project to be rejected. This information can often be obtained simply by asking the proper 

 agencies. The local water quality control agency may know immediately whether the project 

 will be acceptable from a water quality standpoint. If not, it wiU outline the information 

 that must be submitted to obtain a ruling. A ruling will probably have to be obtained if the 

 project requires dredging, placing fiU material in the water, dry excavation to be flooded 

 later, or disposal of waste materials in nearby waters. 



The probable effects of harbor construction on the ecology in the project area must be 

 reported in the impact statement if required. Local building and safety permit authorities 

 can usually provide information on other local or State agencies that exercise jurisdictional 

 control over local environmental matters and whether projects of the type under 

 consideration have a good or poor acceptance experience. If the experience is generally 

 good, the impact statement may be deferred to a later stage of planning. If experience has 

 been poor, an early submittal may result in project rejection before much time and effort 

 have been spent on planning. If no information can be obtained at the local level, a letter 

 request to the Environmental Protection Agency (Federal) should produce the necessary 

 guidelines for covering this field in the feasibihty studies. 



Another aspect of an environmental statement is the possible effects of harbor 

 operations and boating on noise levels (e.g., racing engines), water pollution (due to oil 

 spills, surface drainage into harbor, and littering), and vehicle traffic. The existence of a 

 harbor in lieu of an undisturbed natural shore-area environment has been protested as a 

 downgrading of the esthetic qualities of an area. These are aU matters that may influence a 

 controlling agency in judging the value of the project to the community. On the other hand, 

 existing conditions or ongoing activities in the surrounding area may have a detrimental 

 impact on harbor operations which, when pointed out in the feasibility report, could 

 discourage the developer from further consideration of the chosen site. Examples of such 

 impact would be the close proximity of large concentrations of disruptive elements of 

 society that would tend to sabotage or plunder the completed project, or nearby factories 

 that pollute the air or water to a degree that would be harmful to exterior finish of small 

 craft or to persons living or working at the harbor. These detrimental factors are usually 

 discovered before site selection, but, if not, they must be revealed and evaluated in the very 

 early stages of the feasibility study. 



e. Area and Access Availability. The first evaluation of the site should define the exact 

 area available, both on land and in the water. By applying general planning principles and 

 rules outlined in Section V, a good estimate can be quickly obtained for the number of 

 boats that can be accommodated. This application may place a physical Limitation on the 

 capacity of the project which, in areas of great need for harbor facilities, may make it 

 necessary to evaluate the market potential. However, if ample area is available, the market 

 potential must be evaluated to determine the size of the facility. 



235 



