the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences (VIMS) for Prince William CgRM (1976), and for the Counties of Fairfax and Arling!on, Ci1y of Alexandria (1979) indicated that the shoreline erosion situation of the mid 1970s was as follows: PW-5B: Chopawamsic Creek. The shoreline does not appear to be eroding. There are no structures along the shore. PW-5A: Prince William county line to Shipping Point. The majority of the shoreline is stable with the exception of 0.1 mile of bluffed shoreline on Chopawamsic Island which is experiencing moderate erosion due mainly to downhill rain runoff and wind and wave actions at the base of the cliff. The house at the northern end of Chopawamsic Island is endangered by erosion. There are approximately 7,600 feet of artificial stabilization, the majority of which is at the Quantico boat dock. There are two large piers at the boat dock with several boat slips. The stabilization at the southern end of Chopawamsic Island is totally ineffective. PW-4: Shipping Point to Possum Point. Most of the area appears to be stable; however, there is some bluff erosion due to downhill rain runoff. There are 1,800 feet of bulkhead in a residential area that appears to be effective. PW-3B: Possum Point to Cockpit Point. The bluff areas north of the power plant are eroding due to rain runoff and undercutting of the cliff base from wind and wave actions. There are approximately 3,000 feet of effective riprap and bulkheads near Possum Point in front of the substation, appears effective. PW-3A: Cockpit Point to Freestone Point. The area appears to be stable, with no endangered structures. There is 1 groin, which appears to be effective. There are also a fishing pier and boat house on the beach. PW-2B: Freestone Point to the northern side of the mouth of Neabsco Creek The bluffs at Freestone Point are experiencing minor erosion due to runoff and undercutting by wind and wave action. There are approximately 1,200 feet of mainly cosmetic artificial stabilization on the south bank of the creek at the 123 NVPDC September, 1992 marina facilities, in addition to several boat ramps and numerous piers. There are about 50 feet of effective riprap to the east of the railroad bridge. PW-2A: The northern side of the mouth of Neabsco Creek to Deephole Point. Although the shoreline appears to be stable, there are 7,300 feet of artificial stabilization. Approximately 3,600 feet of riprap from the mouth of Marumsco Creek to Deephole Point appear to effectively protect the road that is dose to the shore in that area. Bayside Park and Featherstone Shores have approximately 3,400 feet of bulkhead and several groins along the shore, all of which appears to be effective. There are numerous piers along the shoreline and docking facilities and a boat ramp at the marina just north of Featherstone Shores, with about 300 feet of bulkheading that is mainly used for commercial purposes. PW-IB: Deephole Point to the 1-95 Bridge. The area appears to be stable. Along the shoreline of the Military Reservation there are approximately 2,000 feet of riprap, which appears to be effective. Northwest of the Route 1 bridge there are around 800 feet of effective bulkhead which appears to be mainly cosmetic as erosion is not a significant problem here. PWM- The 1-95 Bridge to the Occoquan River. Although the shoreline appears stable, it has 6800' of effective bulkheading located at the commercial and industrial areas and along most of the shoreline near Occoquan. FX-1: The Occoquan River Dam to Sandy PoinL Downhill rain runoff causes some erosion along sections of the Belmont Bay shoreline. There are approximately 650 feet of bulkhead just east of the railroad bridge, 50 feet of bulkhead near the mouth of Massey Creek, and 100 feet of riprap in the residential section of Massey Creek. There are also several piers. The structures appear to be effective and were mainly erected for cosmetic and commercial purposes. FX-2: Sandy Point and Hallowing Point. This area is experiencing moderate bluff erosion (1 to 3 feet/year) from Sycamore Point to Sandy Point due from both rain runoff erosion and wave attack of the shore. There are several piers in this segment and approximately 4,500 feet of bulkhead along the Hallowing Point River Estates shoreline. Several areas south of Sandy Point have riprap along the shoreline, and there are three groins south of the riprapped areas The shoreline stabilization structures are for the most part, effective, however, there are gaps between structures in residential areas that reduce the overall effectiveness. FX-3A: Hallowing Point to Pohick Creek. This segment is undergoing moderate erosion (1 to 3 feet/year) from Hallowing Point to the inside of Gunston Cove, which is due mainly to downhill rain runoff rather than wave attack of the shoreline. One house at the mouth of Gunston 124 NVPDC September, 1992 Cove is endangered by the erosion situation. There are 2,500 feet of artificial stabilization which appears to be effective. There are several groins north of Hallowing Point; the remaining structures are mainly bulkheads and some riprap. There are also several piers and a boat ramp in this segment. FX-3B: Pohick Creek to Whitestone PoinL There is no significant erosion in this segment. The 2,500 feet of bulkhead and riprap appear to be more for cosmetic purposes rather than for shoreline stabilization. There are many docks and several boat ramps at the mouth of Gunston Cove. FX-4A.- Whitestone Point to Ferry Point. The bluffs near Whitestone Point are experiencing moderate erosion (1 to 3 feet/year) due to downhill rain runoff and wave action undercutting the base of the cliffs. The 7,600 feet of bulkhead and riprap appears to be effective elsewhere in the segment. There are numerous piers and docks located from the Mount Vernon Yacht Club to Ferry Point. FX-4B: Ferry Point to Sheridan Point The bluffs north of Ferry Point are experiencing moderate erosion (1 to 3 feet/year), and much of the remainder of the segment has been artificially stabilized with approximately 9,200 feet of bulkhead and riprap. There is a pier at Mount Vernon. FX-5: Sheridan Point to Hunting Creek. There is no significant erosion along this segment; however, there are approximately 8,100 feet of apparently effective bulkhead and riprap.. There is also a marina with several piers and docks. AL-6: Hunting Creek to Four Mile Run. This segment is experiencing little or no erosion. There are approximately 21,000 feet of artificially stabilized shoreline. Some of the bulkheading is old and is in need of strengthening or replacement. The Alexandria Waterfront has numerous piers and docks AR-7: Four Mile Run to Little Falls. There is little or no erosion in the Arlington segment. There are approximately 15,900 feet of artificially stabilized shoreline which is mainly effective riprap. There are also several boat ramps and piers in this segment. 125 NVPDC September, 1992 U12endix 3 NORTHERN VIRGINIA SHORELINE EROSION MAILING LIST Arlington CQ=ty Environmental Services Division No. 1 Courthouse Plaza 2100 Clarendon Boulevard Arlington, VA 22201 City of Alexandria Transportation and Environmental Services P.O. Box 178 City Hall Alexandria, VA 22313 Commonwealth of Virginia Marine Resources Com 2600 Washington Avenue P.O. Box 756 Newport News, VA 23607-0756 Council on the Environment Coastal and Oceans Program Environmental Program Analyst 903 9th Street Office Building Richmond, VA 23219 Fairfax CQunjy Fairfax County Wetlands Board c/o Office of Comprehensive Planning 4050 Legato Road, Suite 800 Fairfax, VA 22033 Featherstgne & Mason Ngck National Wildlife Refuges Mason Neck NWR 14416 Jefferson Davis Flighway, Suite 20A Woodbridge, VA 22191 George Iyashington Memorial Parkway National Park Service c/o Turkey Run Park McLean, VA 22101 126 NVPDC September, 1992 Interstate ChesaReake Bay Commission (EPA) 60 West Street, Suite 200 Annapolis, MD 21401 Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 6110 Executive Boulevard, Suite 300 Rockville, MD 20852-3903 Mason Neck State Park & Leejylvania State Park Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of State Parks 203 Gouvenor Street, Suite 306 Richmond, VA 23219 Militaa DeveloRment in the National Cal2ital Region PMNCR Building 257, Stop 388 Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060-5388 National AiMort Engineering Division, Environmental Section Metropolitan Washington Airport Society National Airport Washington, DC 20001 Prince William County Wetlands Board of Prince William County c/o Department of Public Works, Watershed Management 4361 Ridgewood Center Drive Prince William, VA 22191-5308 Regional Parks Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority 5400 Ox Road Fairfax Station, VA 22039 State Water Control Board (SWCB) P.O. Box 11143 Richmond, VA 22230 U.S. Army CojRs of Engineers Northern Virginia Regional Office Plaza South, Suite 102 138 Graham Park Road Dumfries, VA 22026 127 NVPDC September, 1992 U.S. Army. Ft. Belvoir Environmental and National Resources DEH-ENZ Building 1442 Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060-5113 U.S. Marine Cor2s. Quantko Public Works Branch, MCCDC, C042 P.O. Box 1855 Quantico, VA 22134-0855 VjMinia Degartment of Conservation and Recreation Shoreline Erosion Advisory Service (SEAS) P.O. Box 1024 Gloucester Point, VA 23062 Viminia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 4010 West Broad Street Richmond, VA 23230 ViMinia Institute of Marine SciencgA MMS) P.O. Box 1346 Gloucester Point, VA 23062 128 NVPDC September, 1992 U12endix 4 SUMMARY OF NEW AND POTENTIAL SHORELINE EROSION INFORMATION SOURCES IN NORTHERN VIRGINIA The following report summarizes the information obtained and the literature reviewed to date. (1) Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences (VIMS) VIMS is developing The Coml2rehensive Coastal Inventory for the Virginia coastline to support shoreline management programs. It is intended to be mainly a collation effort with an aim of acquiring all existing data sets and providing a common format for the data. It is intended to complement ongoing data collection efforts such as the Tidal Rivers Inventory Project. Base scale for The Coml2rehensive Coastal Invenigry is 1:24,000 with "critical areas" at a scale of 1:5,000. The system is designed to include rates of erosion and accretion, shoreline mobility, nearshore profiles and bathymetry, sediment characteristics, sediment budget, wind and wave characteristics, distribution and performance of engineering structures, identification of non-living and living marine resources, land use, level of development and valuation, and land ownership and claims. The system was proposed in 1988 and is scheduled to be completed over a five year period and then updated in five year cycles. At the current time (3/92), the system is not complete, and contains no data for Northern Virginia. The Shoreline Situation ReRgrts are being used as the background material for the Coml2rehensive Coastal Inventory they are updating them as they enter the data. They have not done anything with the report on Prince William Coun1y nor the Counties of Fairfax, ArlingLon, Cijy of Alexandria report. VM' Tidal Rivers InventM Prgject has completed mainly rural counties; however, the completion for Northern Virginia is unlikely because of a lack of funds. As far as priorities go, the Upper Potomac is low on the list because there are very few "critical areas" in terms of erosion and species habitat. VIMS has flown aerial reconnaissance of Virginia's coast up to Westmoreland County. They are using their vertical aerial photos, and some Highway Department photos for digitizing new shoreline positions. 129 NVPDC September, 1992 They are using oblique low altitude aerial video coverage for the delineation of erosion control structures. The Tidal Rivers Inventory Pro-ject is mainly concemed with the ecology of the rivers. The oyster grounds have been mapped at 1:5,000, and everything else at 1:24,000. They have mapped submerged aquatic vegetation through the Northem Neck. They are currently transferring the hard copy Tidal Marsh Inventories done in the 70's and 80's for each coastal county in Virginia to a digital form. (2) Council on the Envirorunent The work being done at VIMS will be incorporated into the EcoMAPS geographic information system at Council on the Environment. The Council is also working with Fish and Wildlife on producing new National Wetlands Inventory maps. The Northern Virginia area has not been done yet. EcoMAPS does not contain any high resolution shoreline boundary files for the Potomac. It does include the 1:100,000 digital line graphs, but the shoreline is very blocky. The Council is looking into getting a better boundary file. (3) United States Geological Survey (USGS), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (A) Shorelines on Maps and Charts The most common sources for coastal geographic information are the USGS 1:24,000 topographic maps (quadrangles) and the NOAA 1:40,000 bathymetric charts. These maps and charts are easy to obtain and are inexpensive. The following seven quadrangles cover the Northem Virginia shoreline: Alexandria (1983) Fort Belvoir (1983) Indian Head (1982) Mount Vernon (1983) Occoquan (1984) Quantico (1983) and Washington West (1983) Two NOAA charts cover the area: 12288: Potomac River, Lower Cedar Point to Mattawoman Creek (16th edition, June 30,1990), and 130 NVPDC September, 1992 12289: Potomac River, Mattawoman Creek to Georgetown (44th edition, January 27,1990). USGS updates their maps about once a decade, and NOAA updates their charts about every two years. The date on a map or chart, however, does not reflect the date of the shoreline information. The USGS is mainly concerned with topography and NOAA is mainly concerned with bathymetry, and therefore the map and chart revisions do not contain shoreline revisions unless the differences are blatantly obvious on aerial photographs. Prior to the 1960s the Army Corps of Engineers printed all shoreline quadrangles. In the early 1960s, the responsibility was transferred to USGS. In the mid 1970s, NOAA provided USGS with shoreline and bathymetric data. The current series of quadrangles contain shorelines provided by NOAA. There are two methods for producing NOAA charts: Photogrammetric and Hydrographic. The Photogrammetry division uses aerial photographs to delineate the shoreline. The Hydrography division goes into the field and produces Hydrographic surveys; they do soundings for bathymetry and use traditional survey methods to map the shoreline. The Hydrography people field check the charts produced by the Photogrammetric people, but their major interest is bathymetry, not shoreline positions. The best data on shorelines comes from the T-sheets, or topographic surveys, that NOAA does in coastal areas. There are a set of T-sheets from the mid to late 1800s, a set from the 1930s to 1950s, and a set from the early 1970s for the Potomac River. The survey data is collated and then registered as the accepted shoreline. The shorelines on the USGS maps and on the NOAA charts are all from the last "registered" shoreline. The shoreline surveys were done at 1:10,000 from 1971 to 1974 and the shoreline was registered in 1977. ALL UPPER POTOMAC SHORELINES CURRENTLY BEING USED ON NOAA CHARTS AND USGS MAPS WERE DERIVED FROM THE 1971 TO 1974 SURVEYS EVEN THOUGH THE DATES ON TTIE MAPS OR CHARTS ARE 1980s AND 1990s. In the late 1970s NOAA digitized the mean high water line of the Upper Potomac. These digital files are available, but cost -$500 per chart, and were done on the 26th datum (the 27th datum is the one currently in use). The Chief of External Affairs is the person to talk to about obtaining the shoreline files. NOAA is currently working with Intergraph on producing a new set of digital shorelines including both the mean high water and mean low water lines. The NOAA project manager, Richard Hogan of Nautical Charting at 131 NVPDC September, 1992 (301) 443-8061, said that they will not be able to release these files for about a year because the shorelines have not yet been verified. (B) Historic Charts The National Archives Cartographic Depository on Pickett Street in Alexandria, Virginia, has many historic charts for the Potomac River. NVPDC obtained copies of the following charts (note: #560 is now #12289, and #559 is now #12288): #560, Edition 10 September, 1910 #560, Edition 23 September, 1953; Revised May, 1957 #560, Edition 33 February, 1973 #559, Edition 1 July, 1907 #559, Edition 4 July, 1935; Revised February, 1956 #559, Edition 10 March, 1973 (C) Potomac Shoreline Study The United States Geological Survey published a Water-Supply Paper in 1987 by Andrew Miller called Shore Erosion as a Sediment Source to the Tidal Potomac River, MgUland and Virgigia; A Water-Qualily Study of the Tidal Potomac River and EsLt@. The study area extends from Gunston Cove to the mouth of the Potomac, and therefore includes Prince William county and the southern portion of Fairfax County. The paper includes an excellent write-up on the causes of erosion, the methods of measuring erosion rates, and the accuracy of measurements of shoreline change. The average erosion rate determined from cartographic and photographic methods for the stretch of coast from Gunston Cove to Chopawamsic Creek range from 0.1 to 0.5 m/yr. However, selected points along Mason Neck were determined to have recession rates as high as 2.0 m/yr. 132 August 10, 1992 Addresses of Owners Who NeCd to Be Contacted by SEAS Palcel Number(s) 1. FX102-2 1-20 The American Horticultural Society Mt. Vernon, VA 22121 (lot address: 7931 E. Boulevard Drive, Alexandria, VA 22308) 2. 110-3 13-16 Oxford Partnership 8808-H Pear Tree Court Alexandria, VA 22309 (lot address: 9514 Lynnhall Place, Alexandria, VA 22309) 3. 110-3 13-17 Taylor Burke 9515 Lynnhall Place Alexandria, VA 22309 4. 110-3 13-18A Irene Kabler 9513 Lynnhall Place Alexandria, VA 22309 5. 110-4 6-11C Mehrangiz Khanrzadeh 9521 Ferry Harbor Court Alexandria, VA 22309 6. 110-4 6-11D Ronald Balazik 9517 Ferry Harbor Court Alexandria, VA 22309 7. 110-4 9-2-4 Melisende C. Bart 3100 Brandywine Street, NW Washington, DC 20008 (lot address: 4007 Belle River Terrace, Alexandria, VA 22309) 8. 111-1 21-29 Richard 0. Keys 3213 Woodland Lane Alexandria, VA 22309 (lot address: 3209 Woodland Lane, Alexandria, VA 22309) 9. 111-1 21-30 Richard 0. Keys 3213 Woodland Lane Alexandria, VA 22309 10. 111-1 21-28 Mary Elizabeth Brahm 3201 Woodland Lane Alexandria, VA 22309 (lot address: 3205 Woodland Lane, Alexandria, VA 22309) August 10, 1992 11. 111-1 15-4A James H. Baker 9006 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22308 12. 111-1 15-5A Wilhelmus Verhoeren 19004 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22308 13. 111-1 15-6A Courtney J. Suter, Jr. 9002 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22308 14. 111-1 15-7A James Ray Cottrell 9000 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22308 15. 111-1 15-8A Resident 1860 Ala Moana Boulevard, Apt. 1704 Honolulu, HW 96815 16. 111-1 15-9A Edward jedrziewski 8912 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22308 17. 111-1 15-10A Robert Watts 8910 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22308 18. 1.11-1 6-17-7A Robert J. Evans 8616 Thomas J. Stockton Parkway Alexandria, VA 22308 19. 111-1 6-17-8A William F. Beyer 8613 Thomas J. Stockton Parkway Alexandria, VA 22308 20. 114-3 1-11 Woodrow Wilson Boy Scout Reservation 21. 114-4 1-11 Lester Stribling 6590 Pohick Bay Drive Lorton, VA 22079 (lot address: 6600 Pohick Bay Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 22. 114-4 1-14 Margaret Tomlinson 2836 Rangewood Terrace Atlanta, GA 30345 (lot address: 10647 Gunston Road, Lorton, VA 22079) August 10, 1992 23. 114-4 1-15 Margaret Tomlinson 2836 Rangewood Terrace Atlanta, GA 30345 Oot address: 10649 Gunston Road, Lorton, VA 22079) 24. 117-2 1-7 John H. Arial, Jr. 10814 Belmont Blvd. Lorton, VA 22079 25. 117-2 1-8 Samuel W. Rothberg 8021 E. Boulevard Drive Alexandria, VA 22308 Oot address: 10816 Belmont Blvd., Lorton, VA 22079) 26. 117-2 1-14 Elias No-uhra 10606 Belmont Blvd. Lorton, VA 22079 27. 117-2 1-24 Belmont Bay Farms, Ltd. 1707 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314 28. 118-1 2-47 Robert L. Ware 6 Meander Chatham, IL 62629 (lot address: 7421 Belmont Landing Road, Lorton, VA 22079) 29. 118-1 2-48 Marshall L. Ware 1600 Westbrook Avenue Richmond, VA 23227 (lot address: 7425 Belmont Land Road, Lorton, VA 22079) 30. 118-1 2-A James A. Foster 7454 Belmont Landing Road Lorton, VA 22079 31. 118-1 2-94 Anne W. Rinavdot 4176 S. 36th Street Arlington, VA 22206 (lot address: 7607 Bayview Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 32. 118-1 2-93 Roger M. Twist 202 E. Iris Avenue Lantana, FL 33462 (lot address: 7611 Bayview Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 33. 118-1 2-92 Anne W. Rinavdot 4176 S. 36th Street Arlington, VA 22206 (lot address: 7615 Bayview Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) August 10, 1992 34. 118-1 2-91 Anne W. Rinavdot 4176 S. 36th Street Arlington, VA 22206 (lot address: 7619 Bayview Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 35. 118-1 1-5 First Fac Inc. c/o Murray J. Belman, Suite 100 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20005 36. 118-1 1-4 Leonard Wixson 3304 Dauphine Drive Falls Church, VA 22042 (lot address: 10806 Belmont Blvd., Lorton, VA 22079) 37. 119-1 1-1 Commonwealth of Virginia Gunston Hall 9th Street Office Building Richmond, VA 23219 (lot address: 10709 Gunston Road, Lorton, VA 22079) 38. 119-1 3-3-7A Eugene Wills 6711 Lee Highway, Suite 4 Arlington, VA 22205 (lot address: 11189 Gunston Road, Lorton, VA 22079) 39. 119-1 3-7-13 Eugene Wills Suite 4, 6711 Lee Highway Arlington, VA 22205 (lot address: 11191 Gunston Road, Lorton, VA 22079) (11209 thru 11021 Gunston Road (12 parcels), Lorton, VA 22079) 40. 119-4 1-1 Michael A. Willner 8519 Electric Avenue Vienna, VA 22182 (lot address: 11521 Potomac Road, Lorton, VA 22079) 41. 119-4 1-1B John F. Murphy 5750 Hallowing Drive Lorton, VA 22079 42. 119-4 1-1A Ted B. Kuemmerling 5700 Hallowing Drive Lorton, VA 22079 43. 119-4 2-13-1 Gunston Manor Property Owner's Association, Inc. 5973 Foxglove Trail Lorton, VA 22079 (property along River* Potomac Road) August 10, 1992 44. 122-1 3-4 Arthur M. Reynolds 6013 River Drive Lorton, VA 22079 45. 122-1 3-5 Judson 0. Harrison 6017 River DTive Lorton, VA 22079 46. 122-1 3-6 Tazewell F. Rufty 6021 River Drive Lorton, VA 22079 47. 122-2 2-8 George E. Monroe 11801 River Drive Lorton, VA 22079 48. 122-2 2-9 Peter D. Jarvis 11805 River DTive Lorton, VA 22079 49. 122-2 2-38 Long Enterprises, Inc. 8253 Backlick Road Lorton, VA 22079 (lot address: 5945 River Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 50. 122-2 2-39 Hallowing Point Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 63 Lorton, VA 22079 (lot address: 5949 River Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 51. 122-2 3-2 Wallace R. Watson 5201 Queensbury Avenue Springfield, VA 22151 Oot address: 6005 River Drive, Lorton, VA 22079) 52. 122-2 3-3 Richard F. Kennedy 6009 River Drive Lorton, VA 22079 53. PW57 1-41A G. J. Manderfield 1098 Swan Point Road Woodbridge, VA 22191 54. PW57 10-5-1 John J. Williams 1100 Swan Point Road Woodbridge, VA 22191 August 10, 1992 55. PW42 1-8 Belmont Bay Limited Partnership 3251 Old Lee FIighway, Suite 201 Fairfax, VA 22030 (lot address: 13901 Dawson Beach Road, Occoquan, VA 22125) 56. PW20 1-21A United States of America P.O. Box 1830 Manassas, VA 22110 (lot address: 16001 Featherstone Road) 57. PW14 1-26 Dept. of Conservation & Economic Development 1201 Washington Building Capital Square Richmond, VA 23219 (lot address: 16501 Neabsco Road, Woodbridge, VA 22191) 58. PW9 1-39B Cockpit Point limited Partnership 3000 K Street, NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20007 (lot address: 1500 Cherry Hill Road, Dumfries, VA 22026) 59. PW9 1-1 VMS/Arden Southbridge Venture P.O. Box 723427 Atlanta, GA 30339 (lot address: 17375 Apple Lane) Addresses of Owners Who Need to Be Conta@ted by SEAS August 10, 1992 1 of 3 American Horticultural Society Ronald Balazik Courtney J. Suter, Jr. Mt. Vernon, VA 22121 9517 Ferry Harbor Court 9002 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22309 Alexandria, VA 22308 Oxford Partnership Melisende C. Bart James Ray Cottrell 8808-H Pear Tree Court 3100 Brandywine Street, NW 9000 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22309 Washington, DC 20008 Alexandria, VA 22308 Taylor Burke Richard 0. Keys - Resident 9515 Lynnhall Place 3213 Woodland Lane 1860 Ala Moana Blvd., #1704 Alexandria, VA 22309 Alexandria, VA 22309 Honolulu, HW 96815 Irene Kabler Mary Elizabeth Bralun Edward jedrziewski 9513 Lynnhall Place 3201 Woodland Lane 8912 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22309 Alexandria, VA 22309 Alexandria, VA 22308 Mehrangiz Khanrzadeh James H. Baker Robert Watts 9521 Ferry Harbor Court 9006 Captain's Row 8910 Captain's Row Alexandria, VA 22309 Alexandria, VA 22308 Alexandria, VA 22308 Wilhelmus Verhoeren Robert J. Evans 9004 Captain's Row 8616 Thomas J. Stockton Pkwy. Alexandria, VA 22308 Alexandria, VA 22308 Addresses of Owners Who Need to Be Contacted by SEAS August 10, 1992 2 of 3 William F. Beyer 8613 Thomas J. Stockton Pkwy. Elias No-uhra Roger M. Twist Alexandria, VA 22308 10606 Belmont Blvd. 202 E. Iris Avenue Lorton, VA 22079 Lantana, FL 33462 Belmont Bay Farms, Ltd. Woodrow Wilson Boy Scout 1707 Duke Street First Fac Inc. Reservation Alexandria, VA 22314 c/o Murray J. Belman, Suite 100 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20005 Lester Stribling Robert L Ware 6590 Pohick Bay Drive 6 Meander Leonard Wixson Lorton, VA 22079 Chatham, IL 62629 3304 Dauphine Drive Falls Church, VA 22042 Margaret Tomlinson Marshall L. Ware Commonwealth of Virginia 2836 Rangewood Terrace 1600 Westbrook Avenue Gunston Hall Atlanta, GA 30345 Richmond, VA 23227 9th Street Office Building Richmond, VA 23219 John H. Arial, Jr. James A. Foster Eugene Wills 10814 Belmont Blvd. 7454 Belmont Landing Road 6711 Lee Highway, Suite 4 Lorton, VA 22079 Lorton, VA 22079 Arlington, VA 22205 Samuel W. Rothberg Anne W. Rinavdot Michael A. Willner 8021 E. Boulevard Drive 4176 S. 36th Street 8519 Electric Avenue Alexandria, VA 22308 Arlington, VA 22206 Vienna, VA 22182 Addresses of Owners Who Need to Be ContacW by SEAS August 10, 1992 3 of 3 John F. Murphy George E. Monroe G. J. Manderfield 5750 Hallowing; Drive 11801 River Drive 1098 Swan Point Road Lorton, VA 22079 Lorton, VA 22079 Woodbridge, VA 22191 Ted B. Kuemmerling Peter D. Jarvis John J. Williams 5700 Hallowing Drive 11805 River Drive 1100 Swan Point Road Lorton, VA 22079 Lorton, VA 22079 Woodbridge, VA 22191 Gunston Manor Property Long Enterprises, Inc. Belmont Bay Limited Partnership Owner's Association, Inc. 8253 Backlick Road 3251 Old Lee Highway, Suite 201 5973 Foxglove Trail Lorton, VA 22079 Fairfax, VA 22030 Lorton, VA 22079 Arthur M. Reynolds Hallowing Point Associates, Inc. United States of America 6013 River Drive P.O. Box 63 P.O. Box 1830 Lorton, VA 22079 Lorton, VA 22079 Manassas, VA 22110 Judson 0. Harrison Wallace R. Watson Dept. of Conservation & 6017 River Drive 5201 Queensbury Avenue Economic Development Lorton, VA 22079 Springfield, VA 22151 1201 Washington Building Capital Square Richmond, VA 23219 Tazewell F. Rufty Richard F. Kennedy Cockpit Point Ltd. Partnership 6021 River Drive 6009 River Drive 3000 K Street, NW, Suite 200 Lorton, VA 22079 Lorton, VA 22079 Washington, DC 20007 VMS/Arden Southbridge Venture P.O. Box 723427 Atlanta, GA 30339 DATE DUE GAYLORDiNo. 2333 PRINTED IN U S A. 10 iow 6668 14107 5400