CASE HISTORY STUDIES 



This section contains summaries of 

 cases where shoreline structures have 

 been installed and the subsequent mod- 

 ifications to the environment. Case his- 

 tories were selected to cover each of 

 the coastal regions in this study and, 

 where feasible, the structures which 

 cause permit review personnel in each 

 region the most difficulty. Some of the 

 case histories are well-documented, and 

 others are very sketchy. In some cases 

 no information existed and hypothetical 

 case histories were formulated. In each 

 instance the case histories reflect the 

 type of concerns that should surface in 

 the permit review process. 



CASE HISTORY - SMALL CRAFT HAR- 

 BORS IN COASTAL REGION 1 -NORTH 

 PACIFIC 



Information pertaining to a specific 

 harbor and location is not sufficient for 

 the presentation of an actual case his- 

 tory in Coastal Region 1. A significant 

 amount of the literature about small 

 craft harbors in Coastal Region 1 is re- 

 lated to marina design and its effect on 

 water quality and salmon migration. 

 Four marinas in the Puget Sound area 

 of Washington State will be compared to 

 illustrate the impact of marinas in the 

 Coastal Region 1. The four marinas are 

 Edmonds Marina, Des Moines Marina, 

 Kingston Marina, and Shilshole Marina. 

 Maximum wave height in this area is 

 approximately 6 ft (1.8 m). The tidal 

 range is around 10 ft (3 m). Northwest- 

 erly winds are common in the summer 

 (Rickey 1971). 



Edmonds Marina consists of two at- 

 tached rubble mound breakwaters pro- 

 tecting two marina basins (Figure 53). 

 The entrance is located between these 

 breakwaters. The shoreline is bulkhead- 

 ed and two timber pile breakwaters ex- 

 tend from this bulkhead shoreward of 

 the entrance separating the two basins. 

 The basins are dredged to -12 ft MLLW 

 or -3.7 m (Nece et al. 1975). There 

 are 825 boat berths in the two basins 

 and about 25% to 30% of the surface is 

 shaded by floating piers. The munici- 

 pal primary sewage treatment plant out- 

 let is located just north of the marina 



and another large storm drain outlet is 

 located to the south. The parking lot 

 storm drains empty into the basin. 



Heiser and Finn (1970) indicated 

 that there was evidence of "impound- 

 ment"; but because of the location of 

 the marina and the large entrance, the 

 tidal exchange was adequate for reason- 

 able water quality. Problems might arise 

 from a spillage of petroleum materials 

 within the basin because the materials 

 would be held in the marina by winds 

 blowing north or south toward the sides 

 of the breakwaters. Observations by 

 Heiser and Finn (1970)showed that pink 

 and chum salmon fry were concentrated 

 inside the marina in greater numbers 

 than along adjacent natural shorelines. 

 They do not know if the harbor acted 

 as a trap for the fry or if they prefer- 

 red the confines of the harbor. 



Des Moines Marina consists of a 

 single basin with a rubble mound break- 

 water leaving a dredged channel open- 

 ing facing north. The basin is dredged 

 to -12.6 ft MLLW (-3.8 m). The surface 

 area of the marina is approximately 20 

 acres (8 ha) and about 25% of the sur- 

 face is shaded by floating piers (Nece 

 et al. 1975). Two residential storm 

 drains and the parking lot drains empty 

 into the basin. The location of the en- 

 trance is not conducive to the tidal ex- 

 change. Northerly winds are common in 

 the summer and will cause interference 

 with the outward movement of the water 

 (Rickey 1971), resulting in stagnation 

 at the southern end of the marina basin 

 (Heiser and Finn 1970). 



Kingston Marina consists of a dog- 

 leg rubble mound breakwater extending 

 from the north shore, then angling 

 twice at approximately 45° to protect 

 the front of the marina. The south side 

 of the marina consists of a large en- 

 trance. Because of this large opening, 

 the water quality of the marina is rela- 

 tively good. The large open area allows 

 adequate tidal exchange and good move- 

 ment of surface water out of the marina 

 with northerly winds (Heiser and Finn 

 1970). Heiser and Finn (1970) observed 



107 



