The District and Division Engineers concluded that the most economical 
and practical general plans of protection for the privately owned shore 
line consist in grading, and draining of the bluffs, revetment of the toe 
of the slope, and maintenance of existing narrow beaches by means of short 
groins. They presented an alternative plan consisting of the same treatment 
of the bluff, and in lieu of the groins, the construction of a cellular steel 
sheet pile seawall]. They recommended that owners of private property adopt 
the proposed plan of improvement best suited to the desired utilization of 
their shore front property. They further concluded that the best plans of 
protection and improvement for the proposed Beaver Creek State Park and 
Lakeview Park comprise artificial fill and groin construction, and in addition 
extension of the seawall at Lakeview Park. 
The Board noted that the reporting officers recommended effective 
methods for protecting the shores of privately owned property. Typical 
protective measures include sloping and draining the bluff, protecting the 
toe of the slope by armor or bulkheads, and tne construction of groins. 
The Board agreed that these measures will be entirely adequate, will 
interfere to a minimum degree with the recreational or other use of the 
shore, and will affect to a minimum degree its natural beauty. Cn the 
other hand the Board was of the opinion that protection against erosion could 
be attained by less elaborate and possibly less costly methods. In its 
simplest form this protection would consist of a continuous belt of heavy 
riprap or stone pavement covering the zone of destructive wave action and 
laid on a stable slope. The bluff behind this armored zone would not need 
to be sloped or drained. In that case however progressive recession of the 
top of the bluff would be expected until the slope of the bluff approximates 
that of the natural angle of repose of the material composing it. The groins 
may be omitted unless property owners desire to maintain beaches in front of 
their properties. The omission of groins will, however, probably result in 
the loss of beach in front of the belt of revetment or pavement. This will 
in turn result in an intensification of the wave attack at the toe of the 
belt of stone protection with consequent settlement of stone. The stone 
lost by such settlement should be replaced without delay to prevent breach- 
ing the protective belt. 
The Board emphasized the necessity for complete uniform coverage of 
the zone to be protected from wave attack and the importance of insuring 
that the riprap of stone pavement be laid on a stable slope. The practice 
of dumping stone of miscellaneous sizes, broken concrete, other building 
materials, brush, etc. over the bluff is not normally an effective method 
of preventing erosion of the shore. The dumped material frequently fails 
to reach the zone of active wave attack in sufficient quantity to form an 
effective and continuous protective belt. The Board noted that the report- 
ing officers proposed that dumped waste materials (stone, broken concrete, 
bricks, etc.) be utilized as protection for the itiverside Park and Weverly 
Park shore lines. In these two instances the use of such materials is open 
to the objections noted above and special care should be taken to insure 
complete and uniform coverage. The Board did not recommend Gunping of 
miscellaneous materials as an effective or standard inethod of beach protection, 
but in these cases it did not object to it. 
ay 
