<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<doc callnum="HT393.V8 N6 1979">
<metadata>
	<titleStmt>
		<mainTitle nfc="0"><title>Coastal land use planning and management in Prince William County</title>:<titleExt>a guidebook</titleExt>/<respStmt>prepared by Regional Resources Division, Northern Virginia Planning District Commission ; prepared for Virginia Office of Commerce and Resources.</respStmt></mainTitle>
	</titleStmt>
	<authorStmt>
		<corpAuthor mainEntry="y"><name>Northern Virginia Planning District Commission.</name><subName>Regional Resources Division.</subName></corpAuthor>
		<corpAuthor><name type="jurisdiction">Virginia.</name><subName>Office of the Secretary of Commerce and Resources.</subName></corpAuthor>
	</authorStmt>
	<imprint><pubPlace>Falls Church, Va.</pubPlace>:<pubName>The Commission</pubName>,<pubDate>1979.</pubDate></imprint>
	<classStmt>
		<locClass>
			<subject cat="top">Coastal zone management</subject>
			<subject cat="geo">Virginia</subject>
			<subject cat="geo">Prince William County.</subject>
		</locClass>
		<locClass>
			<subject cat="top">Regional planning</subject>
			<subject cat="geo">Virginia</subject>
			<subject cat="geo">Prince William County.</subject>
		</locClass>
	</classStmt>
</metadata>

<text xml:space="preserve">
<pb n="1" />

                                  GOASTAL ZONE
                                  INFORMATION

              COASTAL LAND USE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
                          IN PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY

                                    A GUIDE BOOK

                                         a's TRIC,

        HT    REGIONAL RESOURCES DIVISION                        A P R I L 1979
        393
         V8
        N6
        1979                           m4m
<pb n="2" />

                                                       COASTAL ZONE
                                                       INFORA,11ATION CENTER

                                     COASTAL LAND USE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT IN PRINCE WILLIAM
                                                       COUNTY: A GUIDEBOOK

                                                             Prepared by
                                                    Regional Resources Division
                                          Northern Virginia Planning District Commission
                                                       Falls Church, Virginia

                                                                                                U S  DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                                                                                COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                                            Prepared for                        2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                             Virginia office of Commerce and Resources          CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413
                                                         Richmond, Virginia

                   CM

                                                                                                          c:7,
                  7F

                   A=

               "Preparation of this report was financed through a grant from the Virginia office of Commerce and Resources.
               Grant funds originated from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National oceanic and Atmospheric
               Administration, under provisions of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended."
<pb n="3" />

                                                               PREFACE

                     Coastal areas such as the Potomac estuary, its tributaries, and adjacent lands, are in critical
                need of public attention. Coastal estuaries are the most biologically productive areas on earth,
                playing a vital role in the life cycle of a tremendous variety of fish, waterfowl, and wildlife.
                Coastal waters provide significant opportunities for recreational activities such as boating,
                water skiing, and swimming. gowever, these values are being increasingly threatened by man's
                activities. Pollution from urban development has degraded the quality of coastal waters, reducing
                their value for habitat and for outdoor recreation. Private shoreline development is rapidly re-
                ducing opportunities for public access to the shoreline.

                     The federal government'and the State of Virginia have recognized the need for special manage-
                ment of coastal areas through the development of coastal resources management programs designed to
                balance man's activities in coastal areas with the protection of valuable coastal resources. A
                major objective of Virginia's program is the development of a State-local cooperative effort to
                minimize the adverse impacts of man's activities on coastal waters.

                     Prince William County has already affirmed the importance of coastal resources through the
                establishment of a local wetlands board under the Virginia Wetlands Law to protect the County's
                valuable coastal marshes. This guidebook is an attempt to provide information which would enable
                Prince William County to extend this philosophy to a more comprehensive protection of its coastal
                resources. Land use planning and management guidelines and standards are suggested for critical
                environmental areas such as beaches, bluffs, and wetlands, as well as for shorelands adjacent to
                these areas, The information contained in this report should be useful not only to local planners,
                but also to landowners in the County's coastal zone who wish to learn more about this unique environ-
                mental area.

                     The recommendations in this report have been developed by the staff of the Northern Virginia
                Planning District Commission (NVPDC) under contract with the Virginia Office of Commerce and
                Resources. Nothing in this report should be construed as representing the adopted policies of the
                NVPDC unless so stated in an adopted Resolution of said Commission.
<pb n="4" />

                                                                TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                                 PAGE

                CHAPTER I:        INTRODUCTION  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                 1

                CHAPTER II:       COASTAL LAND  USE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT    GUIDELINES    . . . . . . . .        7

                                  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .               7
                                  Preservation  Areas  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    8
                                    Wetlands &amp;  Bottomlands   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           8
                                    Bluffs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         *    19
                                    Beaches   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            20
                                  Conservation  Areas  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       * *  ,    21
                                    Hillsides   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            21
                                    Waterways   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    24
                                    Woodlands   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            27
                                    wildlife Habitat   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           28
                                  Development Areas    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           34
                CHAPTER III:      INVENTORY OF COASTAL RESOURCES IN PRINCE WILLIAM       COUNTY   . . . . . .      53
                                  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            53
                                  Segment  1:  1-95 Bridge to Marumsco Creek      . . . . . . . . . . . . .        53
                                  Segment  2:  Marumsco Creek to Freestone Point       . . . . . . . . . . .       56
                                  Segment  3:  Freestone Point to Cockpit Point     . . . . . . . . . . . .        59
                                  Segment  4:  Cockpit Point to Shipping Point      . . . . . . . . . . . .        60
                                  Segment  5:  Shipping Pdint to Chopawamsic Creek       . . . . . . . . . .       63
                                  Summary  of Chapters II and III    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         65

                CHAPTER IV:       STATE AND FEDERAL COASTAL POLICIESi PROGRAMS AND       REGULATIONS
                                  PERMITS FOR ACTIVITIES IN NAVIGABLE WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS         . . .     86
                                  USACE Permits for Activities in Navigable Waters       . . ..... . . . . .       86
                                  Virginia Marine Resources Commission Subaqueous                                  88
                                    Bottomland Permits   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                  Virginia Wetlands Law     . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          90
                                  State Water Control Board Regulations and Programs       . . . . . . . . .       92
                                  Summary of State and Federal Shoreline Permits       . . . . . . . . . . .       92
                                  Coastal Resources Management Programs       . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        95
                                    Federal Coastal Zone Management Program       . . . . . . . . . . . . .        95

                                                                        ii
<pb n="5" />

                                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

                                                                                                           PAGE

                                 Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program   . . . . . . . . . . .       97

               CHAPTER V:      SOURCES OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     100

                               Shoreline Permitting   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      100
                               Shoreline Erosion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      102

               APPENDIX  I:    COMMON MARINE RESOURCES OF THE POTOMAC RIVER NEAR PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY     106

               APPENDIX  II:   GEORGIA MOUNTAINS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SLOPE REGULATIONS     107

               APPENDIX  III:  VIP&amp;SU FERTILIZER APPLICATION GUIDE                                         109

               APPENDIX  IV:   CONTENTS OF A WETLANDS APPLICATION                                          112
<pb n="6" />

                                                           LIST OF TABLES

               TABLE                      TITLE                                                         PAGE

                               Some Pollutants Found in Urban Runoff and Their Impacts                    6

               2               Maximum Land Clearance Slope Guidelines                                  23

               3               Minimum Lot Size Slope Guidelines                                        23

               4               Fairfax County Tree Selection Guide                                      29

               5               Prince William County Coastal Soils                                      42

               6               Urban BMP Guidelines                                                     43

               7               Site-Specific Guidelines for Minimizing Runoff Pollution                 47
                               Loading's From Urban Development

               8               Land Area in Prince William County Coastal Zone by Segment               54

                                                                 iv
<pb n="7" />

                                                         LIST OF FIGURES

              FIGURE                      TITLE                                                    PAGE

                              Natural Coastal Watershed                                              4

              2               Effects of Urban Development on Coastal Watershed                      5

              3               VIMS Wetland Type Delineations                                         10

              4               Typical Rock Riprap Structure                                          18

              5               Summary of Governmental Regulations for Coastal Prince                 87
                              William County

              6               Generalized Diagram of Shoreline Permit Application Review             94
                              Procedures

                                                               v
<pb n="8" />

                                                             LIST OF MAPS

                        Map Number                       Title                                        Page

                                               Prince William County Coastal Zone                      2
                           2                   Segment 1:  Natural Resources                           66
                           3                   Segment 1:  Soil Suitability Zones                      67
                           4                   Segment 1:  Existing Land Use                           68
                           5                   Segment 1:  Proposed Land Use                           69
                           6                   Segment 2:  Natural Resources                           70
                           7                   Segment 2:  Soil Suitability Zones                      71
                           8                   Segment 2:  Existing Land Use                           72
                           9                   Segment 2:  Proposed Land Use                           73
                          10                   Seg-ment 3: Natural Resources                           74
                          11                   Segment 3:  Soil Suitability Zones                      75
                          12                   Segment 3:  Existing Land Use                           76
                          13                   Segment 3:  Proposed Land Use                           77
                          14                   Segment 4:  Natural Resources                           78
                          15                   Segment 4:  Soil Suitability Zones                      79
                          16                   Segment 4:  Existing Land Use                           80
                          17                   Segment 4:  Proposed Land Use                           81
                          18                   Segment 5:  Natural Resources                           82
                          19                   Segment 5:  Soil Suitability Zones                      83
                          20                   Segment 5:  Existing Land Use                           84
                          21                   Segment 5:  Proposed Land Use                           85

                                                                 vi
<pb n="9" />

                                    Coastal Land Use Planning and Management in Prince William
                                                       County: A Guidebook

                                                            CHAPTER I

                                                           INTRODUCTION

                    The purpose of this guidebook is to provide information and technical assistance to land use
               planners and others involved in land development activities in Prince William County's coastal zone.
               The boundary of the coastal zone in Prince William County, shown on Map 1, roughly follows 1-95 and
               is based on both the natural and man-made characteristics of the area. The coastal zone comprises a
               total of approcimately 18,180 acres.

                    Prince William County's shoreline is classified as a coastal area because it adjoins the
               Potomac Estuary, which forms part of the Chesapeake Day estuarine system. An estuary is a
               semi-enclosed coastal water body with an open connection to the sea and a measurable quantity of
               salt in its waters. Estuaries are highly productive natural systems, functioning as a "trap" for
               life-sustaininq nutrients and providing essential spawning and nursery grounds for a large number of
               commercial and sport fish and shellfish (A listing of fish and shellfish species common to the
               Prince William coastal area is provided in Appendix I).

                    The confined characteristic of estuaries which makes them nutrient-rich also makes them
               especially vulnerable to pollution, since pollutants can be "trapped" in the estuary just as are
               nutrients. Therefore, development adjacent to estuarine waters requires special management. The
               State and Federal governments have recognized this need through the institution of coastal resources
               management programs designed to balance man's use of coastal areas with the unique needs of the
               fragile coastal ecosystem.

                    The Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program is designed to provide a cooperative
               State-local effort to manage coastal land and water resources. This management effort can be
               divided into two major approaches: 1) the protection of critical environmental areas; and 2) the
               control of development and uses of shorelands to minimize the adverse impacts of runoff on coastal
               waters,

                    Critical environmental areas in the Prince William County coastal.zone include wetlands, tidal
               flats, nearshore shallows, bluffs, and beaches. Chapter III discusses the general location of these
               resources within the County's coastal zone.   Wetlands and nearshore shallows are currently
               protected by permitting programs administered by local, State and Federal agencies. Tidal flats and
               beaches are protected only by Federal permitting programs. These programs are discussed further in
               Chapter IV,

                                                                -1-
<pb n="10" />

                                                                                                                                     Map I

                                                                                                     Prince William County Coastal Zone

                                                                                                                                        "NOR
                                                                                                                              0 S            A
                                                                                                                                             N,
                                                                                         ,k;-,                                                                 WE

                                                                                                                                                                                         011
                                                                                                                                                                                     N

                                                                                     44 @)

                    t, 1        4,

                                                  7N

     ?v

                                                                                                                                                X., k
                                                                                                                                                X

                                                                                                                                   @7

                                                                                                                                                                           Ve

                                                                                                                                        @2-
<pb n="11" />

                    Because of its direct drainage into coastal waters, land development adjoining the tidal
               streams and coastal waters in Prince William County has the potential to damage the marine
               environment unless carefully planned to minimize the polluting effects of runoff. Figures 1 and 2
               illustrate the impacts of land development in coastal watersheds. The uncontrolled runoff of
               sediments, nutrients, bacteria and heavy metals can cause turbidity and depressed oxygen levels in
               the estuary, which in the past have resulted in periodic fish kills and the closure of shellfish
               grounds in the Upper Potomac. Typical pollutants and their impacts on water quality are summarized
               in Table 1. Such adverse impacts of land use on the estuarine environment can be reduced through
               proper land use planning and management techniques.

                    Chapter 11 of this guidebook outlines a series of land use planning and management guidelines
               and standards which, if implemented, can minimize the adverse impacts of man's activities on tidal
               waters. These guidelines and techniques are based on the most recent scientific, planning, and
               engineering information available. As our knowledge of coastal problems and solutions increases,
               this guidebook should be updated accordingly.

                    The greatest control over land use in the shorelands rests with local government, in
               cooperation with individual landowners. Many of the environmental guidelines and standards
               recommended herein are already in use in Prince William County, such as local erosion and
               sedimentation control. Others, such as the urban runoff controls, can be effectively incorporated
               into the existing structures of development planning and management in the County.

                    The most important goal of all those involved in the use of the County's coastal zone should be
               the consideration of coastal lands and waters as a single natural system. In order to understand
               the system and its important land/water interactions, existing natural and man-made resources of the
               coastal zone must be identified and analyzed. A generalized analysis for Prince William County's
               coastal zone is provided in Chapter III. Resources and development constraints of individual sites
               should be evaluated on a site-specific basis.

                                                               -3-
<pb n="12" />

                                                               EVAPO-19AW,PIRWIDN                                        (Li N o
                                                                                         V6646TAXMW

                                                                                                       "N'
                                                                                                                         A,
                     hi
                                                 5TA.6
                                                 QUI40fr-

                                                                                                                      WA.-TER 'TABLE

                                          wlm@
                                                                                                                         PKWA&amp;F, CC WooNDWA40Z

                                            FIGURE 1. NATURAL COASTAL WATERSHED SYSTEM
                                                    0
<pb n="13" />

                                                     vblt(T 1"ONFbi"I

                                                Vot LOTION
                                                                                                                                                               14DTS @CAPS-.
                                                   jol rl-                                        :rwfthseb            ROCA)                                    leowilic"
                                                     RAI
                                                   LO@St                                          RU I'l OrF           CLAIN
                                                   AhD It             AfAc-mil If I                                                                -Zi-S-0 -rows
                                                        10            JWr-A-lrj)                                       OYER)WI-11-11AWN:
                                                                                                                        6N
                                                                                                                                                                                VAiti"In"

                                                   fbutnuD m(m?.
                                                   ))AJIA6c Tb
                                                   I IAII I Nt; U M-

                                                                 FIGURE 2.       EFFECTS OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT ON COASFAL WAI-EjjSIIEDS
<pb n="14" />

                                                                                                             Table 1.
                                                   SOME          POLLUTANTS FOUND IN URBAN RUNOFF AND THEIR IMPACTS

                                                                                                                          TOXIC
                                                   SEDIMENT        In urban areas, excessive sediment comes               SUBSTANCES        A variety of toxic substances, including
                                                                   primarily from construction activities and                               pesticides and heavy metals such as lead,
                                                                   the erosion of stream channels after rain-                               zinc, manganese and cadmium, are often
                                                                   storms. Soil erosion from construction sites                             found in urban runoff. The origins of such
                                                                   can range from 5 to 100 tons/acre/year.                                  materials are not well understood.           How-
                                                                   This sediment can remain suspended in                                    ever,   there    does    seem    to. be      some
                                                                   streams long after construction is com-                                  correlation with impervious areas subject to
                                                                   pleted.    The sheer volume of sediment                                  large amounts of vehicular traffic such as
                                                                   decreases flow capacity in drainageways,                                 large shopping mall parking lots and heavily
                                                                   takes up storage volume in reservoirs, and                               traveled highways. High concentrations of
                                                                   covers aquatic plants and spawning areas                                 these toxic materials can result in fish kills.
                                                                   essential for fish survival. Sediment parti-           OXYGEN-
                                                                   cles may also have other pollutants attached           DEMANDING
                                                                   to them, such as nutrients, pesticides or              SUBSTANCES        Organic matter requires oxygen to decom-
                                                                   other oxygen demanding material.                                         pose.   Excessive amounts of decomposing
                                                                                                                                            matter    results   in   oxygen    depletion     in
                                                   NUTRIENTS       Nutrients found in urban runoff come from a                              receiving waters. In extremi cases discolor-
                                                                   variety of sources, and contaminate receiv-                              ation, gas formation and odors may result.
                                                                   ing waters in a number of ways. Nutrients                                Thc3c conditions can be caused by excessive
                                                                   in runoff originate from such varied sources                             nutrients in runoff, septic tank discharges
                                                                   as airborne pollutants, fertilizer wash-off                              and sewer overflows carried to receiving
                                                                   from lawns, and decomposition of fallen                                  streams.
                                                                   leaves and other material. High concentra-
                                                                   tions of nitrogen and phosphorus can lead to           PETROLEUM
                                                                   excessive algae growth in receiving        waters.     SUBSTANCES        Petroleum substances, particularly gasoline,
                                                                   As these organisms die off and decay,                                    oil and grease@ are found in urban storm
                                                                   depletion of dissolved oxygen and subsequent                             runof I.   These substances wash off roads,
                                                                   fish kills can result.                                                   highways and parking lots.         They destroy
                                                                                                                                            aquatic organisms by adhering to thern or by
                                                   BACTERIA        Significant bacteria levels as measured by                               coating the habitat of the organisms and
                                                                   fecal coli form are found in urban runoff. At                            cutting off the supply of oxygen. Excessive
                                                                   the present time their origin is not com-                                amounts of these substances also detract
                                                                   pletely   understood.       Major    source     are                      from the aesthetic quality of receiving
                                                                   thought to be animal        and bird droppings,                          waters.
                                                                   sewer leakage and septic tank overflows.
                                                                   Contamination of this sort presents a                  CHLORIDES         Chlorides are also assumed to be present in
                                                                   potential health hazard for water contact                                area storm runoff during seasonal periods.
                                                                   recreation and water supply operations                                   They originate in substances used to melt
                                                                   unless purification steps are taken.                                     snow and ice on area roadways. Application
                                                                                                                                            of these materials in excessive amounts can
                                                                                                                                            kill aquatic organisms and increase oxygen
                                                                                                                                            demands on receiving waters.

                                                   SOURCE: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Water Resources Planning
                                                                   Board, "The Water Monitor", Vol. III, No. 1, February 1979.

                                                                                                               -6-
<pb n="15" />

                                                             CHAPTER II
                Introduction                 LAND USE PLANNING &amp; MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES

                     The planning and management of coastal resources can be aided by the classification of coastal
                areas into three broad use categories based on development suitability:

                     *    Preservation areas: These include critical environmental areas, such as wetlands,
                          beaches, and bluffs, which constitute highly productive unique, fragile or vulnerable
                          natural habitats or areas of particular scenic or historical importance. It is
                          recommended that these areas be preserved without development and protected from
                          degradation due to direct use or to external sources.

                     *    Conservation areas: These are defined as areas marginally suitable for development which
                          possess important, but noncritical ecological significance. These areas, which include
                          drainageways, floodplains, hillsides, and woodlands, usually serve as a buffer between
                          preservation and development areas. Development in these areas, because of erosion,
                          flooding and/or drainage problems, poses potential hazards to public health and safety
                          and may require periodic outlays of public and private funds for erosion and/or flood
                          prevention and reparation. For these reasons, development should be carefully controlled
                          in these areas.

                     0    Development areas: These are the remaining areas which are comparatively suitable for
                          development and which possess less important ecological, recreational, and historical
                          values than the previous two categories. A variety of land use activities may be
                          appropriate in these areas, depending on site-specific conditionsL Special precautions
                          are suggested, however, to minimize the impacts of development on the sedimentation and
                          pollution of the estuary.

                     This type of approach to coastal resources management has been taken by localities in the North
                Carolina (24) and Florida (12) coastal programs, among others, and is a widely recognized
                environmental planning tool.

                     The land use planning and management guidelines discussed below are designed to assist those
                involved in coastal land use decisions in effecting a balance between the many competing uses of
                this significant area of Prince William county. These guidelines are grouped by resource type into
                the three categories outlined above. A land use planning and management approach which draws on a
                combination of guidelines from all three categories will result in the most comprehensive,
                ecologically sound, and cost effective coastal resources management program for the County.

                                                                -7-
<pb n="16" />

               Preservation Areas

                    1.    Wetlands and Bottomlands.

                          Background. Three interrelated wetland systems, are found along the Prince William County
                          shoreline: nearshore shallows or bottomlands, tidal flats, and vegetated wetlands.

                               The shallow bottomlands, which are located below the low tide limit, are vegetated by
                          aquatic perennials and bethic algae and are vital to fish and shellfish as spawning,
                          nursery and feeding grounds. Uses of these bottomlands are controlled by the State
                          through a permitting system administered by the Virginia Marine Resources Commission      (Code
                          of Virqinia, 62.1-3).

                               From the low tide limits to near sea level are found tidal flats, also referred     to as
                          nonvegetated wetlands. While appearing to be lifeless, these flats are among the most
                          valuable of coastal habitats. Nonvegetated wetlands or flats are important nursery and
                          feeding grounds for fishes and shellfish, providing abundant food and shallow water refuge
                          from predators for sensitive juvenile fishes, shedding blue crab, etc. Primary
                          productivity is high due to the abundant supply of light and the year-round productivity
                          of the nonvascular plants, i.e., bottom-dwelling algae and phytoplankton, found in these
                          intertidal areas. In addition, relatively high levels of nutrient storage and cycling
                          occur in the intertidal zone, since it is particularly conducive to direct exchanges among
                          water, sediments, the atmosphere and aquatic life. Tidal flats constitute the primary
                          feeding grounds of shorebirds and many waterfowl, making them prime areas of interest for
                          birdwatchers. Finally, nonvegetated wetlands provide some degree of erosion protection to
                          the shoreline and adjacent vegetated wetlands (29).

                               Above the tidal flats are found vegetated wetlands or marshlands which produce the
                          organic matter basic to the important estuarine food web. Marshes provide food and/or
                          habitat at some stage in the life cycle of 90-95% of Virginia's commercial and sport
                          fishes, as well as waterfowl and various wildlife species such as raccoon, muskrat and

                          vegetation changes inorganic nutrients in runoff into organic material, stored in their
                          otter (36). Wetlands also provide water quality protection to the estuary. Wetiand

                          leaves and in their remains, which are trapped by the marsh root system to form peat.
                          Wetlands also reduce the speed of runoff and streamflow, allowing sediment to settle out
                          before reaching the estuary. In addition, wetlands provide flood'and erosion protection
                          to adjacent dry land areas, referred to as fastlands. One acre of marsh can absorb or
                          hold 300,000 gallons of water (30). This water retention capability enhances the
                          stability of the coastal water system by retaining water in dry periods and holding it

                                                                    -8-
<pb n="17" />

                          back during floods. Wetland vegetation also serves as a buffer that protects the
                          shoreline from the eroding forces of tides and storms.

                               Because of these important public benefits and their sensitivity to alteration by
                          man, tidal wetlands in Virginia are protected and managed through the 1972 Virginia
                          Wetlands Law (Virginia Code, 62.1), administered by the Virginia Marine Resources
                          Commission and local wetlands boards. The Virginia Code defines wetlands as "all land
                          lying between and contiguous to mean low water and an elevation above mean low water equal
                          to the factor 1.5 times the mean tide range. . ." and upon which grow specific kinds of
                          vegetation (Virginia Code, 62.1-13.2(f)). For management purposes, the Virginia Institute
                          of Marine Science (VIMS) has classified Virginia's wetlands by type and grouped them into
                          five classifications according to the estimated total environmental value of an acre of
                          each type.

                               Of the twelve types of wetlands in Virginia, only four are found in Prince William
                          County: Types VI, VII, IX and XI. These comprise approximately 900 acres of wetlands.
                          Three acres, or less than 1% of the County's wetlands are classified as Type VI. Type VII
                          comprises 31 acres or 3%. The 54 acres of Type IX make up another 6%, leaving the
                          remaining 812 acres, or 90%, as Type XI wetland. Further information about these wetland
                          types is provided in the wetland summaries in Figure 3.

                               Types VII and XI which constitute 843 acres, or 93% of Prince William County
                          wetlands! are in Group One, the highest of the five wetlands evaluation groups established
                          by VIMS. According to VIMS, Group One marshes have the highest values in productivity and
                          wildfowl/wildlife utility and are closely associated with fish spawning and nursery areas.
                          They are also given high values as erosion inhibitors, are important to the shellfish
                          industry, and are valued as natural shoreline stabilizers. VIMS recommends that Group One
                          marshes be preserved.

                               The Type VI marshland, which has been assigned a Group Two classification, is of only
                          slightly lesser value than Group One marshes. VIMS cites the lower ranking of Group Two
                          marshes as being due to a less readily available source of nutrients for the marine
                          environment, since the higher elevations of these marshes result in less tidal action to
                          flush nutrient-rich detritus into adjacent waterways. Group Two marshes are assigned very
                          high values in water quality and coastal flood protection. VIMS recommends that these
                          marshes also be preserved, although it would be better to alter Group Two marshes than
                          Group One marshes.

                               The final marsh type found in the County, Type IX, which constitutes only 6% of the
                          County's wetlands, is classified in the Group Three category. The yellow pond lily marsh
                          is not considered to be a significant contribution to the food web, but it does have high

                                                                -9-
<pb n="18" />

                                                                        FIGURE 3

                                                                    SUMMARY OF PRINCE
                                                            WILLIAM COUNTY WETLAND TYPES

                                                                                           TYPE XI.    FRESHWATER MIXED COMMUNITY

                                                                                     le

                                          BUTTONBUSH                                             YELLO W POND LILY
                                       BIG CORDGRASS                                               TYPE IX
                                            TYPE V                                               ARROW ARLIM and
                                                                                                  PICKEREL WEED
                                            WILD RICE                                              TYPE VII
                                       CATTAIL TYPE VI                                           SMARTWEED
                                                                                                   and WATERDOCK
                                      SWAMP MILKWEED                                             SEDGES

                  Dominant vegetation:              No single species covers more than 50% of the site.
                  Associated vegetation:            Bulrushes, sedges, waterdock, smartweeds,          ferns, pickeral weed, arrow arum,
                                                    wildrice, beggar's ticks, rice cutgrass.

                  Growth habit:                     Heterogeneous mixutre of plants.
                  Physiographic    position:        From submerged to the upper limits of the wetlands.
                  Average density:                  Highly variable.
                  Annual production and             3 to 5 tons per acre. Ditritus of species such as arrow arum, pickerel
                    detritus availability:          weed and yellow pond lily would be available in the intertidal zone.
                  Waterfowl and wildlife            A highly valuable marsh for a broad diversity in wildlife species. Plant
                    utility:                        species such as smartweeds, waterdock, wildrice and others are prime water-
                                                    fowl and sora rail foods. waters adjacent.to these type marshes are also
                                                    known as spawning &amp; nursery grounds for striped bass, shad and river herring.
                  Potential erosion buffer:         Shoreline erosion protection provided by this type of marsh is equivalent
                                                    to type VII, arrow arum - pickerel weed community.

                                                                            _10-
<pb n="19" />

                                                           FIGURE 3 (continued)

                 Water quality control:         This ranks somewhat higher as a sediment trap and flood deterrent than an
                                                arrow arum - pickerel weed community. The presence of the stiffer, more
                                                resilient grasses, sedges and rushes and peaty substratum increases the
                                                ability of this type of community over a Type VIII marsh as an assimilator
                                                of sediments and flood waters.

                 SUMMARY:                       These are very valuable marshes and the aim should be to keep them in
                                                a natural state. This type of marsh would be ranked equivalent to a
                                                saltmarsh cordgrass marsh (Type I) and an arrow arum-pickerel weed
                                                (Type VII) marsh.
<pb n="20" />

                                                          FIGURE 3 (continued)

                                                                     TYPE VII. ARROW ARUM     PICKEREL WEED COMMUNITY

                                       ARROW ARUM

                                                                                  PICKEREL WEED

                Dominant vegetation:         Arrow arum (Peltandra virginica (L.) Kunth.)    Pickerel week (Pontederia
                                             cordata L.)
                Associated vegetation:       Sedges, smartweeds, bulrushes, ferns, cattails, pond lily.

                                             or heart'shaped leaves. Clumps 2 to 6 feet tall, average height 3 feet.
                Growth habit:                Many broad leaved clumps growing from a thick, cylindrical rhizome; arrow

                Physiographic position:      On tidal mud flats from mean sea level to about mean high tide in low
                                             salinity or freshwater marshes.
                Average density:             I or 2 clumps per 10 square feet.
                Annual production and        2 to 4 tons per acre. Detritus readily available to the marine food web
                  detritus availability:     because of daily tide fluxes. In the fall of the year these species de-
                                             compose quite rapidly and completely except for the root stock.
                Waterfowl and wildlife       Seeds and shoots of both species are eaten by ducks. Arrow arum seeds
                                             float after the pod decays and are readily available for wood ducks.
                                             Often associated with confirmed spawning and nursery areas for herring
                                             and shad.
                Potential erosion buffer:    Although this community type lacks the vast network of rhizomes, roots
                                             and.peat substratum typical of a saltmarsh cordgrass community, this
                                             marsh/water interface vegetation is often the only vegetative buffer to
                                             shoreline erosion in freshwater areas. The substratum in a marsh such
                                             as this is typically soft, unstable mud. After the vegetation has decayed
                                             in the winter time, the mud flats are highly susceptible to erosion due to

                                                                  712-
<pb n="21" />

                                                           FIGURE 3 (continued)

                 Water quality control        Slows the flow of flood waters, causing some suspended sediment to
                   and flood buffer:          settle out.

                 SUMMARY:                     Under natural conditions, the marsh of this type is relatively stable
                                              but it is highly sensitive to development and activities such as excessive
                                              boat traffic. Because of its many attributes, this marsh ranks similar to
                                              that of Type I.

                                                                    -13-
<pb n="22" />

                                                                     FIGURE 3 (continued)

                                                                                   TYPE VI. CATTAIL COMMUNITY
                                  zi:

                       NARROW- LEAVED   CATTAIL      'j
                           Typho angustifolla

                           COMMON CATTAIL
                             rypha lalifolia

                 Dominant vegetation:          Narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia L.)

                 Assoc
                                               pickerel weed, smartweed, other fresh or brackish water plants.
                      iated vegetation:        Broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia L.), sedges, bulrushes, arrow arum,

                 Growth habit:                 Characteristic "wiener on a stick" fruiting heads, long straplike leaves,
                                               somewhat blunted tips, 4 to 6 feet tall.
                 Phsiographic position:        Very wet sites, sometimes in standing water, often at the margin of marsh
                                               and uplands. Does well in seepage areas resulting from upland runoff.
                 Average density:              2 to 6 stalks per square foot.
                 Annual production and         2 to 4 tons per acre. Detritus usually not readily accessible to the
                                               marine environment.

                 Waterfowl and wildlife        Provides habitat for certain birds; roots consumed by muskrats.
                   utility:
                 Potential erosion buffer:     Because of its preferred habitat and its characteristic shallow root
                                               system, Type VI is only a minor buffer to erosion.
                 Water quality control-        Its usual habitat along the upland margins in soft muddy areas ranks this
                   and flood buffer:           marsh type.high as a sediment trap despite its shallow rooted condition.
                                               Very few species will grow in these areas either because of the stagnant
                                               condition of the substratum or because they are inhibited by toxin release
                                               of the cattail roots or a combination of the two factors.

                 SUMMARY:                      Because of its value as a wildlife food and habitat, its function as a
                               A--

                                               sediment trap, its relatively high production and the usual soft substratum,
                                                                                                                  U
                                               this type of marsh community should not be indiscriminately use' as a
                                               development site. As far as overall value is concerned it compares with
                                               a salt meadow marsh (Type II).

                                                                    -14-
<pb n="23" />

                                                          FIGURE 3 (continued)

                                                                    TYPE IX    YELLOW POND LILY COMMUNITY

                                         YELLOW POPIO LILY
                                          N"PAor 00"ena

                Dominant vegetation:          Yellow pond lily, spatter-dock (Nuphar luteum (L. Sibthrop and Smith

                Associated vegetation;        Pickerel weed, arrow arum.
                Growth habit:                 Saucer shaped leaves with a narrow notch, floating on water; large,
                                              leathery yellow flower. 2 to 4 feet high from submerged root stalk.
                Physiographic  position:      Submerged except for floating leaves at high tide. Found in freshwater areas.
                Average density:              One plant (cluster of leaves) for every 3 to 5 square feet.
                Annual production and         @ to 1 ton per acre; detritus readily available but not a significant
                  detritus availability:      contributor to the food chain.
                Waterfowl utility:            Excellent cover and attachment site for aquatic animals and algae. Feeding
                                              territory for aquatic birds and fish.
                Potential erosion buffer:     While lacking the stiffness of grasses and sedges, these plants do reduce
                                              wave action from wind and boats. This has been noted in freshwater streams
                                              and boat channels.
                Water quality control         Although not a direct assimilator of sediments and flood waters, the flow
                  and flood buffer:           of flood water is slowed somewhat and sediments can settle out. This function
                                              is minimal because the community is submerged completely in flood conditions.

                SUMMARY:                      Destruction of the community would result in a decrease in number and
                                              diversity of aquatic animal life in the immediate area. The greatest value
                                              the community has is its habitat for aquatic biota. This type should      be
                                              ranked with or slightly higher than a Type III (black needlerush) marsh.
<pb n="24" />

                          values for wildlife and waterfowl. The Group Three marsh is thus of less total value than
                          Group One and Two marshes, and, if altered, would cause less total harm to the estuary
                          than altering the wetlands assigned to the two preceding groups.

                               VIMS also suggests two general guidelines which can be used along with the wetlands
                          evaluation system to make decisions on wetlands use:

                               1. Any marsh 2 feet or more in average width is considered to have significant
                               values as an erosion deterrent and a sediment trap; and

                               2. Depending on marsh type and viability, any marsh greater than 0.1 acre may have
                               significant values in terms of productivity, detritus availability, and wildlife
                               habitat. Depending on its location, it may also have value as an erosion buffer
                               (36).

                               In Prince William County, the local Wetlands Board is responsible for granting or
                          denying permits for activities in wetlands (See Chapter IV for further information on the
                          Board and its duties).

                               Man's activities in wetlands and bottomlands threaten the health and, in some cases,
                          the continued existence of these areas. Dredging or filling activities may cause direct
                          alteration of wetlands and bottomlands in the immediate vicinity, as well as indirect
                          alterations to areas removed from the activity by changing current, sediment deposition,
                          and erosion patterns. Dredging in these areas reduces primary productivity, eliminates
                          fish and wildlife feeding grounds, and deposits sediments which may deplete the available
                          Oxygen supply. Filling of these areas effectively removes them from the aquatic system.

                               Construction of bulkheads, groins, breakwaters, docks and piers may cause particular
                          harm to nonvegetated wetlands through scouring or sedimentation. Improperly designed
                          bulkheads, for example, may result in erosion at the base of the bulkhead, altering the
                          intertidal habitat (29).

                               Activities upstream from wetlands, which are outside the jurisdiction of the Wetlands
                          Board, can also have an impact on the health of wetlands. Excess siltation or nutrient
                          input from upland runoff can upset the wetlands system by altering water levels and
                          dissolved oxygen concentrations. This problem is especially significant in embayed
                          wetlands, such as those found at the mouths of the County's coastal streams, since
                          flushing time is slower than in less confined wetlands. In addition, tidal wetlands can
                          be harmed by either an increase or decrease in freshwater flow, which can be caused by
                          increased runoff or the addition of upstream impoundments.

                                                                -16-
<pb n="25" />

                              Guidelines. To assist local wetlands boards in executing their permitting
                         responsibilities, the state has developed guidelines (17,36) for activities in and
                         immediately adjacent to wetlands. Information on these guidelines can be obtained from
                         the Prince William County Wetlands Board, which is discussed further in Chapter V. The
                         following general guidelines may serve as a starting point for persons contemplating
                         activities which may affect wetlands (6):

                              1.   There should generally be no excavation in wetlands.
                                   Rationale: Excavation may disrupt the natural functions of wetlands by
                                   eliminating vegetation, disrupting natural water flows, destroying the marshy
                                   soil layers, and facilitating the drying out of wetlands. Excavation should be
                                   permitted only when required for essential public purposes (e.g., mosquito
                                   control, wildlife enhancement) and should be limited to a small percentage (10%)
                                   of the area.

                              2.   There should generally be no land clearance, grading or removal of natural
                                   vegetation in wetlands.
                                   Rationale: Vegetation is the driving force of productivity in vegetated
                                   wetlands. Loss of vegetation will reduce productivity, resulting in a loss of
                                   nutrients to the estuarine system.

                              3.   There should generally be no filling of wetlands.
                                   Rationale: The soil cover would eliminate the wetlands, change elevation, alter
                                   the water regime, and generally disrupt wetland functions.
                              4.   'There should generally be no solid-fill roads or other structures in wetlands.
                                   Rationale: Solid-fill obstructs water flow through wetlands, disrupting the
                                   delivery of freshwater and nutrients to the estuary and upsetting the salinity
                                   balance in the wetlands.

                              5.   Shoreline defense structures (e.g., bulkheads), where necessary, should be built
                                   shoreward of wetlands, above the annual flood mark, and should be designed to be
                                   permeable to groundwater and runoff.
                                   Rationale: By definition, wetlands that should be undisturbed lie below this
                                   level. In addition, solid structures such as bulkheads that extend into water
                                   areas often adversely alter water circulation, increase scouring of the bottom,
                                   and preempt tidal marsh and tidal flat habitat areas. Permeable structures
                                   allow the free supply of fresh water and water-borne nutrients to wetlands and
                                   promote better drainage of the adjacent shorelands, so as to reduce erosion.
                                   Rock riprap (see Figure 4) is often the easiest and least costly shoreline
                                   protection measure and is both highly permeable and conducive to the

                                                                -17-
<pb n="26" />

                                    establishment of aquatic life. Another example is gabions, which are often used
                                    for lining stream channels. Gabions (5) are wire baskets, filled with rock and
                                    lined together to form a wall or channel lining.

                                            FIGURE 4. TYPICAL ROCK RIPRAP STRUCTURE

                                                                                       Timbet Pile to Guide Floats
                                                 C,        '00,                     1                                            1

                                                                                            Polystyrene Floats
                                                             Armor Stone
                                                                                                        M-S-L.
                                                                                      Zi-
                                                                                     E?                7
                                                   C) ";",y          2
                                                     Slone
                                                       vwying                                        14'
                                                         Sizes
                                                    C10--
                                                   @d

                                                                   Cast Concrete To       -'@@De@qed Channel Bottont

                               6.   As a rule, discharge or release of pollutants into wetlands should be minimized.
                                    Rationale; Although wetlands have a certain capacity to absorb Iand naturally
                                    treat nutrients and other pollutants from stormwater runoff (27), research has
                                    not established the capacity of each wetland type to assimilate these
                                    pollutants. Additions of nutrients to the tidal marshes of an estuary such as
                                    the Potomac, which is already rich in nutrients, may have a relatively minor
                                    impact, but this cannot be assured. Studies have shown that additions of
                                    organic nitrogen to estuaries and marshes significantly stimulates plant growth
                                    (34,35). Higher natural Productivity means higher respiration rates in the
                                    water, decreasing oxygen concentration levels and possibly resulting in fish
                                    kills, particularly in summer months when oxygen concentration naturally drops
                                    very low at night (13). Research continues concerning the limits of acceptable
                                    estuarine nutrient pollution (27), but algal blooms and fish kills which have
                                    occurred in the Potomac make it apparent that such limits have already been
                                    exceeded on occasion in this region. In addition, the specific effects of
                                    excess nutrients may be obscured by toxic pollutants, which may diminish
                                    biological activity and reduce the diversity of life in the wetland and estuary
                                    systems(33). Therefore, it is advisable to minimize the introduction of
                                    pollutants into wetland systems, particularly sediment and toxic pollutants
                                    wi-Lich may impair LI-le natural nutrient treatr-Ltent capacity of these areas.
<pb n="27" />

                              Guidelines for activities upstream of wetlands are designed to regulate the two key
                         natural processes that can threaten the health of wetlands: runoff and erosion. Adverse
                         impacts on wetlands resulting from the acceleration of these processes due to man's
                         activities can be controlled through both structural and nonstructural measures. An
                         overall guideline to be followed for development in coastal watersheds is to maintain
                         runoff and erosion levels at or near the natural level. Specific guidelines and standards
                         which can be utilized to achieve this overall objective are discussed later in this
                         report.

                    2. Bluffs

                              Background. Bluffs, which are areas of high elevation adjacent to the estuary,
                         provide both environmental and aesthetic benefits to man. Similar to wetlands, bluffs
                         protect inland areas from flooding. Bluffs also have high scenic potential because of the
                         vistas afforded by their elevation. This often makes them desirable sites for residential
                         development. However, bluffs are sensitive environmental areas because of their
                         vulnerability to erosion.

                              The effects of erosion make bluffs dynamic natural features. Rainfall runoff, soil
                         seepage, and tidal action all contribute to the erosion of bluffs and subsequent retreat
                         of the shoreline. Man may contribute to this erosion through the action of boat wakes and
                         by directing or augmenting runoff, although the impacts of the former are usually minor
                         unless boat traffic is intense. Since bluff erosion is a natural process, guidelines
                         pertaining to bluffs concern human safety more than they do the impact of man on the
                         natural system.

                              Guidelines. The following guidelines are suggested for bluff preservation:

                              1. Control man's impact on bluff erosion by:

                                   a) Requiring slow or no wake zones in areas of high boat traffic adjacent to
                                   bluffs; and

                                   b) Encouraging the use of runoff controls on urban and agricultural land
                                   adjacent to bluffs (See Development Areas section below for recommended
                                   controls).

                              2.   Minimize future losses of property due to highly eroding bluffs (i.e., rates of
                                   1 foot per year or greater) by requiring a setback of structures beyond the
                                   thirty-year bluff recession line, or requiring movable structures or structural

                                                               _19-
<pb n="28" />

                                   protection for existing buildings within the 30-year setback zone; and

                              3.   Minimize losses to existing property owners by encouraging a unified landowner
                                   approach to shoreline erosion control (See Chapter V for sources of technical
                                   assistance for shoreline stabilization).

                                   Implementation. The first guideline, which deals with the control of boat
                              traffic is not under local control. Implementation of this recommendation requires
                              action by the State of Virginia and/or Maryland.

                                   Implementation of guidelines l(b) and 2, encouraging the use of runoff controls
                              and regulating bluff development, can be accomplished at the local level through
                              special local zoning and subdivision requirements. Such requirements for guideline
                              l(b) might take the form of runoff control techniques which are incorporated into a
                              Public Facilities Manual. Fairfax County has taken this approach (11).

                                   Implementation of the third guideline, which concerns shoreline erosion, can be
                              accomplished through cooperative local, State, and federal efforts. Local agencies,
                              such as the Planning office and the Soil and Water Conservation District Office, can
                              provide educational materials and technical assistance to landowners with shoreline
                              erosion problems. These efforts should be accompanied by State*or federal technical
                              and financial assistance programs.

                    3. Beaches

                              Background. A beach is an unconsolidated, sloping area contiguous to the shore and
                         composed of sand, gravel, or cobbles which results from wave and current action. Beaches
                         in Prince William County occur next to bluffs or vegetated shorelines. Under normal
                         conditions, the amount of sand or other material that makes up the beach is in careful
                         balance with the current and tidal action of the Potomac River. Beaches act as dynamic
                         shoreline protection structures, breaking the impact of waves and currents. Disruption of
                         the natural balance of movement between beach and bottom materials through the
                         construction of groins and jetties, etc., can accelerate shoreline erosion and result in
                         the loss of beaches and subsequent erosion of fastlands. Beaches of good size  and quality
                         have long been valued for their recreation use.

                              Guidelines. The following guidelines are suggested for the identification and
                         preservation of high quality beaches:

                              1.   Beaches in Prince William County should be analyzed for their recreational
                                   potential, erosion control capabilities, and other values mentioned above.

                                                                -20-
<pb n="29" />

                                    Beach areas suitable for recreational access should be prioritized for possible
                                    public access acquisition.

                               2.   Bulkheads, jetties, groins and other structural protection techniques should be
                                    avoided. Structures along the shoreline block the movement of sand and sediment
                                    materials necessary to replenish sand losses from storms. The beach may then
                                    become unstable and eventually disappear.

                               Implementation. In order to prevent the degradation or destruction of the high
                         quality beaches, local acquisition of shoreland public access areas adjacent to such high
                         quality beaches may be desirable at some point, particularly as Potomac River water
                         quality improves to a level to allow public swimming. Coastal zone segment resource
                         inventories that can help identify the location of County beach areas are presented in
                         Chapter III.

                               State and federal shoreline permitting agencies should take the lead in promoting
                         non-structural shoreline stabilization measures over structural measures to the greatest
                         extcnt possiblc. Structural approaches, where necessary      prctect priv-
                                                                                 Y    J- - @ U  @V@@V @@
                         investments, should be coordinated with neighboring shoreline landowners. Local building
                         inspectors can also work with shoreline landowners in developing the least ecologically
                         damaging shoreline defense measures. A State-sponsored training program on shoreline
                         protection would be very beneficial to building officials in coastal jurisdictions.

               Conservation Areas

                    1. Hillsides

                               Background. Careful control of development on hillsides, defined here as areas with
                         8% slope or greater, is necessary to minimize the adverse impacts of ground disturbance,
                         which include loss of slope and soil stability and accelerated erosion. Removal of
                         vegetation from hillsides deprives the soil of the stabilizing effect of plant root
                         systems and eliminates the water recycling benefits of plant transpiration. on slopes
                         with no vegetation and exposed soils, new watercourses are readily formed, creating
                         gullies which significantly increase the rate of erosion. Increasing the amount of paved
                         surfaces on hillsides not only alters the natural drainage pattern, but also increases
                         runoff and allows less precipitation to recharge groundwater.resources. Such increased
                         runoff and erosion contribute to sedimentation in downstream waterways, wetlands,
                         embayments, and the Potomac estuary.

                               It has been demonstrated that erosion increases rapidly with the steepness of the
                         slope. One study (9) indicates that the rate of erosion is proportional to the 1.35 power

                                                                -21-
<pb n="30" />

                         greater than from a 4% slope, and 5 times greater than from an 8% slope (9). Therefore,
                         of the slope. This means, for example, that the erosion from a 25% slope can be 12 times

                         guidelines which have been developed for the wise use of hillsides are closely tied to
                         variations in the steepness of the slope.

                              Guidelines. The regulation of hillside development is more sophisticated than in
                         other critical environmental areas. Approaches to hillside regulations fall into three
                         major categories (30): (1) slope-density provisions, which decrease allowable development
                         densities as slope increases; (2) soil-overlay provisions, which assign use and density
                         based on soil characteristics; and (3) the "guiding principles" approach, containing few
                         specific standards, but rather specific policies to form the basis of individual project
                         evaluations. Grading and erosion controls, discussed in the Development Areas Section
                         below, are important supplements to any of these approaches.

                              Slope-density provisions are perhaps the most common form of hillside development
                         regulation. Since most commercial and industrial land uses are not suited to hillsides
                         due to the necessity for extensive grading and filling, these provisions focus on
                         residential development. Such provisions generally take two forms: 1) requirements that
                         certain percentages of a site remain in a natural state; or 2) limitations on the number
                         of dwelling units allowed per acre. The severity of these restrictions varies among
                         geographic areas, depending upon the range of slopes encountered.

                              Several examples of slope-density guidelines are provided in Reference (30). An
                         example of the first approach to these guidelines, based on open space quotas, is
                         summarized in Table 2.

                              An example of slope-density provisions based on lot size, developed by the Georgia
                         Mountains Planning &amp; Development Commission, are illustrated in Table 3. These provisions
                         cover a very wide range of slopes, as might be expected in a mountainous region. Although
                         the severe slopes at the upper range of Table 3 are unlikely to be encountered in the
                         Prince William coastal zone, it indicates the full spectrum of considerations necessary in
                         hillside regulation. The final column of Table 3 also gives maximum allowable land
                         clearance. This thus represents a combination of the two types of slope-density
                         guidelines. The full text of the Georgia Mountains PDC slope regulations is provided in
                         Appendix II.

                              The second major approach to hillside regulation, the soil-overlay approach, is
                         recommended for use in Prince William County. The availability of a complete soil survey
                         for the County provides a rational basis for the development of regulations that reflect
                         the varying sensitivities of sloped lands to erosion, runoff, and mass movement. This
                         makes the regulations more easily understandable to developers and landowners, and

                                                               -22-
<pb n="31" />

                                                                           Table 2
                                                        Maximum Land Clearance Slope Guidelines

                       @Iope                                                                     % of Land Left in Natural State

                       10 - 15%                                                                                   25
                       25 - 20%                                                                                   40
                       20 - 25%                                                                                   55
                       25 - 30%                                                                                   70
                       30%+                                                                                       85

               SOURCE: Reference (3).

                                                                           Table 3

                                                           Minimum Lot Size Slope Guidelines
               Topography,               Minimum               Minimum                  minimum                   Ground Surface
               Slope                     Area,                 Average                  Average                   to Remain in its
               Average                   (sq.ft.)             Width (ft.)               Depth (ft.)               Natural State
                                                                                                                  (no cut or fill)
                 0-12%                   15,000                      60                     90                           50%
               10-15%                    18,000                      80                   100                            60%
               15-20%                    22,000                      80                   11.0                           65%
               20-25%                    28,000                    100                    120                            70%
               25-30%                    35,000                    100                    150                            75%
               30-35%                    44,000                    120                    175                            .80%
               35-40%                    54,000                    1.50                   200                            85%
               40-50%                    65,000                    175                    250                            95%
               50-70%                    85,000                    200                    300                            95%
               70-100%                   Not less  than five(5)    acres.                                                95%
               Over 100%                 No lot development permitted.                                                   100%

               SOURCE:   Reference (33).

                                                                            -23-
<pb n="32" />

                        therefore easier to administer by the local planning office. In addition, soil overlay
                        provisions apply to the entire planning area, not just the hillsides, resulting in a more
                        comprehensive approach to environmental management.

                             This approach relies on soil overlay maps, which represent soil groupings based on
                        development suitability. For example, McHenry County, Illinois, has "Soil Overlay
                        Regulations" which are added to the requirements of the existing zoning categories (30).
                        A "Steep Soils Overlay District" has been established for areas with problem soil types
                        and slopes greater than 12 percent. Other localities which have adopted a similar
                        approach include Mine Hill, New Jersey, and Orange County, New York (30). An initial
                        application of such an approach to the soils in Prince William County's coastal zone is
                        provided on page 39 in the Development Areas section. This approach groups the County's
                        coastal soils into four broad development suitability zones: unsuitable, low
                        density/conservation, medium density, and hiqh/low density. The low density/conservation
                        zone roughly corresponds to the "Steep Soils Overlay District" of McHenry County,
                        Illinois.

                             Implementation. Soil overlay zones are not meant to establish strict management
                        boundaries, but to identify similar management areas which can provide guidance for
                        individual land use decisions in the coastal zone. While the zoning ordinance provides a
                        mechanism for local governments to implement such overlay districts., a more detailed
                        analysis of soil and slope conditions would be necessary in order to establish accurate
                        boundaries for each zone. minimum lot size, grading and clearance restrictions, and other
                        appropriate development requirements for each overlay zone could then be incorporated into
                        the zoning ordinance.

                   2.   Waterways

                             Background. Surface water drainageways, as integral. parts of the hydrologic cycle,
                        provide many public benefits in their natural state, including the transport of overland
                        flow from upland areas for groundwater recharge and reservoir replenishment and the
                        support of fish, waterfowl, and other wildlife. Development in upstream areas can result
                        in increased runoff, accelerating the rate of stream flow, which may result in streambank
                        erosion and a loss of shading vegetation. This not only increases the sediment load to
                        the downstream receiving body, such as the estuary or wetlands, but increases water
                        temperatures. Heated runoff from impervious surfaces further elevates water temperatures,
                        which may have adverse effects on aquatic life sensitive to temperature changes.

                             Development also results in increased stormwater runoff, causing sedimentation and be
                        minimized through urban stormwater and nonpoint pollution management programs, discussed
                        in the Development Areas section of this report.

                                                               -24-
<pb n="33" />

                                 Guidelines. Several additional approaches to stream protection are outlined here.
                            These approaches are designed not only to protect waterways from the adverse impacts of
                            development mentioned above, but also to address the flooding impacts of streams on
                            adjacent development areas. Typical stream protection regulations instituted by local
                            governments provide for the establishment of a buffer zone along watercourses, usually
                            extending 50 to 150 feet on either side of the stream, within which development and land
                            disturbing activities are strictly limited. The buffer zone may be a fixed distance from
                            mid-stream, or may "float" according to the character of adjacent areas. The former
                            approach is easier to implement and administer, while the latter allows the inclusion of
                            adjacent sensitive environmental. areas, such as wetlands and steep slopes.

                                 The following example of a fixed buffer, which would prohibit tree cutting, grading,
                            filling, and construction in the following buffer areas, has been recommended by the
                            Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (28):

                                         Water Body                           Buffer width

                                      lakes.over 50 acres                       300 feet
                                      lakes 50 acres and less                   200 feet
                                      navigable streams                         100 feet
                                      all other streams                          50 feet

                            other criteria which have been suggested for stream buffers, based on open space
                            considerations, include:

                            1.   Preserve between 200 feet (18) and 300 feet (16) on either side of all watercourses.
                                 A 200 foot buffer provides about 24 acres of recreation area per mile of stream
                                 corridor (2).

                            2.   Preserve a 1-50-foot buffer on each side of a stream and, for major streams, plan
                                 development of a 4000-foot wide corridor (1).

                            3.   Require developers to preserve and/or donate 10% of their gross acreage to open space
                                 use, preferably in flood plain and shoreline areas (32).

                            A more scientific approach to stream buffer zones is based on sediment control
                            considerations. From a sediment control standpoint, particularly during construction
                            activities, a buffer zone acts as a backup measure to such traditional sediment control
                            measures as detention basins and burlap fences. The State of Virginia and most of its
                            localities have not yet taken this approach. For example, stream protection measures in

                                                                    -25-
<pb n="34" />

                         stream bank stabilization with rock riprap or vegetation.
                         the Northern Virginia region concentrate instead on structural control measures such as

                              Buffer zone requirements, where they exist in other States (e.g., North Carolina),
                         are usually based on limiting visible siltation to the first 25% of the buffer zone. This
                         type of regulation has been shown to be difficult to implement, because of the difficulty
                         in'estimating ahead of time the width of buffer zone necessary to limit visible siltation
                         to the performance standard (9). The City of Raleigh, North Carolina, therefore, has
                         adopted the following formula for buffer zone width calculations (25):

                              W = 1.7K(LS)ML
                                   where      W = necessary width of buffer zone;
                                              K = erodibility factor of the soils;
                                            LS = soil loss factor based on the length and degree of the slopes;
                                              M = an adjustment factor for the month of the year; and
                                              L = length of the slope.

                         Experience with the formula has reportedly been satisfactory, with the normal range of the
                         buffer zone width from 5 to 75 feet (9). The narrowest buffer zones occur in areas with
                         gentle slopes and fairly stable soils. These narrow buffers, while perhaps accomplishing
                         sediment control, do not contribute significantly to other stream valley protection
                         objectives, such as the preservation of open space and wildlife habitat. A comprehensive
                         stream protection policy would combine these approaches by establishing a minimum buffer
                         width for open space concerns and applying the formula on an individual project basis to
                         determine the desirability of expanding the buffer beyond this minimum.

                              The advantage of setting up a buffer zone, whether fixed, floating, or a combination
                         thereof, is that it establishes a special management area, within which permitted uses and
                         alterations may be identified by local government. Permitted uses typically include
                         recreation, conservation, and non-tillage agricultural operations. Alterations that are
                         restricted include dredging, filling and dumping in or adjacent to streams. An example of
                         regulated uses for stream protection from Napa County, California include (30):

                              (1)  Depositing or removing any material within a watercourse;
                              (2)  Excavating within a watercourse;
                              (3)  Planting or removing any vegetation within a watercourse;
                              (4)  Constructing, altering or removing any structure within, upon, or across a
                                   watercourse; and
                              (5)  Altering any embankment within a watercourse.

                              Implementation. Stream protection ordinances have been enacted in localities in
                         severT1 states which incorporate a buffer zone within which restrictions are applied to

                                                                -26-
<pb n="35" />

                           most uses and alterations. Special use permits are required for uses and alterations in
                           the buffer zone.

                               Private septic tank systems are currently prohibited by the State Health Department
                           within 50 feet of waterways or water bodies. However, local health officials and
                           scientific studies acknowledge, that although 50 feet is generally sufficient to achieve
                           necessary reductions in coliform bacteria, it is probably not wide enough to remove
                           nutrients, particularl-y nitrates. A 100-150 foot buffer is tile suggested minimum for
                           removal of nutrients, and a 300-foot zone is advisable (30).

                     3. Woodlands

                               Background. The many public benefits of woodlands makes them appropriate areas for
                           conservation or careful development. These benefits include: wildlife habitat, soil
                           stabilization, runoff moderation, noise buffer, absorption of certain air pollutants, and
                           microcl-imate moderation. Mature forests in Virginia take 50 years to develop. Rapid,
                           severe and widespread disturbance by man of woodlands can alter erosion rates, soil
                           composition, and pl-ant and animal diversity. Near heavily urbanized areas the
                           unavailability of seed from scattered trees may impair the restoration of severely
                           disturbed forests. Preserving stands of trees for natural reseeding is therefore an
                           overall guideline to be followed in heavily developing areas.

                               The removal of forest vegetation has been shown to dramatically increase the runoff
                           of nutrients to streams (5). Undisturbed forests efficiently retain and recycle nutrients
                           from rainfall through transpiration and soil uptake. A 1967 study (4) by Bormann and
                           Likens found that undisturbed forestlands lose only 7.2 lbs per acre per year of calcium
                           (and equally small amounts of other nutrients), while devegetated watersheds experienced
                           3- to 15-fold increases in the loss of mineral nutrients.

                               Large tree species have traditionally been valued for their shading ability and tile
                           commercial value of their wood products, but ecological studies a1so show that understory
                           trees, such as dogwood, play an important role in nutrient cycling, by acting as nutrient
                           "pumps" which counter the downward movement of nutrients in soil to keep them in
                           circulation between microorganisms and the active upper layers of litter and soil (22).
                           In addition to the wildlife values of a diverse woodland, this factor is important in the
                           sel.ection of a woodl.and conservation strategy.

                               Guidelines. Guidelines for the use and management of woodlands should be based on

                                                                 -27-
<pb n="36" />

                          the ecological functions of woodlands. Guidelines for the removal or retention of trees
                          with respect to tree function involve (30):

                               1.   The condition of the woodlands: disease, decay.
                               2.   The necessity to remove trees to construct public facilities and utilities.
                               3.   Topography and susceptibility of soils to erosion.
                               4.   Amount of existing woodland in the neighborhood.
                               5.   The presence of "landmark" trees whose preservation is desirable and will not
                                    unreasonably interfere with the property's use.

                          The Fairfax County tree preservation ordinance provides a guide for the selection of trees
                          to be retained by developers, which is shown in Table 4. This tree selection guide
                          incorporates some ecological considerations. A comprehensive tree selection chart is
                          included which indicates the characteristics of various species found in Northern
                          Virginia.

                               Implementation. A tree preservation ordinance, such as the one enforced in Fairfax
                          County, is the most common implementation mechanism for woodland protection. many of
                          these ordinances are based on a somewhat arbitrary preservation standard of saving a
                          certain number of trees per acre. Similar to wetlands, woodland types vary in value and
                          in sensitivity to disturbance by man.  For this reason, the environmental performance
                          approach discussed above, which is based on ecological functions, is recommended. Such an
                          approach may take the form of an ordinance requiring a special permit, certain
                          requirements in PUD ordinances, or a special provision of the subdivision ordinance.
                     4.   Wildlife -                                                                                                  I -

                               Background. The extent and quality of habitat is the primary determinant of wildlife
                          populations. The major habitat components are food, cover, and water, which must all be
                          present within a species' daily cruising radius. Some species, such as the cottontail
                          rabbit, may have a cruising radius of only one or two acres, while others, like quail,
                          ran(Je over an area of 20-40 acres (3).

                               The quality of habitat depends largely on the nature and distribution of vegetation,
                          which is controlled by ].and use practices. Thus, man's primary impact on wildlife is not
                          through hunting, trapping and fishing, but through modification of vegetation. man's land
                          use activities can either improve or degrade the quality of wildlife habitat.

                               Orban sprawl reduces wildlife range. Continued highway construction results in
                          increasing tolls of both large and small wildlife species. Tile contamination of water-
                          courses by human and industrial wastes and nonpoint pollution adversely affects fish and

                                                                 -28-
<pb n="37" />

                                                   Table 4

                 zxcernz frc@m: Fa_Jrfax County 1.978 ?ubli c FarJ 1    es Manua* , Voll. 3:
                                 Tree Praservaz._4on -and Planting, Cha;D-tar 3-1

                 Preservation of trees in areas to @ie disturbed

                      Guide for selection of trees to he retained

                      1.   Proposed development - Consider the mature height and spread of
                           the trees to insure they will not interfAire with proposed
                           structures and overhead utilities.     Consider the-roof develop-
                           ment characteristics to insure they will not*cause Interference
                           with walls, walks, drives, patios, and other paved surfaces or
                           affect water and sewer lines, septic systems,.or 'underground
                           drainage systems.

                      2.   High use areas - Consider the proposed use of the developed
                           area.  Select trees which exhibit a tolerance to air pol-
                           lution if a large amount oil air pollution will be present
                           (see Tree Selection Chart).     Select trees which are suitable
                           for buf'ierlrrg or screening if noise or objectionable views are
                           going to be a problem.    (Evergreens provide better buffering
                           and screening than deciduous trees.)     Select trees which can
                           tolerate de-icing salts if there is a chance these will be
                           used. (See 7ree Selection Chart).

                      3.   Landfills - Consider the proximity to landfills.       Gases gen-
                           erated can travel underground for a considerable distance to
                           kill trees.

                      4.   Life span - Preference should be given to trees with long life
                           span.

                      5.   Resistance to disease and insects - Trees     that are known to
                           be resistant to attacks by disease or insects should be given
                           preference to those known to be susceptible.

                           Esthetic value - Consideration should @e given to fliowering
                           habits, autumn foliage, bark and crown characteristics, and
                           type of fruit.

                           Wildlife value - Leave trees which provide a good source of
                           food, cover and nesting sites for wildlife. Example: Oaks,
                           Hickories, and Dcg@,cods have a high food value.

                           Tolerance to sudden exposure - Consider'the tolerance of the
                           trees to the new environmental conditions such as increased
                           direct sunlight, increased radiant heat from proposed buildings
                           and pavement, and increased wind.     Trees with a strong tap or
                           fibruous root systern should be given priority over -those with
                           a weak root system.    (See 7ree Selection Chart).

                           A,opearance - Trees with a well-develo   'Ped crown should generally
                           be given pre:ference over those with misshapen crowns or trunks,
                           those with a small crown at the top of a tall trunk or those with
                           narrow, V-shaped crotches. Those trees which are op-en grown us-
                           ually possess better form than those which are grown in the woods.
<pb n="38" />

                                        Table 4 (continued)

            10.  Water table - Consideration should be given to the effect of
                 grading on the water table and its accompanying effect on trees
                 retained. Grades that are lowered will cause the water tabl,-!
                 to drop which will reduce the ground water available to the
                 trees.

            Il.  Grading - Consideration must be given to the proximity of
                 proposed grading to'the trees retained. Grading shall not
                 take 'olace within the drip line of these trees unless approved
                 by the Director.

            12.  Outstanding specimens - Trees of impressive size or shape, of
                 historical significance, or rare species should be preserved
                 if possible.

            13.  Other trees - Consideration should be given to other trees grow-
                 ing In the immediate area. Example:    Virginia Pine, which would
                 not be of particular value if crowing  with hardwoods, would in-
                 crease in value if this were the only  tree species present on
                 the site; trees standing alone are of  higher value than those
                 in a wooded situation.

            14. Comfort - Consider the location of the trees to be retained in
                 relation to the planned use of the site. Trees provide relief
                 from summer heat and strong winds.

         MM    M      M
<pb n="39" />

                                       saw m W m Wm m mm

                                            Table 4, (cont-inued)

                                            TREE SELECTION CF-I-RT
                                                                                                       IA

                                                                                              0

                                                                          ;m
                                                                  00      :1-                 3
                                                                   VI     Ln               &gt;           &gt;
                                                                                                       0

                                                                          0
                                                                          0
                                                                                              z

                                                                          0

                                                                          0    (U
                                                                   0
                                                                   0           0     0
           Botanical Nam/Common Name                                                     0
           Abies concolor/White Fir                       M        x      I           S   I
           Acer ainnala/Amur Maple                        M        x      S           7                7
           Acer 'olatanoi6es/Norway Maple                 m               S    T      T   T   I  S     T*,
           Acer pseudoplatanus/Sycamre Maple              Om              I    T      T
           Acer rubrum/Red Maple                          MW              S    S      S.  T            C*I
           Acer sac--harinum/Silver Maple                 MW              S    S      7   S   I
           Acer saccharum/Sugar Maple                     M               S    I      T   T
           Aesculus hippocastanum/Horsechestnut           m               I    T
           Arnelanchier canadensis/Serviceberry           M               S    T      S       I        T

           Betula nigra/River Birch                       W               S           S
           Betula pendula/European White Birch            MW       x      S    I      S   T   I
           Betula populifolia/Gray Birch                  D        x      I    I      S

           Carpinus carol iniana/Ameri can  Hornbeam      Om              S    S      T
           Carya species/Hickory sp.                      DM              D    I      S
           Catalpa species/Catalpa sp.                    M                    I      S   S   I
           Celtis occidentalis/Hackberry                  DW       x      D    T
           Carcis canadensis/Redbud                       M               S    I      S   S            T
           Cornus florida/Flowering Docrqood              M               S           T       T        T
           Crataegus phaeno  'pyrum/
                Washington Hawthorne                      DM              D    I                       C*

           Elaeagnus augustifolia/Russian olive                    x           T      T       T

           Fagus grandifolia/Ame-rican Beech              DM              S    S      S
           Fraxinus americana/White Ash                   MW                   I      S   S
           Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Green Ash               mw       x      I    I      S   S   I

           Gingko biloba/Gingko                           DM       x      I           T   S   S  S     C*,
           Gleditsia triacanthos inermis/
                Thornless Honeylocust                     DM       x      I    T          S            T

           Ilex opaca/American Holly                      M               I    I          T   T        P

           Juglans nigra/Slack Walnut                                     D    S          T   I
           Juniperus virginiana/Eastern Redcedar          DM       x      D    I      T       T

           Koelreuteria paniculare/Goldenraintree         Om      -X      I

           Laris laricina/Larch                           MW              S    T      S   S
<pb n="40" />

                                                                                                                ;A

                                                  Table 4 (continued)

                                                                                 Q                     6J
                                                                                 j
                                                                                 0                  AW
                                                                        0 0      &gt;-
                                                                          V)     (A                 &gt;  0        &gt;
                                                                        &gt;.
                                                                AA        V            0
                                                                @66
                                                                C                      Ij
                                                                          6.           W            C  &lt;        &lt;
                                                                        C 0                         0
                                                                        M .61                       V)

                                                              A.J       Ln
                                                              0         -a
                                                                          0      r-    -                    X
                                                              0           0      &gt;-    0
          Botanical Name/Corrmn Name                          =           0-
          Ti-quidambar styraciflua7-weetgum                   MW      -        -S              S    S  T
          Liriodendron "-ullpfera/Tulippoplar                 M                  D     S       T

          Magnolia grand if lora/Southern Magnolia            DM
          Macnolia soulanceana/Saucer Magnolia                M                                                 T
          Macnolia stellata/Star Macnolia                     M                  S
          Malus species/Crebapple                             M,                 S     I       S    S      S    T

          Nyssa sylvatica/Slack Gum                           DW                 S     I       T    T

          Oxydendran arboreum/Sourwocd                                                         T

          PaLlIOWnia tomentosa/Royal Paulownia                D.M                S                     S
          Phellodendron amurense/Amur Cork Tree               DM        x        S
          Picea abies/Norway Spruce                           M         x        S     S            T
     tQ   Picea alauca/White Spruce                           M                  S     5       1    T  I   S
          Plcea pungens glauca/
                Colorado Blue S    oruce                      M                  D     T       T    T  S   S
          Pinus   echinata/Shortleaf Pine                     DM        x        D                     S
          Pinus   nigra/AL-strian Pine                        M         x        D     T       S    S  I   S
          Pinus   resinosa/Red Pine                           D                  D     5       T    T
          Pinus   strobus/Whi-le Pine                         M         x        S     S       S    S  S   S
          Pinus   sylvestris/Scotch Pine                      D         x        S     I       S       S
          Pinus   thunbe rg i i /J apanese Black Pine         -M        x              T
          'inus   taeda/Lablolly Pine                         DW                               5       S
          Pinus   virginiana/Virginia     Pine                Dw        x        I     I       S    S
          Populus arandidentata/Bictocth         Aspe-n       0H                 I     T       S       I
          Populus celtoides;Easte,n       Cottonwdod          MW                 S     I            S  I
          Platanus occidentalis/Sycamore                      MW                                    S  T
          Prunus serotina/Black Cherry                        M                  5     T       S
          Prunus serrulata'Kwanzan/Kwanzan Cherry             M                  S                     T        T
          Pseudotsuga r7enziesii/Douglas Fir                  M                  D     S       I    T  S
          Pyrus calleryana Bradford/Bradford Pear             M         x        I     I                        T

          Quer-cus, alba/White Oak                            Dm                 D     T       I    S  I
          Quercus  coccinea/scarlet Oak                       om                 D     T            S  I
          quercus  faicata/Southern Red       Oak             DM        x        D                     I
          qUercus  montana/Chestnut Oak                       DM        x        D     T               I
          QUercus  palustris/Pin Oak                          DW,                I     T       S    S  I
          QUercus  phellos/Willow Oak                         ow                 I     T               I
          Quercus, rubra (borealis)'/Red      Oak             DM                 I     T       T    T  I
          qUercus  stellata/Post Oak                          om        x        I
          QUercus  velutina/Black Oak                         DM                 D                  I
<pb n="41" />

                                                           Table       (continued)

                                                                                                                      t

                                                                                                  Q                   &gt;

                                                                                                               )K
                                                                                 0
                          Botanical Name/Cor=n Nam
                          Robinia pseucoacacia/Black Locust         DM           x         S      I    T   S I S

                          Salix babylonica/Weeping Willow           M                      S      T    S   S T
                          Sassafras albidum/Sassafras               DM           x         D
                          Scphora japonica/Japanese Pagodatree      Dh           x         S
                          Sorbus americana/Mountainash              M                      S      I    S   S T        C*

                          Taxodium distichum/Bald Cypress           MW                     I
                          Thuja  occ! den ta I i s/Arborvi tae      MW                     I      T    T   T I
                          Tilia  americana/Anerican Linden          M,                     I      S    I   S T
                          7ilia  cordata/Lit-leleaf Linden          14                     1      S    T   S T S      P
                          7suga  canadensis/Canadian Hemlock        M                      S      S        S T

                          Uimus  americana/American Elm             M                      I      S    S     T
                          Ulmus  fulva/Slippery Elm                 W                      1           7

                          Zalkova ser-aca/Jaoanese   Zelkova                               S

                                              KEY

                          Moisture Reculrements

                                 MW  Moist to Wet Soil
                                 M   Moist Soil
         L11)                    OM  Dry to Moist Soil
                                 D   Dry Soil
                                 DW  Dry to Wet Soil

                          Withstands Drv or Poor Sterile Soil

                                 X - Does Withstand

                          T@oes of Root System

                                 S - Shallow Lateral Root
                                 I - Intermediate wit', Wide Spreading     Deep Lateral Roots
                                 0 - Deep Penetrating or Tap Root

                          Tolerance  to De-Icinc Salts

                                 T - Tolerant
                                 I - Intermediate Tolerance
                                 S - Sensitive

                          Sensitivi ty to Air Pollution

                                 T - Tolerant
                                 I - Intermediate
                                 S - Sensitive
                                 I - Intermediate or Tolerant depending upon reference source
                                     Sensitive or Intermedlate depending upon reference source
                                     Generally Tolerant of parking lot conditions

                          VDH L T  Aooroved Trees

                                 T - Approved as Tailored Tree for Strips 61 and over
                                 C - Approved as Col umnar Tree for Strt;s 81 and over
                                 P - Approved as Pyramidal Tree for Stri;s 12' and over
                                   - A Variety of the Species has been Approved
<pb n="42" />

                           wildlife populations. Dredqing and filling of marshes for residential, recreational, or
                           other uses further reduces wildlife habitat areas. Among farming practices which have the
                           most serious adverse effect upon wildlife are- 1) the use of chemical pesticides, which
                           have taken a great toll on song and game birds and small. animals; 2) channelization of
                           streams for improved drainage, which reduces stream valley corridor habitats; and 3)
                           clearing of woodland habitat arid reduced field vegetation borders which has accompanied
                           the trend toward increased large-scale farming operations. Land use practices which favor
                           wildlife are suggested below.

                               Guidelines. Although the focus of this guidebook has primarily been toward urban
                           development, there are certain farming practices especially favorable to wildlife which
                           should be mentioned here, both for the professional and "backyard" farmer. Most farm
                           crops, particularly corn, small grains and soybeans, are used for food and cover, to some
                           extent, on a seasonal basis by wildlife. Late harvest and spring tillage, rather than
                           tillage in t:he fall extend the period in which wildlife can utilize crops and crop
                           residues. The addition of new crops and crop rotation provide diversification of food and
                           cover. Fencing livestock out of woodlots conserves wildlife food and cover arid also
                           prevents excess soil erosion and stream sedimentation. Vegetated turning strips at field
                           borders, shrubby fence rows, and windbreaks provide wildlife nesting cover.

                                Residential development can also contribute to the quality of wildlife habitat if
                           properly designed. Cluster development, which allows the maintenan@e of natural
                           vegetation areas, furnishes acceptable habitat for many songbirds, as well as quail,
                           squirrels and rabbits. Dedication of stream valleys and floodplains to open space use not
                           only provides recreational amenities, but promotes the establishment of open space
                           corridors through which wildlife can travel to seek food, cover and water. In addition,
                           the local game warden and the State Wildlife Commission can provide landowners with
                           information and advice on planting materials which can improve wildlife habitat on
                           individual properties.

                 Development Areas

                           Background. This section focuses on areas that are generally suitable for urban
                      development and measures which can be taken to minimize the impact of development in these
                      areas on coastal water resources. Urban development results in wastewater discharges, septic
                      tank effluents, sedimentation from construction activities, and an increase in total rainfall
                      runoff. These changes to the natural system can result in both water quality and flooding
                      problems, which not only effect man's health, safety arid welfare, but also threaten the health
                      of the marine environment, which in Prince William County consists of the Potomac estuary,
                      adjacent tidal marshe's, and' the aquatic and terrestial life they support.

                                                                 -34-
<pb n="43" />

                          Rainfall. or stormwater runoff is referred to as a nonpoint source of water pollution,
                     since it does not originate from a single source such as a wastewater treatment plant discharge
                     and thus is more difficult to control. Typical urban development can cause the following
                     changes in the factors affecting natural stormwater runoff (33):

                          a)   an increase in impermeable surfaces, and consequent elimination of natural surface
                               areas which retain precipitation;
                          b)   a decrease in soil porosity due to compaction, which reduces infiltration of
                               rainfall;
                          c)   construction of improved channels and storm sewers to transport the excess surface
                               water, which affects the rate and timing of rainfall runoff; and
                          d)   a decrease in vegetation, and consequent reduction in transpiration and interception
                               of precipitation by plant systems.

                     Usually one urban change affects several of these factors.   For example, paving reduces the
                     permeability of a natural surface, reduces vegetation and infiltration, thereby increasing peak
                     rates and volumes of runoff while reducing the amount of water that seeps into the soil for
                     groundwater recharge. Figure I in Chapter I illustrates this point.

                          While the impacts of excessive nutrient pollutants from point sources of water pollution,
                     primarily wastewater treatment plants, on eutrophication in the Potomac estuary are well
                     documented (39), the relative contribution of nonpoint sources to this problem has not been
                     well researched. As higher levels of wastewater treatment are implemented within the region
                     and urbanization continues, urban runoff will undoubtedly become an increasingly significant
                     source of water pollution in the estuary and adjacent embayments.

                          Guidelines. The land use/water quality guidelines suggested below for development in
                     coastal watersheds are divided into two sections: (A) general guidelines for the County's land
                     use planning and management efforts in this area; and (B) site-specific guidelines for
                     developers and individual landowners.

                          A.   General guidelines. The following are general guidelines which can assist the County
                               in developinq and implementing land use plans and policies for the coastal zone:

                                    1. Use the small watershed as a basic planning unit. The watershed is a basic
                               topographic unit which includes distinct land/water relationships. The elements of
                               these relationships - slopes, soils, drainage patterns, ground cover - should be
                               inventoried as a basis for understanding the potential water quality impacts of land
                               use changes.

                                    2. Adapt the basic pattern and density of major urban development (100 acres

                                                                 -35-
<pb n="44" />

                                 or more) to the geophysical. characteristics of the watershed. Necessary information
                                 on the characteristics of Proposed urban development includ'es:

                                           a) Percent of impervious cover (pavement, rooftops). For example, the
                                           following figures have been developed by NVPDC for the Occoquan Basin (19):

                                                Land Use                                    Effective % Impervious*

                                           Estate Residential (0.1-0.2 Du/ac)                        3-4%
                                           Low Density Residential (0.5 Du/ac)                       7%
                                           Low Density Residential (1.0 Du/ac)                       124,
                                           Low Density Residential (2.0 Du/ac)                       18%
                                           Medium Density Residential (4.0 Du/ac)                    28%
                                           medium Density/Townhouse (6.0 Du/ac)                      34%
                                           Townhouse (10 Du/ac)                                      40%
                                           Townhouse (15 Du/ac)                                      46%
                                           Garden Apartments (20-25 Du/ac)                           50 - 60%
                                           High-rise Residential ( &gt;25 Du/ac)                         60 - 75%
                                           Institutional                                             40%
                                           Commercial-/Of f ice                                      90 - 95%
                                           industrial                                                65 - 90%

                  Impervious cover directly connected to stormwater drainageway

                                      b)   Disturbed acreage. The following relationships between residential lot
                                           size and the maximum percentage of a site which should be disturbed have
                                           been suggested in Reference (31):

                                                  Residential lot size                       % of Site Disturbed

                                                     5 acres                                         5
                                                     2 acres                                        10
                                                     1 acre                                         15
                                                    1/2 acre                                        25
                                                    1/4 acre                                        50
                                                    1/8 acre                                        75

                                      3. Guide urban development into higher order watersheds.      Higher order
                                 watersheds (i.e., downstream watersheds) generally have more stable streamflows than
                                 upstream areas. Urban development in these other areas may increase problems related
                                 to erosion, sedimentation, and flash floods (1).    Urban development located near the
                                 mouth of a watershed, i.e., in higher order watersheds, often has less total impact

                                                                    -36-
<pb n="45" />

                               on downstream channel segments; e.g., channel enlargement, sedimentation, water
                               quality degradation (7).

                                    4. Guide urban development into the hiqher elevations of the watershed (ridges
                               and plateaus) rather than stream valleys. Development away from waterways,
                               particularly on moderate slopes, not only minimizes adverse water quality impacts on
                               streams, but also protects development from flooding problems (9).

                                    5. Encourage compact development in or adjacent to existing services. This not
                               only lessens pressure to develop environmentally sensitive areas, but allows a more
                               efficient and cost-effective provision of public services (26).

                                    6. Control nonpoint source pollution through land use planning and management.
                               Studies of nonpoint pollution in the Northern Virginia area (21) have resulted in the
                               development of the following land use/nonpoint pollution relationships which can be
                               used in the implementation of nonpoint pollution control measures for tile Prince
                               William County  coastal zone:

                                         a)    For nitrogen, phosphorus, and organic matter (biochemical oxygen
                                               demand), annual nonpoint pollution loadings (lbs/acre/year) from
                                               almost all urban land uses were considerably higher than loadings from
                                               forestland, pasture land, and minimum tillacle cropland; moreover, the
                                               urban land uses with the highest levels of impervious ground cover
                                               (e.g., pavement, rooftops) exhibited the highest annual loading rates,
                                               which in some cases, were equivalent to loading rates from
                                               conventional tillage cropland.

                                         b)    For heavy metals such as lead and zinc, annual nonpoint pollution
                                               loadings from urban land uses were considerably higher than loadings
                                               from rural-agricultural land uses, with the most highly impervious
                                               land uses exhibiting the highest loading rates, and vice versa.

                                         c)    A significant percentage of the plant nutrient loadings from all urban
                                               land uses was consistently unattached to sediment (i.e., found in a
                                               dissolved form), with the mean sediment-borne load in urban runoff
                                               ranging from 27%-42% of the total load for nitrogen and 45%-69% of the
                                               total load for phosphorus; the high quantities of dissolved loadings
                                               are significant from a nonpoint pollution management standpoint since
                                               this portion will generally not be removed by typical stormwater
                                               detention ponds.

                                                                -37-
<pb n="46" />

                                          d)   A relatively small percentage of the lead loadings from all urban land
                                               uses was consistently unattached to sediment, with the mean
                                               sediment-borne load in urban runoff ranging from 85%-94% of  the total
                                               load; the high quantities of suspended lead loadings suggest that
                                               stormwater detention ponds should be rather effective at reducing lead
                                               loadings in urban runoff.

                                          e)   Periodic analyses of pollutant loadings in rainfall revealed that air
                                               pollution is an important source of nonpoint pollution loadings and
                                               that atmospheric contributions of plant nutrients do not appear to be
                                               dependent on land use; however, since highly impervious urban land
                                               uses will convert larger amounts of rainfall to runoff than will urban
                                               land uses of lesser imperviousness, the significance of atmospheric
                                               loadings was found to vary from one land use to the next, ranging from
                                               30%-90% for nitrogen, from 15%-50% for phosphorus, and from 5%-10% for
                                               lead.

                                          f)   A comparison of "population per acrO and nonpoint pollution "loading
                                               rates per acre" for high density and medium density residential land
                                               uses indicates that the high density land uses exhibit lower "per
                                               capita" loading rates for plant nutrients. However, since an acre of
                                               high density residential development exhibits higher plant nutrient
                                               loadings than an acre of medium density residential development,
                                               comparisons of the two densities are best made on a case-by-case basis
                                               that should consider; (a) whether or not the same control population
                                               is to be supported by the two land use patterns, and (b) the amount of
                                               open space preserved by the two conditions.

                                     The NVPDC studies also identified the following relationships between surface
                                runoff and soil types:

                                     1.   As the density of residential households increases from about one per acre
                                          (single family detached) to greater than 22 per acre (high-rise
                                          residential), the volume of surface runoff increases about four times for
                                          silt loam soils, five times for loam soils, and seven times for  sandy loam
                                          soils. Thus, on a per capita basis, the impact of high density    residential
                                          land use on runoff volume is less than for low density residential land use
                                          assuming a constant number of people are to be accommodated within a given
                                          watershed.

                                     2.   Similar findings were made in respect to total nitrogen, total phosphorus,

                                                                  -38-
<pb n="47" />

                                          chemical oxygen demand (COD), and extractable lead runoff pollutant loads.
                                          For soils with a loam texture, about three times as much nitrogen, four
                                          times as much phosphorus, six times as much COD, and nine times the
                                          extractable lead annual runoff pollutants load per acre come from high-rise
                                          residential. developments as from large lot single-family detached
                                          developments. on a per capita basis, loadings from the denser residential
                                          categories were lower than those associated with lower density residential
                                          developments.

                                     3.   Suburban shopping center and central business district types of development
                                          contribute the greatest per acre annual loads of nitroqen, phosphorus, COD
                                          and lead and the greatest per acre annual runoff volume of urban land uses.

                                     4.   For both runoff volumes and runoff j?ollutant loads, the soil texture is an
                                          important variable with looser, more porous soils releasing significantly
                                          less runoff and pollution loads than less porous soils for the land uses
                                          with moderate to low percentages of imperviousness.

                          Nonpoint pollution problems in the County's coastal zone can be addressed by both
                     structural and nonstructural control strategies. The more traditional, structural control
                     measures, including construction of stormwater detention and treatment facilities, land surface
                     maintenance programs, etc., are also the more costly of the two general control strategies.
                     While the need for structural controls may not be eliminated by the implementation of
                     nonstructural strategies such as improved land use management, such a need can be reduced,
                     along with its associated costs.

                          Nonstructural land use guidelines, which can minimize post-development runoff volumes and
                     related pollutant loadings in stabilized urban watersheds, have been incorporated into a
                     Soil Overlay Zone system mentioned above. This generalized soil classification system, which
                     can be of assistance to local planners during master planning and site plan review, is
                     described below.

                               Soil overlay zones. For the purposes of the soil overlay approach, the soils found
                          in the County's coastal zone have been grouped into four broad suitability zones:
                          unsuitable, low density/conservation, medium density, and high/low density. 'I'llese
                          groupings should be reviewed by local planners and soil experts and revised, if necessary.

                               1.    Unsuitable. These areas include tidal marshes and floodplain soils. Flooding
                                     problems and poor drainage make these areas unsuitable for urban development.
                                     Recommended uses: conservation; low-density recreation such as bird watching,
                                     fishing, and hunting.

                                                                  -39-
<pb n="48" />

                                                                                                                               41

                               2.   Low density/Conservation zone. These areas are characterized by steep soils
                                    and/or soils of high runoff potential that would maximize nonpoint pollution
                                    runoff loadings from urban development. This category generally corresponds  to
                                    the "Steep Slope overlay District" of McHenry County, Illinois, discussed above,
                                    with slopes generally excessive.
                                    Recommended uses: Conservation, low-intensity recreation. If conservation uses
                                    are not possible, the placement of large-lot (2-10 acre lots) residential land
                                    uses in these areas is advisable to minimize the amount of impervious surface
                                    area, encourage the maintenance of tree cover, and minimize the amount of
                                    fertilized lawn area. Medium density residential development (1-5 dwelling
                                    units/acre) in these areas may require excessive expenditures for erosion and
                                    runoff pollution control facilities.

                               3.   Medium density zone. These areas contain soils characterized by moderate
                                    permeability and moderate slopes (usually less than 8%), resulting in high soil
                                    moisture storage capacities.
                                    Recommended uses: Medium density residential development (1-5 dwelling
                                    units/acre) in these areas would minimize the washoff of pollutants from
                                    residential lawn surfaces. Medium density residential development generally has
                                    a higher percentage of its total land area in lawn surfaces than other land
                                    uses. Significant dissolved nutrient loadings have been identified in runoff
                                    from residential lawns. Since these pollutant loadings are not associated with
                                    sediment, they cannot be effectively controlled by stormwater detention and
                                    storage measures, which are capable only of trapping sediment and suspended
                                    pollutant loadings. Very costly physical-chemical treatment facilities may  be
                                    required to remove the significant percentages of nitrogen and phosphorus
                                    loadings that are dissolved in runoff from residential areas. By designating
                                    areas with the most permeable soils for urban land uses characterized by high
                                    percentages (60% - 85%) of landscaped lawn surfaces, washoff of dissolved plant
                                    nutrients from lawn surfaces during storm events can be minimized by the natural
                                    filtration and storage capacity of the permeable soils. On the other hand, the
                                    placement of medium density residential development on relatively impermeable
                                    land surfaces can be expected to maximize runoff pollution loadings from the
                                    fertilized lawn areas.

                               4.   High Density/Low Density Zone. These areas contain soils characterized by poor
                                    permeability and slopes generally less than 8%.
                                    Recommended uses: Highly impervious land uses (40% or more impervious) should
                                    be encouraged to locate in sewered areas of these zones to minimize
                                    post-development increases in runoff volumes associated with highly impervious

                                                                -40-
<pb n="49" />

                                     urban development and to preserve the more permeable soils with high moisture
                                     storage capabilities for medium density residential land uses. In unsewered
                                     areas within this zone, however, poor permeability conditions are likely to
                                     limit urban development to low density residential land uses (1 dwelling
                                     unit/acre or less).

                                          Table 5 groups Prince William County coastal soils into these 4 zones.
                                     Their general location in the County's coastal zone is illustrated on maps for
                                     subsections of the coastal zone presented in Chapter III.

                          Implementation. Application of the Soil Overlay Zone technique to future updates in tile
                     comprehensive plan for the County's coastal areas will facilitate the implementation of these
                     guidelines. Such nonstructural. control strategies may not be able to reduce pollutant loads to
                     lire-development conditions, and, therefore, they should be supplemented by the implementation
                     of structural "best management practices" (BMP's).

                          Urban BMP's for controlling nonpoint pollution can be subdivided into three categories:

                          1.   VOLUME CONTROLS: BMP's that channel a specified volume of runoff and dissolved as
                               well as suspended pollutant loadings into the soil profile where pollutant removal
                               can occur throuqh physical, chemical and biological processes.

                          2.   DISCHARGE OR DETENTION CONTROLS: BMP's that store stormwater and rely upon solids
                               settling processes to remove sediment and sediment-related pollutant loadings.

                          3.   SOURCE CONTROLS: Maintenance programs that minimize the accumulation and exposure of
                               pollutants on the land surface and in the atmosphere during dry weather periods.

                     Examples of these types of control measures, along with recommended implementation guidelines,
                     are provided in Table 6.

                          Many of these urban BMP's are quite similar to controls typically required for local
                     stormwater management programs. For example, computer modelling studies (10) by the Northern
                     Virginia Planning District Commission (NVPDC) have shown that, with minor design modifications,
                     traditional stormwater detention ponds can achieve the following pollutant reduction rates for
                     urban land uses:

                          a)   Large-Lot Single Family     20%-30% reductions in annual phosphorus
                               Residential:                loadings; 50%-80% reddctions in annual
                                                           lead loadings.

                                                                 -41-
<pb n="50" />

                                                                                                 Table 5

                                                                                          SOIL OVERLAY ZONES
                                                                                     Prince William County Soils
`										1												  1
                                  ZONE             FIELD NO.       NAME                                   ZONE                FIELD NO.       NAME

                                  Unsuitable       1               Mixed aluvial land                     Medium Density      44B,C           Metapeake fine sandy laom,
                                                   3               Congaree silt loam                                                         gently sloping-sloping
                                                   4               Congaree fine sandy loam                                   45B,C           Matapeake sails
                                                   5               Wehadkee silt loam                                         54B,C           Sassafras fine sandy loam, gently
                                                   6               Local colluvial land                                                       sloping-sloping
                                                   8               Worsham silt loam                                          60B,C           Appling fine sandy loam, gently
                                                   20              Meadowville silt loam                                                      sloping - sloping
                                                   89              Tidal marsh                                                83B             Galestown loamy
                                  Low Density      16C             Beltsville loams,permeable                                                 gently sloping
                                  Conservation                     substratum                                                 87B,C           Wickham loam, gently sloping -
                                                   35C,D,E         Watt shaly  silt loam, sloping-                                            sloping
                                                                   steep                                  High/Low            16B, 37B        Beltsville loams, gently
                                                   3BC             Beltsville  fine sandy loam,           Density                             sloping
                                                                   sloping                                                    38B             Beltsville fine sandy loam
                                                   44C,D,E         Matapeake fine sandy loam,                                                 w/fragipan
                                                                   sloping-steep                                              49B             Lunt soils, gently sloping
                                                   45D,E           Matapeake soils                                            53              Lenoir silt loam
                                                   46B             Mattalies silt loam                                        05              Elkton silt loam
                                                   47              Dragston fine sandy loam                                   97              Altavista silt loam
                                                   49C.E           Lunt soils, sloping-moderately                             144B            Rusten-Beltsville gravelly fine
                                                                   Steep                                                                      sandy loams
                                                   51A,B           Keyport silt loam                                          197D            Altavista-like soils with
                                                   61B,C,D,E       Loamy &amp; gravelly sediments,                                                fragipan
                                                                   steep-sloping                                              460B            Appling-Glenelg soils
                                                   63C,D,E         Louisburg sandy loam, sloping-
                                                                   steep
                                                   65B             Colfax fine sandy loam
                                                   84              Fallsington fine sanyd loam
                                                   121D,E          Manor-Louisburg loams, sloping-
                                                                   steep
                                                   144C,D,E        Ruston-Belsville gravelly fine
                                                                   sandy loams
                                                   161C,D,E        Silty and Clayey sediments
                                                   197C            Altavista-like soils with frag-
                                                                   ipan, sloping
                                                   460D,E          Appling-Gleneg soils, moderately
                                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -    steep-steep   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                                  I As shown in "Interim Soil Survey Report, Prince William County, Virginia, " U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
                                    Service w/VPI-SU, July 1976 and discussed in "Soils of Prince William County," Report No. 8, Prince William County with
                                    VPI-SU Agronomy Department and Soil Conservation Service, n.d.

                                                                                                   -42-
<pb n="51" />

                                                                 Table 6

                                                  URBAN "BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (IMP) GUIDELINES

                          BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE                                            PROPOSED GUIDELINES

            1.  VOLUME CONTROLS                                                 1.  Encourage the utilization of volume controls
                                                                                    wherever soil conditions are acceeptable.
                 A.   Control measures that artificially increase               2.  Volume controls should be designed to control
                      stormwater infiltration at the source                         post-development increases in runoff volumes
                      1. Dutch drain                                                from 10-year design storm.
                      2. Porous pavement                                        3.  Stormwater management ordinances or policies
                      3. Turf grids                                                 that cover the provision of volume controls
                 B.   Control measures that artificially increase                   should be adopted by participating jurisdictions.
                      stormwater infiltration after preliminary
                      concentrations
                      1.  Seepage lilt
                      2.  Swale storage with seepage pit
                      3.  Rooftop storage with outlet to seepage
                          pit
                      4.  Stormwater detention pond with seepage
                          pit

           II.   DISCHARGE C0NTOLS	                                            1.  To Increase stormwater detention time and annual
                                                                                    sediment capture rates, utilize one of the following
                 A.   On-line storage ponds                                         design criterion for onsite detention storage
                      1.  Onsite Detention Ponds                                    facilities:
                      2.  Offsite Retention Ponds                                    a. Release rates should be based on pre-development
                                                                                        peak runoff from 2-year design storm event;
                 D.   Off-line storage plus stormwater treatment                        storage volume should be based on comparison of
                      1. Land application of stormwater during.                         post-development runoff from 10-year design
                         non-storm periods                                              storm event and pre-development runoff from
                      2. Physical-chemical treatment                                    2-year design storm event.
                                                                                    b.  Release rates should be based on pre-development
                                                                                        peak runoff from 2-year design storm event and
                                                                                        10-year design storm event, storage volume should
                                                                                        be based on comparison of pre- and post-development
                                                                                        runoff front the 10-year design storm event.
                                                                                2.  Encourage the use of innovative outlet structure de-
                                                                                    signs to increase trap efficiency of on-line detention
                                                                                    storage facilities (e.g., perforated riser pipes).

                                                                         -43-
<pb n="52" />

                                                                 Table 6
                                                                  (con't)
                         BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES                                           PROPOSED GUIDELI

           II. DISCHARGE CONTROLS (continued)                              3. Encourage the installation of prototype stormwater
                                                                                treatment facilities through:
                                                                                a. Federal demonstration projects
                                                                                    o USEPA "Clean Lakes" Programs (Section 314 of
                                                                                       Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments)
                                                                                    o USEPA Research Grants
                                                                                b.  Site plan review negotiations
                                                                            4.  Stormwater management ordinances or policies that
                                                                                cover the provision of discharge controls should be
                                                                                adopted by participating jurisdictions.

           III. SOURCE CONTROLS                                             1.  To reduce loadings from fertilized lawn surfaces,
                                                                                incorporate the following soil permeability guidelines
                A. Nonstructural Control Measures                               into local site plan review and master planning
                    1. Land use controls to achieve reductions                  programs:
                       in runoff volumes and loading rates                      a.  Encourage the placement of medium density resi-
                       a.  Soil permeability guidelines for                         dential land uses on the least permeable soils
                           site plan review and master planning                 b.  Encourage the placement of highly impervious land
                       b.  Consideration of density tradeoffs                       uses on the least permeable soils
                           (i.e., growth centers with rela-                     c.  If areas with soils of low permeablity are not
                           tively high net densities will                           suited to highly impervious land uses, encourage
                           generally produce lower nonpoint                         conservation or large-lot single family land uses
                           pollution loading rates per capita
                           than sprawling land use pattern                  2.  To reduce per capita loadings, consider the use of
                           with relatively low not densities)                   residential clustering techniques during the develop-
                           during master plan preparation                       ment of local master plans
                    2.   Improved fertilizer and pesticide manage-          3.  Encourage the adoption of improved plant chemical
                         ment practices to minimize the accumulation            management practices
                         of potential pollutants on pervious surfaces       4.  Develop local urban cleanliness programs
                         a.  public education programs                      5.  Develop programs for improved cleaning and maintenance
                         b.  Improved management guidelines for                 of paved areas and drainage facilities
                             plant chemical applications to public
                             lands (e.g., require use of slow-
                             release fertilizers)
                         c.  incentives or disincentives for improved
                             plant chemical management practices
                             on private property (e.g., restrictions
                             on use of high-nitrogen fertilizer;
                             incentives for the use of slow-release
                             fertilizers).                         -44-
<pb n="53" />

                                                                Table 6

                                                                 (con't)

                         BEST MANAGEMENT PRACHCES                                       PROPOSED GUIDELINES

                 SOURCE CONTROLS (continued)

                     3. Urban Cleanliness Measures
                         a. Public education programs
                            o Anti-litter
                            o Management of domestic pet'wastes
                         b. Economic incentive programs
                            o Recycling of automobile waste
                               materials (e.g., used oil)

                 D. Structural Control Measures
                     1.  Improved cleaning and maintenance
                         programs fors
                         a. Streets
                         b. Parking lots
                         c. Urban drainageways and drainage
                            structures

                                                                       -45-
<pb n="54" />

                          b)   Medium Density Single       25%-45% reductions in annual phosphorus
                               Family Residential:         loadings; 50%-75% reductions in annual
                                                           lead loadings.

                          c)   Townhouse/Garden Apt.:      30%-50% reductions in annual phosphorus
                                                           loadings; 45%-70% reductions in annual
                                                           lead loadings.

                          d)   Shopping Center:            30%-50% reductions in annual phosphorus
                                                           loadings; 50%-75% reductions in annual
                                                           lead loadings.

                     Detention ponds that capture the "first flush" of nonpoint pollution loadings and provide the
                     maximum amount of offline detention can be expected to provide pollutant removal rates that are
                     somewhat higher. Likewise, "volume" controls (e.g., seepage pits, Dutch drains) that reduce
                     the amount of runoff from the urban land use can generally be expected to provide higher
                     removal rates since these measures are capable of removing both dissolved and sediment-borne
                     loadings. However, comparisons of estimated BMP efficiencies with runoff pollution loading
                     rate increases resulting from urban development suggest that most BMP's will not be able to
                     prevent urban loadings from exceeding predevelopment conditions (8). This affirms the
                     recommendation that the implementation of the land use planning and management guidelines
                     outlined herein are an important supplement to traditional structural control techniques.

                          More detailed information on the engineering aspects of urban BMP's can be obtained from
                     the State "Urban Best Management Practices Handbook" (38). Further information on the relative
                     efficiencies and cost effectiveness of these measures has been developed by the NVPDC as part
                     of the Occoquan Basin Management Program (10).

                          B.   Site-Specific Guidelines. measures can be taken by developers and individual land-
                               owners to reduce adverse impacts on coastal waters at the site design, site
                               preparation, and site occupancy stages of development. Table 7 indicates
                               considerations of natural conditions during site selection and design to minimize
                               post-development runoff pollution loadings. The most damaging impact of site
                               preparation is erosion resulting from construction activities. Typical erosion rates
                               from construction sites as compared to other land uses is given below (9):

                               Land Use                            Sediment Produced (Tons/sq.mi./yr.)

                               Forest                                         9-50
                               Urban/Suburban                                50-100
                               Farmland                                   1,000-5,000
                               Denuded construction sites                25,000-50,000

                                                                 -46-
<pb n="55" />

                                                                         Table 7

                                                      SITE-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES FOR MINIMIZING RUNOFF POLLUTION

                                                                  LOADINGS FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                                       Recommended Land Uses for Areas Exhibiting Specified Physical Features

                                                      Soil Permeabilit                                Land Slope

                                Land Use
                                Category        Slow(&lt;2 in/hr)    Moderate(2-6 in/hr)      Severe(15%+)   Stee.-(7-15%)   Moderate (&lt;7%

                                .1-.2 DUA             x                                        x                 x

                                .2-.5 DUA             x                                        x                 x

                                .5 DUA                x                                        x                 x

                                1 DUA                                     x                                      x              x

                                2 DUA                                     x                                                     x

                                2-4 DUA                                   x                                                     x

                                4-8 DUA                                   x

                                B-12 DUA              x                   x                                                     x

                                12-16 DUA             x                   x                                                     x

                                High Rise
                                Residential           x                                                                         x

                                Co,rdnercial          x

                                Forest
                                Conser-vation         x                                        x               x

                                            Recommended for townhouse/garden apartment projects with impervious ground
                                            cover percentages less than 40%.

                                                                       -47-
<pb n="56" />

                          Developers and landowners contemplating any land-disturbing activities must comply with
                          the County sediment and erosion control ordinance, which requires a permit for such
                          activities and specifies acceptable erosion and sediment control measures.

                               Pollution resulting from stabilized urban areas can also be managed. Studies by the
                          NVPDC and the Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Lab have shown that significant nutrient
                          loadings can be attributed to fertilized lawn surfaces (21). Much of the problem is the
                          result of improper'timing and rates of fertilizer application. Contrary to popular belief
                          and the advertising of fertilizer retailers, the best time to apply fertilizer is in the
                          fall, before the first frost. This allows the fertilizer time to soak into the soil all
                          winter. The high saturation of soils during most of the Spring when fertilizer use is
                          highest will reduce the absorption of fertilizer applied at this time. A light
                          application in the Spring--half the manufacturer's recommended amount--will promote
                          moderate growth and reduce the incidence of d'isease. In addition, homeowners should be
                          encouraged to choose fertilizers with high percentages of slow-release nitrogen. The
                          slow-release nitrogen is preferable from a nonpoint pollution control standpoint because
                          it is less susceptible to being washed away and thus contributing to the eutrophication of
                          the estuary. Slow-release fertilizers also save labor, since fewer applications are
                          required.

                               Recommended fertilizer applications vary according to grass type and soil
                          composition, but a general rule of thumb for both the establishment and maintenance of
                          lawns is two pounds of nitrogen per 1,000 square feet of lawn area. For example, that
                          would be approximately 30 to 40 pounds of 5-10-5, 6-12-6, or 5-10-10 fertilizer per 1,000
                          square feet.                                                                                           It
                               These measures will not only improve water quality, but will assure maximum
                          effectiveness of the fertilizers while achieving cost-savings for the homeowner.
                          Homeowners may obtain advice on lawns and gardens from the local extension agent of the
                          Virginia Polytechnical Institute and State University (VPI&amp;SU) Cooperative Extension
                          Service. VPI&amp;SU offers a free soil test which determines individual site lime and
                          fertilizer needs. Appendix III provides a more detailed fertilizer guide for typical
                          turfgrass of Prince William County, as recommended by the VPI&amp;SU Extension Division.

                                                                -48-
<pb n="57" />

                                                      References of Chapter 11

                I - Atlanta Regional Conunission, "Chattahooche Corridor Study," Atlanta:  ARC, 1972.

                2.  Baltimore Regional Planning Council, "A Plan and Program for the Acquisition and Development of
                    Open Space in the Baltimore Region. Part I: Goals, Objectives, and Standards," Baltimore: RPC,
                    1969.

                3.  Barick, Frank B., and T. Stuart Critcher, Wildlife and Land Use Plannin with Particular
                    Reference to Coastal Counties, Interagency Wildlife Coordination Section, North Carolina
                    Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, April 1975.

                4.  Bormann, F. If. and G.E. Likens, "Nutrient Cycling," Science, Vol. 155, 1967, pp. 424-429.

                5.  Burroughs, Max A., "Gabions: economical, environmentally compatible bank control," Civil
                    Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, January 1979.

                6.  Clark, John, Coastal Ecosystem Management: A Technical Manual for the Conservation of Coastal
                    Zone Resources, The Conservation Foundation, John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc., New York, 1977.

                7.  Coughlin, Robert E. and Hammer, Thomas R. Stream Quality Preservation Through Planned Urban
                    Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, 1973.

                8.  DeFalco, Paul, Jr., "The Estuary, Septictank of the megalopolis," Estuaries, G.H. Lauff, ed.,
                    Pub. No. 83, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C., 1967,
                    pp. 701-703.

                9.  Elfers, Karl and Maynard M. Hufschmidt, Open Space and Urban Water Management, Phase 1: Goals
                    and Criteria, and Phase II, Case Studies and Findings, Water Resources Research Institute,
                    University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, January 1975 and December 1976.

               10.              , "Estimated Pollutant Removal Rates for Typical Urban 'Best Management Practices'
                    (BMP's) for Controlling Nonpoint Pollution," interim report prepared for the Metropolitan
                    Washington Water Resources Planning Board, February 1979.

               ll*  Fairfax County 1978 Public Facilities Manual, Vols. 1, 2, and 3.

               12.  Florida Coastal Coordinating Council, Florida Coastal Zone Management- Atlas, Tallahassee,
                    Florida, 1972.

               13.  Frankenberg, D. and C. W. Westerfield, "Oxygen demand &amp; oxygen depletion capacity of sediments
                    from Wassaw Sound, Georgia," Bulletin of the Georgia Academy of Science, Vol. 26, 1968, pp. 160-172.

                                                                  -49-
<pb n="58" />

              14.  Georgia Mountains Planning and Development Commission, Georgia Mountains Areawide Land
                   Development Policies and Procedures Manual, Gainesville, Georgia, January, 1974.

              15.  Hobbie, John E. and B. J. Copeland, "Effects of Control of Nutrients on Estuarine Ecosystems,"
                   and Schubel, J. R. and R. H. Meade, "Man's Impact on Estuarine Sedimentation," Estuarine
                   Pollution Control &amp; Assessment, Vol. I, Office of Water Planning and Standards, U.S. Environ-
                   mental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

              16.  Institute for Environmental Studies, Regional Science Research Institute and U.S. Geological
                   Survey, The Plan and Program for the Brandywine, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania,
                   1968.

              17.  Marcellus, Kenneth, George Davis and Gene M. Silberhorn, "Local Management of Wetlands;
                   Environmental Considerations," Special Report No. 35, Virginia Institute of Marine Science,
                   Gloucester Point, Va., June 1973.

              18.  McHarg, Ian, Design With Nature, Gardin City: Doubleday &amp; Co., 1969.

              19.  Northern Virginia Planning District Commission, "Assessments of Water Quality Management
                   Strategies with the Occoquan Basin Computer Model," prepared for the Occoquan Technical Review
                   Committee, January 1979.

              20.  Northern Virginia Planning District Commission, "Occoquan Basin Nonpoint Pollution Management
                   Program," December 1978 (Rev.)

              21.  Northern Virginia Planning District Commission and VPI &amp; SU, "Occoquan/Four Mile Run Nonpoint
                   Source Correlation Study," prepared for the Metropolitan Washington Water Resources Planning
                   Board, July 1978; and Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory, Summary Edition of the Occoquan
                   Quarterly: 1973-1976, Vol IV, No. 4, Spring 1976.

              22.  Odum, E. P., Fundamentals of Ecology, Third Edition, W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1971.

              23.  Odum H. T. and K. C. Ewel, eds., "Cypress wetlands for water management, recycling and conser-
                   vation," Annual Report to the National Science Foundation (RANN) and the Rockerfeller Foundation,
                   Center for Wetlands, University of Florida, Gainesville, 1974.

              24.  Office of Coastal Zone Management, U.S. Department of Commerce, and North Carolina Coastal Manage-
                   ment Program, N.C. Dept. of Natural Resources and Community Development, State of North Carolina
                   Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement, Washington, D.C., U:S. Dept.
                   of of Commerce, August 1978.

                                                               -50-
<pb n="59" />

                25.  Raleigh, City of; Wake County, and Wake Soil and Water Conservation District, "Standards and
                     Specifications for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control," Raleigh, N.C.: City of Raleigh, October
                     1972, with revisions 1.973, 1974.

                26.  Real Estate Research Institute, The Costs of Sprawl, prepared for the Council on Environmental
                     Quality, HUD, and EPA, Washington, April 1974.

                27.  Smith, J. N., The Decline of Galveston Bay, the Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C., 1972.

                28.  Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, "Floodland and Shoreland Development Guide,"
                     Waukesha: SWRPC, 1968.

                29.  Theberge, Louise and Conald F. Boesch, "Values and Management Strategies for Nonvegetated Tidal
                     Wetlands," Special Scientific Report No. 90, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloncester
                     Point, Va., December 1978.

                30.  Thurow, Charles, William Toner and Duncan Erley, Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands: A
                     Practical Guide for Local Administrators, Planning Advisory Service Report Nos. 307, 308,
                     American Society of Planning Officials, June 1975.

                31.  Tourbier, Joachim, et.al-. "The Cristina Basin: The Protection of Water Resources as a Basis for
                     Planning in Developing Areas," Water Resources Center, University of Del-aware, Newark, 1973.

                32.  Tulare County Planning Department and Grunwald, Crawford Associates, "Environmental Resources
                     Management Element," Hanford, California: Tulare County Planning Department, 1972.

                33.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Preventive Approaches to Stormwater Management," EPA
                     440/9-77-001, Water Planning Division, Office of Water Planning and Standards, Washington, D.C.,
                     January 1977.

                34.  Valiela, I. and J. M. Teal, "Nutrient limitation in salt marsh vegetation," Ecology of Malophytes
                     (11. J. Reimold and W. Ii. Queen, eds.), Academic Press, New York, 1973.

                35.  Valiela, I., J. M. Teal, and C. D. Van Raalte, "Nutrient and sewage sludge enrichment experiments
                     in a salt marsh ecosystem," INTECOL Symposium on Physiological Ecology of Plants &amp; Animals in
                     Extreme Environments, Dubrovnik, 1972.

                36.  Virginia Institute of Marine science, "Coastal Wetlands of Virginia: Guidelines for Activities
                     Affecting Virginia Wetlands," Interim Report No. 3, Gloucester Point, Va., June 1974.

                                                                -51-
<pb n="60" />

               37.  Virginia Institute of Marine Science, "Shoreline Situation Report; Prince William County,
                    Virginia," Gloucester Point, Va., 1976.

               38.  Virginia State Water Control Board, "Urban Best Management Practices Handbook," Richmond, Va.,
                    May 1979.

               39.  Water Resources Planning Board, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, "Metropolitan
                    Washington Water Quality Management Plan," Washington, D.C., March 1978.

                                                                 -52-
<pb n="61" />

                                                              CHAPTER III

                                               COASTAL RESOURCES OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY

                  Introduction

                       An essential- part of coastal resources planning and management is an inventory of existing
                  resources in the coastal zone, both natural and man-made. This chapter presents such an inventory
                  for Prince William County's coastal zone. While this inventory attempts to be comprehensive,
                  available information is usually somewhat generalized, and should be supplemented by site-specific
                  determinations when making individual land use decisions.

                       To simplify the presentation, the coastal zone has been divided into 5 segments, based on
                  natural divisions of the shoreline such as creeks and points of land. For each segment, information
                  is provided on the characteristics of both the shoreline and the fastlands, including both natural
                  and man-made coastal resources. The approximate land area of each segment is shown in Table 8. For
                  wetlands, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) Site and Type number from the State
                  wetlands inventory program is Indicated to assist in management decisions concerning these regulated
                  areas. All resource information is illustrated on a series of maps for each segment, which include
                  natural features, existing land use, future land use, and soil suitability zones. The soil
                  suitability classifications have been defined previously in Chapter II.

                       The resource inventory must be supplemented by the land use planning and management guidelines
                  provided in Chapter II. These guidelines are designed to assist in making land use decisions
                  concerning the County's coastal resources. In order to facilitate cross-referencing, the resource
                  types identified in this chapter correspond to the resource categories discussed in Chapter 11.

                  SEGMENT 1: 1-95 Bridge to Marumsco Creek
                       A. Characteristics of Shoreline. (See Map 2.)

                            1. Natural Resources
                                 a)   Wetlands. The total area of wetlands in Segment I is 87 acres. Individual
                                      wetland sites are as follows:
                                      (1)  Occoquan River at Woodbridge. Area: 5 acres; VIMS SITE #: 23; VIMS TYPE
                                           Ix   This is a low, embayed marsh dominated by pickerel weed, arrow arum
                                           and yellow pond lily, which includes some areas of tidal flats.
                                      (2)  Occoquan River. Area: 26 acres; VIMS SITE It: 24; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                                This is a pocket marsh of high elevation, dominated by hibiscus and
                                           jewel weed with a fringe of pickerel weed.
                                      (3)  Conrad Island. Area: 2 acres; vims SITE It: 22; VIMS TYPE #: VII

                                                                 -53-
<pb n="62" />

                                                                  Table 8

                                      Land Area in Prince William County Coastal Zone By Segment

               Segment                                 Shoreline Boundaries                     Approximate Acr eage

                                               1-95 Bridge to Marumsco Creek                           1945

                  2                            Marumsco Cree k to Freestone Point                      3382

                  3                            Freestone Point to Cockpit Point                        4868

                  4                            Cockpit Point to Shipping Point                         4649

                  5                            Shipping Point to Chopawamsic Creek                     3334

               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

               TOTAL COASTAL ZONE                                                                     18,178

                                                                    -54-
<pb n="63" />

                                               A small fringing marsh is found here, dominated by the pickerel
                                          weed-arrow arum community of the island.
                                      (4) Marumsco Creek.   Area: 55 acres;  VIMS SITE It: 21; TYPE #: XI
                                               A creek marsh with pickerel weed and pond lily is located along the
                                          creek channels.   VIMS reports evidence of some channelization.

                                b)    Beaches. (Total length: 2 miles)
                                          Beaches in Segment 1 are of fair to poor quality for recreation use. These
                                      beaches are fairly wide and often vegetated. Of the 2 miles of beach within
                                      Segment 1, 0.1 mile is under the 1-95 bridge and 1.4 miles are within the U.S.
                                      Military Reservation, thus restricting public access and usage.

                                c)    Bluffs. (Total length: 0.2 miles)
                                          The short distance of bluff in this segment is located adjacent to 26 acres
                                      of wetlands, making preservation especially important.

                           2.   Man-made Resources. Approximately 45% of the shoreline in segment 1 i's in federal
                                ownership. Man-made features of the shoreline include:
                                a)    Shore Protection Structures. (Total length: 1.9 miles)
                                          There are about 5,600 feet of effective rubble rip rap along the shoreline
                                      of the Military Reservation.

                                b)    Shorefront Recreational Facilities.
                                          There is a boat ramp at the Route I bridge and a 78-acre Veterans Memorial
                                      Park on the west side ot Marumsco Creek, owned and operated by the County.

                      B. Characteristics of Fastlands

                           1.   Natural Pesour-ce-s
                                a)    soils and Slopes.  (See Map 3.)
                                          The major remaining undeveloped area, north of the Military Reservation and
                                      east of Woodbridge, contains moderate slopes with varying moisture storage
                                      capabilities which can support a mixture of medium density and high density land
                                      uses. While current zoning in this area (see Land Use below) proposes such a
                                      mixture, the zoning pattern does not appear to be entirely compatible with the
                                      soil suitabilities for nonpoint pollution management within this area. Nonpoint
                                      pollution control considerations seem to indicate that more of this land might
                                      be programmed for medium density residential uses and less for industrial. and
                                      townhouse uses, within market limitations.

                                                                 -55-
<pb n="64" />

                              b)   Vegetation and Wildlife. (See Map 2.)
                                        Because of the built-up nature of this segment, the only significant
                                   vegetation and wildlife habitat area is found at the mouth of Marumsco Creek.
                                   It is recommended that the existing conservation use of this area be maintained.

                              c)   Waterways. (See Map 2.)
                                        Occoquan Creek, Belmont Bay, and Marumsco Creek are the most significant
                                   water bodies in this segment. While most areas of the shoreline have elevations
                                   of at least 10 feet msl, part of the Military reservation south of Taylors Point
                                   is susceptible to flooding during periods of abnormally high water. Further
                                   intense urban development above Marumsco Creek may threaten the embayed wetlands
                                   at its mouth. Nonpoint pollution control measures which might be instituted to
                                   minimize the addition of nutrients and other pollutants to this area from future
                                   development are discussed in Chapter II.

                         2.   Man-made Resources    (See Maps 4 and 5.)
                              a)   Land use
                                        Most of the segment is programmed for urban or governmental use.
                                   Townhouse, apartment, and heavy industrial land uses are zoned for the major
                                   undeveloped area, north of the Military Reservation. Conservation-Park/Public
                                   Use dominates in the area adjacent to Marumsco Creek.

                              b)   Developments of Regional Benefit/Key Facilities
                                        The U.S. Military Reservation at Deephole Point is the primary non-local
                                   land use in this segment. If a State Coastal Resources Management Program is
                                   established, land use decisions at federal installations would be required to  be
                                   consistent with coastal land use plans and policies.

               SEGMENT 2: Marumsco Creek to Freestone Point
                    A. Characteristics of Shoreline (See Map 6.)

                         1. Natural Resources
                              a)   Wetlands. The total area of wetlands in Segment 2 is approximately 333 acres.
                                   Individual wetland sites are as follows:
                                   (1)  Upper Farm Creek. Area: 36 acres; VIMS SITE #: 20; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                             This is a creek marsh, crossed by a dirt road, but a culvert allows
                                        some tidal flushing.
                                   (2)  Lower Farm Creek. Area: 7 acres;    VIMS SITE #: 19; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                             This is a pocket marsh, containing a pickerel weed fringe with other
                                        species landward.
                                   (3)  Occoquan Bay. Area: 61 acres; VIMS SITE #: 18; VIMS TYPE #: XI

                                                               -56-
<pb n="65" />

                                                A large fringing marsh is found here; cattails dominate its interior.
                                      (4) Neabsco Creek. Area: 229 acres; VIMS SITE It: 17; VIMS TYPE It: XI
                                                Neabsco Creek contains a large creek marsh which consists of a mixed
                                           freshwater marsh community.

                                b)    Beaches. (Total length: 1.6 miles)
                                           Beach quality is poor to good for recreational use. Narrow, strip beaches,
                                      often vegetated, are found near Featherstone Shore and from the railroad bridge
                                      at Neabsco to Freestone Point. Small pocket beaches occur in several areas near
                                      Bayside Park and south of Featherstone. The beaches at Neabsco and Firestone
                                      Point, however, are fairly wide and clean.

                                c)    Bluffs. (Total length: 0.3 miles)
                                           Bluffs in this segment are found at Freestone Point. This area is
                                      experiencing some minor erosion due to rainfall runoff and undercutting of the
                                      cliff base by wave action from the Potomac, but the rocky composition of these
                                      bluffs apparently allows them to withstand major erosive forces.

                           2.   Man-made Resources.. Approximately 61% of Segment 2 shoreline is in private
                                ownership, with 25% in federal ownership and 15% owned by the County. Man-made
                                features of the shoreline include:

                                a)    Shore Protection Structures. (Total length: 1.5 miles)
                                           There are approximately 3,600 feet of effective rubble riprap from Deephole
                                      Point to the mouth of Marumsco Creek. Bayside Park and Featherstone Shores have
                                      about 3,400 feet of bulkhead, most of which VIMS has judged to be effective.
                                      This area also contains several groins. The marina just north of Featherstone
                                      Shores has approximately 300 feet of bulkhead, mainly for commercial purposes.
                                      Another 1200 feet of hulkheadinq, primarily serving a cosmetic rather than
                                      erosion control function, is found at the marina facilities on the south bank of
                                      Marumsco Creek. The railroad bridge is stabilized on the east side by an
                                      additional 50 feet of rubble riprap.

                                b)    Shorefront Recreational-Facilities.
                                           Docking facilities, boat ramps and piers are found at Bayside Park,
                                      Featherstone shores, and Neabsco.

                      B.   Characteristics of Fastlands

                           1.   Natural Resources.
                                a)    Soils and Slopes. (See Map 7)

                                                                 -57-
<pb n="66" />

                                          Extreme slopes are associated with the minor stream valleys draining into
                                     the north side of Neabsco Creek. Additional severe slope conditions occur along
                                     the southern bank, near Neabsco and extending to Freestone Point. The portion
                                     of this segement which is most suitable for intensive urban development, to the
                                     west of Belmont Bay, is already almost entirely devoted to urban land uses.
                                     Conflicting land use zoning and suitability appears to occur, however, in the
                                     upper portion of the Farm Creek marsh system, which is programmed for heavy
                                     industrial use. While the remainder of the segment is primarily classified in
                                     the low density soil suitability zone, much of this land is committed or
                                     programmed for medium and high intensity urban land uses.

                               b)    Vegetation and Wildlife. (See Map 6.)
                                          Extensive woodlands are found in the hilly areas on either side of Neabsco
                                     Creek, to the south of existing urban development in the Marumsco Woods area.
                                     These forested areas are predominantly hardwood, with scattered pine and mixed
                                     pine-hardwood areas. Large expanses of wetlands occur in the Neabsco Creek
                                     system and to the east of the railroad tracks along Farm Creek. Both the forest
                                     lands and wetlands represent significant wildlife habitats, between them
                                     supporting such important hunting species as deer, wild turkey, quail, rabbit,
                                     squirrel, and fur-bearing mammals, such as the otter.

                               c)    Waterways. (See Map 6.)
                                          Belmont Bay and Neabsco Creek are the most significant water bodies in this
                                     segment. The only area susceptible to flooding, aside from the tidal marshes,
                                     is the Bayside Park area. According to the VIMS Shoreline survey (37), many
                                     structures here are below the 10-foot msl contour line, several of which might
                                     be inundated during periods of abnormally high water. The extensive Neabsco
                                     Creek wetlands system provides both flood protection and water quality benefits
                                     in its present state, including the filtering of effluent from a sewage
                                     treatment plant on its southern shore.

                          2.   Man-made Resources
                                                (See Maps 8 and 9)
                               a)    Land use.
                                          Most of the upper portion of Segment 2 is presently in urban development,
                                     including commercial, medium density residential, and townhouse land uses. A
                                     section to the northwest of Neabsco Creek is zoned for a similar mixture of
                                     urban uses. much of the southern bank of Neabsco Creek is committed to medium
                                     density residential development, with some commercial land uses existing at
                                     Neabsco. Plans for a large public park in the historical Freestone Point area
                                     are currently being developed.

                                                                 -58-
<pb n="67" />

                                   b)    Developments of Reqional Benefit
                                              There are no developments of greater than local significance in this
                                         segment.

                   SEGMENT 3: Freestone Point to Cockpit Point
                        A. Characteristics of Shoreline. (See Map 10.)

                              1.   Natural Resources
                                   a)    Wetlands. The total area of wetlands in segment 3 is approximately 212 acres.
                                   Individual wetlands locations are as follows:
                                         (1)  Powell's Creek. Area: 1-23 acres;      VIMS SITE It: 16;   VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                                   A large creek marsh is found at the mouth of Powell's Creek, the
                                              lowest downstream portions of which are dominated by pickerel weed and
                                              yellow pond lily. Wild rice and pickerel weed dominate the interior of the
                                              marsh, while the uplands and woody swamp are bordered by cattails, hibiscus
                                              and smartweeds. This marsh is a valuable fish nursery and spawning area as
                                              well as a wildlife habitat.
                                         (2)  Powell's Creek. Area: 89 acres
                                                   A fringe marsh extends along either side of the mouth of Powell's
                                              Creek.

                                   b)    Beaches. (Length: 2.2 miles)
                                              There are beaches of fair to good quality for recreational use along tjie
                                         Potomac shore in this segment, with some long stretches of wide, clean beaches.

                                   c)    Bluffs. (Length: 0.34 mile)
                                              The small bluff area in this segment is located adjacent to the fringe
                                         marsh on Powell's Creek.

                              2.   Man-made Resources. Ownership of Segment 3 shoreline is completely private.
                                   a)    Shore Protection Structures. (Length: 0.2 mile)
                                              There is one groin located along a beach area which VIMS has judged to be
                                         effective.

                                   b)    Shorefront Recreational Facilities.
                                              There is one large fishing pier and a boathouse on the Potomac beach.

                        B.    Characteristics of Fastlands

                              1.   Natural Resources.
                                   a)    Soils and Slopes. (See Map 11.)
                                              Much of the area bordering Powell's Creek is characterized by soil and

                                                                      -59-
<pb n="68" />

                                    slope conditions which are unsuitable for urban development. The majority of
                                    the developed land in this segment is most suitable for low density residential
                                    development or conservation uses, with small scattered areas also suitable for
                                    medium or high density development. Access to much of this area is hindered by
                                    steep slope conditions which may reduce the feasibility of higher density urban
                                    development in this segment.

                              b)    Vegetation and Wildlife (See Map 10.)
                                         The majority of the segment (77%) is in unmanaged woodlands. There is some
                                    waterfowl hunting in the marshy areas of Powell's Creek. Bald eagles are found
                                    along the coast with small fur-bearing mammals such as muskrats, otters and
                                    beavers inhabiting the waterway areas. Turkey and deer are also commonly found
                                    in this segment. Existing wildlife habitats may be threatened by intensive
                                    urban development in this area.

                              c)    Waterways (See Map 10.)
                                         Powell's Creek is the major water body in this segment. The land rises
                                    rapidly from the coast and is not subject to flooding in most of this segment,
                                    except for the marshy areas around the mouth of Powell's Creek. Sport boating
                                    and fishing are common in this area.

                         2.   Man-made Resources.
                              a)    Land Use. (See Maps 12 and 13.)
                                         Approximately one-half of the shoreline of this segment is zoned for
                                    industrial use while the northern shore is designated for parkland. Much of the
                                    land area in the interior of the segment is currently devoted to sinqle family
                                    or townhouse developments. Large areas remain uncommitted, with most of the
                                    committed areas designated for single family homes and townhouses.

                              b)    Developments of Regional Benefits/Key Facilities
                                         A future public park at Freestone Point is planned for this segment.

               SEGMENT 4: Cockpit Point to Shipping Point
                    A.   Characteristics of Shorelands. (See Map 14.)

                         1.   Natural Resources
                              a)    Wetlands . Segment 4 contains a total of 242 acres of wetlands. Individual
                                    sites include:
                                    (1) Lower Quantico Creek. Area: 4 acres; VIMS SITE #: 8; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                              This is a spit marsh with diverse, high marsh flora, such as hibiscus
                                         and water hemp, and a pickerel weed fringe.

                                                               -60-
<pb n="69" />

                                         (2)  Middle Quantico Creek. Area: 17 acres; VIMS SITE It. 9; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                                   This site contains a large pocket marsh of low elevation which is
                                              dominated by pickerel weed and yellow pond lily, with other species along
                                              the landward border.
                                         (3)  Middle Quantico Creek. Area; 3 acres; VIMS SITE It: 10; VTMS TYPE It: XI
                                                   A low elevation spit marsh which is dominated by pickerel weed and
                                              pond lily, is also found midway tip Quantico Creek.
                                         (4)  Upper Quantico Creek. Area: 109 acres; VIMS SITE It: 11; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                                   A large, fringing marsh with yellow pond lily extends onto tidal flats
                                              in Upper Quantico Creek while pickerel weed and wild rice dominate the
                                              interior of this wetlands site.
                                         (5)  Upper Quantico Creek. Area: 106 acres; VTMS SITE: 4: 12; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                                   A large creek marsh with yellow pond lily is located along the
                                              channels and the entire lower section of Upper Quantico Creek. Pickerel
                                              weed and wild rice dominate the interior of this site.
                                         (6)  Middle Quantico Creek. Area; I acre; VIMS SITE It: 13; VIMS TYPE #: VI
                                                   This is a small pocket marsh dominated by cattails.
                                         (7)  Middle Quantico Creek. Area: 1 acre; VIMS SITE #: 14; VIMS TYPE It: XI
                                                   An additional small pocket marsh which is dominated by cattails and
                                              reed grass is found in the middle section of Quantico Creek. The reed
                                              grass indicates that the marsh has been disturbed, probably by fill.
                                         (8)  Middle Quantico Creek. Area: I acre; VIMS SITE It: 15; VIMS TYPE ff: XI
                                                   This site contains a small fringing marsh with pickerel weed along the
                                              water channel and marsh hibiscus dominating the interior.

                                   b)    Beaches.  (Length: 4.7 miles)
                                              Beaches in Segment 4 are fair to poor quality for recreation use. There
                                         are several beach areas in the northern part of this segment that are fairly
                                         wide, but most of the beaches in the segment are narrow, strip beaches.

                                   c)    Bluffs.   (Length: 0.9 miles)
                                              Bluffs in this segment are located along the Potomac shore. The bluffs
                                         north of the VEPCO substation at Possum Point are experiencing slight to
                                         moderate erosion, due primarily to downhill rain and wave actions. Another
                                         small bluff area is found at Possum Nose, just south of Cockpit Point.

                              2.   Man-made Resources. Segment 4 shoreline is seventy-seven percent in private
                                   ownership and twenty-three percent in Federal ownership. Man-made shoreline features
                                   are as follows:
                                   a)    Shore Protection Structures. (Length: 0.9 miles)

                                                                     -61-
<pb n="70" />

                                  VEPCO substation and 1800 feet of bulkheading in Quantico Creek, primarily for
                                       There are 3000 feet of stabilization structures near Possum Point for the

                                  individual residential land uses.

                             b)   Shorefront Recreation Facilities.
                                       There are several private-piers in this segment and a large pier at the
                                  substation site, but no developed public access sites.

                   B.   Characteristics of Fastlands

                        1.   Natural Resources.
                             a)   Soils and Slopes (See Map 15.)
                                       Much of the land in this segment is classified as most suitable for low
                                  density use. The presence of steep slopes in the segment, especially within the
                                  Cherry Hill area, may limit access to developable areas. There are also many
                                  marshy areas around Quantico Creek. Further urban development inland from the
                                  marsh system should include nonpoint pollution and stormwater management
                                  controls.

                             b)   Vegetation and Wildlife (See Map 14.)
                                       Approximately one-half of this segment is wooded and undeveloped. This
                                  segment is inhabited by small fur-bearing mammals, turkey, and deer, and is
                                  frequented by the bald eagle. The Cherry Hill area, flanked by marshlands and
                                  the estuarine system and representing the largest, privately-owned undeveloped
                                  area in the Prince William coastal zone, provides significant opportunity for
                                  public, low-intensity outdoor recreational uses.

                             c)   Waterways (See Map 14.)
                                       Quantico Creek is the major body of water in this segment. The majority of
                                  the shoreline in this segment is characterized by average elevations of 20 feet
                                  msl, minimizing flooding potential.

                        2.   Man-made Resources. (See Maps 16 and 17.)
                             a)   Land use.
                                       The shoreline of the northern portion of this segment is currently either'
                                  in industrial use or zoned for industrial use. A VEPCO power station is the
                                  major existing industrial site and is located along the southern shore of this
                                  segment. Some single family and townhouse developments exist in the segment
                                  interior. While there are some areas zoned for single family use, large areas
                                  of this segment remain uncommitted to development. Land use on the south side
                                  of Quantico Creek is dominated by the Quantico Marine Corps Base.

                                                                  -62-
<pb n="71" />

                                  b)    Developments of Regional Benefit/Key Facilities
                                             A VEPCO power plant substation is located near Possum Point. The Richmond,
                                        Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad line runs along the Potomac shoreline.

                   SEGMENT 5: Shipping Point to Chopawamsic Creek
                        A. Characteristics of Shorelands. (See Map 18.)

                             1.   Natural Resources
                                  a)    Wetlands. The total area of wetlands in Segment 5 is 115 acres. Individual
                                        wetland sites include:
                                        (1)  Chopawamsic Creek. Area: 27 acres; VIMS SITE ff: 1; VIMS TYPE #: VII
                                                  Numerous low elevation marsh islands which are primarily mudflats
                                             during the winter, lie in this area along the Prince William/Stafford
                                             County line.
                                        (2)  Upper Chopawamsic Creek. Area: 28 acres; VIMS SITE It: 3; VIMS TYPE It: IX
                                                  A creek marsh of low elevation is located along the southern boundary
                                             of the Marine Corps Base with cattails found along the landward border.
                                        (3)  Chopawamsic Creek. Area: 19 acres; VIMS SITE 11: 3; VIMS TYPE #: XI
                                                  A pond lily and pickerel weed fringe is found near the mouth of the
                                             creek. with other marsh species found along the landward edge.
                                        (4)  Chopawamsic Creek. Area: 32 acres; VIMS SITE It: 4; VIMS TYPE It: XI
                                                  A fringing marsh extends just northwest of the Marine Corps Air
                                             Station, with a large number of cattails in the higher elevations.
                                        (5)  Chopawamsic island. Area: 4 acres; VIMS SITE It: 5; VIMS TYPE It: XI
                                                  A freshwater high marsh is found on the northern end of the island,
                                             dominated by hibiscus.
                                        (6)  Quantico. Area: 2 acres; VIMS SITE #: 6; VIMS TYPE It: VI
                                                  This marsh, located across from Chopawamsic Island and north of the
                                             air strip, has been disturbed, with the lower portion largely filled.
                                        (7)  Lower Quantico Creek. Area: 3 acres; VIMS SITE It: 7; VIMS TYPE #: VII
                                                  A low elevation marsh, adjacent to the Quantico Creek railroad bridge,
                                             is dominated by pickerel weed and water hemp.

                                  b)    Beaches. (Length: 1.44 miles)
                                             The beach areas in this segment, scattered along the Potomac shore, are of
                                        poor quality.

                                  c)    Bluffs. (Length: 0.1 mile)
                                             The small bluff area in this segment is located adjacent to a fringe marsh
                                        area along Chopawamsic Creek.

                                                                    -63-
<pb n="72" />

                         2.   Man-made Resources. Only eight percent of Segment 5 is in private ownership. The
                              remainder is in federal ownership in the Quantico Marine Corps Base. Man-made
                              shoreline features include:
                                                                  (Length: 1.44 miles)
                              a)   Shore Protection Structures.
                                        Stabilization structures are located along the Potomac shore at the town of
                                   Quantico. Stabilization on Chopawamsic Island has failed to halt the moderate
                                   erosion occurring at its southern end.

                              b)   Shorefront Recreational Facilities
                                        There are two large piers at the Headquarters Battalion Boat Dock with
                                   several boat slips.

                    B.   Characteristics of Fastlands

                         1.   Natural Resources.
                              a)   Soils and Slopes (See Map 19.)
                                        Soil and slope conditions are mixed in this segment, with the low density
                                   soil suitability zone predominating as it has in other segments. Principle
                                   unsuitable areas are found along the major creeks and stream valleys.

                              b)   Vegetation and Wildlife (See Map 18.)
                                        The majority of this segment is in mature hardwoods, comprising an
                                   extensive habitat area which is broken up only occasionally by Marine Corps Base
                                   facilities. Chopawamsic Creek's extensive marsh system also supports a variety
                                   of bird, waterfowl, and wildlife species.

                              c)   Waterways (See Map 18.)
                                        Chopawamsic Creek and the Potomac River constitute the principle waterways
                                   in this segment. Public access to these waterways is limited by federal
                                   government ownership of the entire shoreline.

                         2.   Man-made Resources
                              a)   Land use. (See maps 20 and 21.)
                                        WI-th the exception of Chopawamsic Island and the Town of Quantico, the
                                   entire segment is in military use, precluding private development for the
                                   forseeable future.

                              b)   Developments of Regional Benefit
                                        The Quantico Marine Corps Base is a major military installation from a
                                   national perspective.

                                                               -64-
<pb n="73" />

                    Summary of Chapters II and III.

                        The inventory of coastal resources in Prince William County indicates both problems and oppor-

                    tunities for those planning for and using the land and water resources of the County's coastal zone.
                    Problems, such as increased nonpoint pollution and the degradation of wetlands, are likely to arise
                    as development pressure continues to be experienced in proximity to the area's critical
                    environmental resources. The soil suitability maps shown in Chapter III illustrate the natural
                    constraints to land development in much of the County's undeveloped coastal zone. The extensive
                    marshes and forest lands remaining in the coastal zone provide significant opportunities for the
                    establishment of public open space and recreational areas to serve the growing number of residents
                    of the County.

                        Chapter II provides suggestions for maximizing the using of the County's coastal resources
                    while causing the least damage to natural coastal systems. A balanced land use planning and
                    management program is offered which combines both structural and nonstructural measures to minimize
                    land development impacts on the natural environment, while minimizing the costs associated with
                    implementing such measures. The success of such a program requires the cooperation of government
                    officials, land developers, and individual landowners in the coastal zone.

                                                                   -65-
<pb n="74" />

                                                                                          MAP 2

                                                                           SEGMENT h NATURAL RESOURCES

                                                                                                                                      0

                                                                                                                                       th

                                                                                                             WOODBRIDGE
                                                                                                                          7-
                                                                                                                                     HIM

                                                                                                                   el

                                                   95

                                                                                 T--

                                                                                                                             U.S. MILITAR
                                                                                                         21                   RESERVATION

                                                                                                                                  rp

                                                                                   -66-
<pb n="75" />

                                                                                                   MAP 3

                                                                                SEGMENT 1; SOIL SUITABILITY ZONES

                                                                                                                      X.:

                                                                                                          WOODOR I DGE

                                                                                                                            it

                                                                                               VAY
                                                         A                          U

                                                                                           -67-
<pb n="76" />

                                                                                                                              MAP 4

                                                                L E G E H D                               SEGMENT 1: EXISTING LAND USE
                                                                   Single fainily

                                                                   T@nhous.

                                                                   Aparto..t
                                                              a3Coriservation Park
                                                              EDNblic Facility
                                                              Mconnxircial/offica
                                                                   tl.a@y l.d.3tri.l

                                                                       tal zone li.it

                                                                -Sanitary dfst.bo@nd.
                                                                                                                                                        001JOR I OGE

                                                                                                                                    :bx,   x.

                                                                                                                                                 r4v..

                                                                                                                     N

                                                                                                                                                                               -Z

                                                                                                            -68-
<pb n="77" />

                                                                                  MAP 5

                                          L I GN 0
                                        CIE] sl 1-ily               SEGMENT 1: PROPOSED LAND USE

                                           C.. S., t iP., i'.
                                         Mf.bli,
                                        mc.

                                                    11'.it

                                       _.._ssnlt.ry

                                                                                            14,

                                                            ............

                                                % I.- xi

                                                                                           01
                                                                                              Vj

                                                                                                                 ITJ

                                               ............

                                                                       -69-
<pb n="78" />

                                                                                                                                                      MAP 6

                                                                                                                              SEGMENT 2: NATURAL RESOURCES

                                                                                0                   2

                                                                                  thIIt"-d feet

                                                                                  LEGEND

                                                                              m       Hard,@ds
                                                                                      Hard-d       pines

                                                                                      Pi "e
                                                                                      We,,:,,ds

                                                                                      Beaches

                                                                                        -fts

                                                                                                                                                                                                  ts

                                                                                                       95
                                                                                                                                                                                                              to

                                                                                                                                                                       ull

                                                                                                                                                                                                   4 -

                                                                                                                                                ..............
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            E!

                                                                                                                                                                   .................
                                                                                                                                                                ..................
                                                                                                                                                                     . .. .........

                                                                                                                                                                  Cc CO-',
                                                                                                                            C
                                                                                                                                                                        t'i' / --

                                                                                                                          V"
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        NEAB

                                                                                                        :-X.

                                                                                                                                      -70-
<pb n="79" />

                                                                                          MAP 7

                                                                          SEGMENT 2-   SOIL SUITABILHY ZONES

                                                               -Ul
                                                                             4F
                                                                       &amp;

                                                                                                       0

                                              49

                                                                                                              H
                                                                                                               'ARSCO
                                                                                                               E
                                                                             Ao     n

                                                                             -71-
<pb n="80" />

                                                                                                                          MAP 8

                                                                                                       SEGMENT 2: EXISTING LAND USE

                                                                   L f G E H 0
                                                                       singi. family

                                                                       T-nhou,.

                                                                       Apartment

                                                                       Conse,vation Park

                                                                       P.bll@ Facility

                                                                       litavy Industrial

                                                             ---Coastal zone limit

                                                                                    ound.
                                                              _.-S..itary dist.b

                                                                                                                                              d

                                                                                                   its

                                                                                                 ..........

                                                                                                        -72-
<pb n="81" />

                                                                                                                                               MAP 9

                                                                                                                         SEGMENT         2:   PROPOSED LAND                USE

                                                                              L F G 1   0
                                                                           ED

                                                                                 Ap  t   t
                                                                           UJJ   (o-e-ml- Pat k                                                              . .....
                                                                                 Publi, f-Ility
                                                                                                                                . ... .......
                                                                                                                             .. ...........
                                                                                       irtd,.sl,f.l

                                                                                               1.4 t

                                                                                                                       -73-
<pb n="82" />

                                                                                                                                                                  MAP 10
                                                                                                                                            SEGMENT           3: NATURAL RESOURCES

                                                                                                                                                                      gill
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Qn-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                d
                                                                                                                                                                             'z oi-UM"I'*.';@.-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                               -cj

                                                                                                                                                   _71                           .... ....

                                                                                       110i                                        u  'I
                                                                                                                                                                                                      Po""    Is
                                                                                                       t3             C
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Creek
                                                                                                                               by-. -P y
                                                                                                                                                                     iz -:4@
                                                                                                       N
                                                                                                                                       6'-'rk'

                                                                                                                                                           C,
                                                                                                                                                     rz,               k'O `4
                                                                                                                      11   ZI.
                                                                                                                                                                         -za
                                                                                                             V.
                                                                                                                                                        C'k..             f!
                                                                                                                                                            %
                                                                                                           'zp

                                                                                                                                                                                                           VLW

                                                                                                                                                                                                       a
                                                                                                                                                                                                   0-    op@\

                                                                                                                         a@                                                     tU
                                                                                               V                           0,L4
                                                                                                                      011

                                                                                                                                                              43
                                                                                                                                                sS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   0 .    "zr.
                                                                                                                                          Y"             %P,3

                                                                                            ..............

                                                                                             .......  ...

                                                                                                                                                 -74-
<pb n="83" />

                                                                                                                                                           MAP 11

                                                                                                                                SEGMENT 3;            SOIL     SUITABILITY ZONES

                                                                                               NY
                                                                                                                                                                                         &lt;r

                                                                                                                                                                            .. A.-

                                                                                                                                                                                      ;P@o

                                                                  L11

                                                                                                              n

                                                                                    CIA$-

                                                                 ...........
                                                                 .............

                                                                                             . . . . . . . . . . .

                                                             IES

                                                                                                                            -75-
<pb n="84" />

                                                                                                                               MAP 12

                                                                                                            SEGMENT 3: EXISTING LAND USE

                                                                                                           ..............

                                                                                                                  ............. ..

                                                                                                                                                   Po,ve

                                                                                                                                                                 Cr
                                                                                                                                                                   L-ek

                                                                                                                                                            ij

                                                                                                               -76-
<pb n="85" />

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  MAP 13
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             SEGMENT 3: PROPOSED LAND USE

                                                                                                                                                                           ...                                                                                          . ......

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Polve/
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             cle
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ck

                                                                                                                       ...........
                                                                                                                                                  . . . . ...... . . . ..........

                                                                                                                                                                                                            . ... . . . . . . .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         A.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        -77-
<pb n="86" />

                                                                                                                                                      MAP 14
                                                                                                                                SEGMENT 4:            NATURAL RESOURCES
                                                                                                                                               t
                                                                                                                                                                                                              H",

                                                                                                                                                                                   ..v       vi

                                                                                                                                                                 kN  a. tit 10 -                      It"

                                                                                                                                                                                                       CAI

                                                                                  Cc                                                                ..30
                                                                                                              ,q                                                                                          is@
                                                                                                                  @.c
                                                                                                                      ,@4

                                                                                     s
                                                                            g
                                                                                          - v6l@l                                                                                               fi, t",

                                                                                                                                               10
                                                                                                                                                                                114

                                                                               N.
                                                                                                               cr

                                                                                                                                                                 9

                                                                                                                                                    q,*
                                                                                                                     &amp;I
                                                                                                      f- 5-
                                                                                                                                     C.,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  P

                                                                                                                                               c,                                            SlilPPING POINT

                                                                                                                                                                                      QUAN ICO

                                                                                                                                    -78-
<pb n="87" />

                                                                                                                                      MAP 15

                                                                                                                 SEGMENT 4; SOIL SUITABILITY ZONES

                                            PR    'E
                                             W:    I AM
                                              FOR E ST
                                            cpll
                                                                                                                                                yo

                                                                              I V-;,
                                                       m WiNGLE

                                                                                                                               zv

                                                                                                                                                    ................

                                                                                                                                                    .. ............ 0-

                                                                                               Al
                                                                                                                                                                        SHIPPING
                                                                                                                                                                                   110

                                                                                                                                                                           QUANTICO
                                                          40

                                                                                                               -79-
<pb n="88" />

                                                                                                     MAP 16

                                                                                        SEGMENT 4: EXISTING LAND USE

                                            ...... ... ...

                                                                                      -7

                                                                                                                                      P
                                                                                                                                       OSSUM POINT

                                                                                                             07

                                                                                         6

                                                                                            j
                                                                                                                               SHIPPING POINT

                                                                                                                               QUAN T I C 0

                                                                                          -80-
<pb n="89" />

                                                                                                                                                                               rTl

                                                                                                                                                                                L'i
                                                                                                                                                                                r-m

                                                                                               0    10  0   IE   701 0   0
<pb n="90" />

                                                                                                         MAP 18

                                                                                     SEGMENT 5:         NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   @ ph

                                                               IF
                                                                                          N.V
                                                                            .3 v                             'wp
                                                                d
                                  c. Vtf               r
                                                                                                                  Y n'

                                           ..........
                                                     ......  j7p
                                                            4'c ea
                                           i::@ i::@ iii i::i:::] i::: 2 @::i                                                          cli(

                                             ...........

                                                                      . ........ .

                                                                                    -82-
<pb n="91" />

                                                                          MAP 19

                                                             SEGMENT 5; SOIL SUITABILITY ZONES

                                                       0
                                                                                    N",

                                                                                                  c

                                                                      z..............
                                               0        2
                                                L
                                                 tl,@-nd  f-t

                                                 l(GFH0

                                                                                      H I L I TARY
                                                                                     RESERVATION
                                                -dl,- d-lity

                                                h I gh/l - d.., I ty

                                             --c-t.1   M.1t

                                                             -83-
<pb n="92" />

                                                                                                          MAP 2 0

                                                                                      SEGMENT 5: EXISTING LAND USE

                                                                                  N 16
                                                                                                      J;

                                                              'o       7
                                                              , -f    1@\'        -\,          I I    ,
                                                                                                               @7

                                                                 0
                                                                                                                                 CHOPAWAMSIC
                                                     f                                                                              ISLAND

                                                                                                                                       L E G E N

                                                                f
                                                                                                                                           Single

                                                                                                                                           Townho
                                                              C"OPalva
                                                                        1l)S ic
                                                                                                                                           Apartm
                                                                                                                           7@\
                                                                                                                                           Conser

                                                                                                                                           Pub) ic

                                                                                                                                           Coalmer

                                                                                                                                           Heavy

                                                                                                                                           Coasta

                                                                                                                                           Sani ta

                                                                                         -84-
<pb n="93" />

                                                                                                                   MAP 21

                                                                                             SEGMENT 5: PROPOSED LAND USE

                                                                                                                 ji

                                                                                                3

                                                                     %

                                                                   -I,\-

                                                                                                                                           CHOPAWAMS
                                                                                                                                              ISLAND

                                                                                                        fil-
                                                                                            7

                                                                                                                                               L E G I
                                                                                                                                                  Sing

                                                                                                                                                    own

                                                                                 c
                                                                                                                                            M Apar

                                                                                                                                                  Cons

                                                                                                                                                  Pub)

                                                                                                                                            [=ill- 11cav

                                                                                                                                        ---Coas

                                                                                                                                               -Sa"i

                                                                                            -85-
<pb n="94" />

                                                          CHAPTER IV.

                                       STATE &amp; FEDERAL POLICIES, PROGRAMS, AND REGULATIONS

                      A myriad of federal, state, and local governmental regu lations apply to development
                  in coastal Prince William County. Figure 5 summarizes existing regulations and provides
                  an illustration of the interrelationships of the various levels of governmental juris-
                  dictions in different portions of the coastal zone. These regulations are discussed in
                  separate sections by subject area below.

                  A. Permits for Activities in Navigable Waters, including Wetlands

                      1.  USACE Permits for activities in navigable waters

                               A permit is required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for any
                          structure or work in or affecting navigable waters of the U.S. As presently
                          administered, permits are required at mean high tide level or lower, which
                          includes wetlands. The permit decision is based upon an evaluation of the
                          probable impact of the proposed activity on the public interest, according to
                          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines issued under Section 404(b)
                          of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. The benefits
                          expected from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable
                          detriments. For further information and technical assistance from the Corps
                          concerning this program, see Chapter V.

                                                              -86-
<pb n="95" />

                                                             F t(;o RE 5.

                                   SIMMARY OF GOVEMMI'MIM, REGULATIONS FOR COASTAL PRINCE W11.1.1AM COUNTY

                                                  FEDERAL

                                                                                   VIRGINIA --A   MARYLAND       AREA OF' JURISDICTION

                                                   LOCAL

                                          OVUM DG

                                                             1k
                                                                    ..:1, -TIPAL MI

             Federal/State Water &amp; Air Pollution            Federal Permits for Activities J'n                  DEVELOPMENT 11EIGULATIONS
               Pegulations                                    Navigable Waters
             Federal Floodplain Insurance Regulations       State Permit for DicroachmenL on
             Local Zoning &amp; Subdivision Regulations           State-owned Bottomlands
             Local Building Permit                          Local/State Wetlands Permit
             State Health Dept. Septic Tank Permit          Local Zoning &amp; Subdivision Regulations
                                                            Local Building Permit
                                                            State Health Dept. Septic Tank Porml.t

                                                                   -87-
<pb n="96" />

                       2.  Virginia Marine Resources Commission: Subaqueous Bottomlands Permits

                                Section 62.1-3 of the Code of Virginia directs the marine Resources Commission to
                           control all non-exempted uses of state-owned bottomlands through the issuance of permits.
                           This section limits the extent of private property rights on Virginia's shorelines to
                           mean low water and declares all other subaqueous land to be the property of the
                           Commonwealth.

                                The Potomac River is an exception to State ownership below mean low water,
                           because, under the Potomac River Compact of 1958, Virginia recognized Maryland as
                           the owner of the Potomac River to the mean low water mark. The boundary adopted
                           in the 1958 Compact was officially established by the Mathews-Nelson Survey of 1928.
                           Although the boundary runs adjacent to the shoreline of the Potomac proper, the 1928
                           survey concluded that the line should not follow the indentations of creeks and bays,
                           but should run from headland to headland. Any activities in the bays and creeks
                           in Prince William's coastal zone are under the jurisdiction of Virginia, while
                           activities beyond the mean low water mark of the Potomac shoreline fall under
                           Maryland jurisdiction.

                                Uses which are regulated by the Virginia marine Resources Commission under
                           Section 62.1-3 include many activities for which federal permits are required, as
                           discussed above, such as mixing the placement of wharves, bulkheads, dredging and
                           fill by shoreline landowners. Among exempted activities are the placement of certain
                           private piers for non-COMmercial use by landowners, uses of subaqueous beds for
                           commercial fishing, and uses incident to the construction and maintenance of approved
                           navigation and flood control projects.

                                In granting or denying a permit, the Commission considers factors similar to
                           the public interest review conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers for federal
                           permits. These factors include:

                                -  consideration of the environmental quality goals contained in
                                   Article XI of the State Constitution
                                -  the effects of the proposed project on reasonable and permissible
                                   uses of state waters and state-owned bottomlands
                                -  the effects upon marine and fisheries resources of the Commonwealth
                                -  the effects upon wetlands of the Commonwealth
                                -  effects upon adjacent or nearby properties

                                                               _88-
<pb n="97" />

                                  - water quality standards established by the State Water Control
                                     Board
                                  -  anticipated public and private benefits

                             Prior to granting or denying any permit for a boatyard or marina for commercial use,
                             however, the owner or other applicant must present a plan for sewage treatment or
                             disposal facilities which is approved by the State Department of Health.

                                                                 -89-
<pb n="98" />

                                        3.     Virginia Wetlands Act

                                                       Section 62.1-13 of the Code of Virginia, known as the Virginia wetlands iaw,
                                               was enacted by the General Assembly in 1972 in recognition of the valuable and
                                               irreplaceable nature of the State's wetlands. This law prohibits any regulated
                                               activity in tidal wetlands without a proper permit. Tidal wetlands are defined
                                               as those lands lying between and contiguous to mean low water and 1.5 times the
                                               mean tidal range, upon which certain specified vegetation grows.

                                                       Virginia's wetlands jurisdiction differs from federal jurisdiction over wetlands.
                                               The federal jurisdiction extends to all areas regularly inundated by water, which
                                               include tidal and freshwater marshlands, both vegetated and non-vegetated. Federal,
                                               State and local authority along vegetated shorelines is summarized in the illustration
                                               below.

                                                               '0 FEDERAL FwPCAA 1912"                            R a HA 1899"
                                                                0 STATE            Witillands Low                                            Subogueous Low
                                                                o   LOCAL          Conventiotiol a   Walloni:13 ZoninQ

                                                                                                                                                                                   Limit of the
                                                                                                                                                                                     Torritoiriol
                                                                                        I Wo                                                               M11W     1.5X               SeGOMI.)
                                                                                                                                                                    Moon
                                                                                                                                                           Mt.W     Tide
                                                                                                                                                                    Rollo*
                                                                                   Vootitolud Wellond      Non-Vootito led (INTER MAL FLMS     Sh-H.W.

                                                                 1)plondti                             Wationdr.                                        Sutloqueous Lands

                                                         fo(jefol Wulot flult.,lion C,nlici ALI A-unkitatili, ol W/2
                                                         Hl.w ai.d li.it- ALI ul IU'JU

                                                   Source: "Report of the Secretary of Commerce and Resources to the Governor and the
                                                                                                                     -----A4--                    -T-J-i-
                                                                   General Asse-IlLbly of Virginia
                                                                   Senate Document No. 8, prepared by the Virginia Coastal Resources
                                                                   Management Program, October 1978.
                                                                                                               _90-
<pb n="99" />

                                  The Virginia Wetlands Act allows localities to manage their wetlands through
                             the adoption of a specified zoning ordinance which provides for the appointment of
                             a local wetlands board to administer the permit program. All decisions by the local
                             board are reviewed by the Commissioner of Marine Resources and are subject to
                             modification or reversal by the Marine Resources Conunission. Appeals can be made
                             through the Commission and the Court.

                                  Prince William County established a local wetlands board after the passage of
                             the 1972 Act. This board was recently  reconstituted by the County Board of Supervisors.
                             Further information about the board is provided in Chapter V. The Virginia Institute
                             of Marine Science (VIMS) has developed guidelines for use by wetlands boards in
                             making permit decisions, entitled "Local- Management of Wetlands: Environmental
                             Considerations." An excerpt from this publication which outlines the typical
                             contents of an application for a wetlands permit is reproduced in Appendix IV.

                                                                 -91-
<pb n="100" />

                   B. State Water Control Board Regulations and Programs

                        1. Water Quality Assurance

                                The State Water Control Board (SWCB) is responsible for the issuance of water
                           quality assurance "401" certificates for pollution discharges into navigable waters,
                           pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, This certifi-
                           cate, which is tatamount to a permit, certifies that the proposed activity will
                           comply with applicable state water quality control laws.

                        2. Industrial Discharge Permit Program

                                Under Section 62.1-44.16 of the Code, a permit is required from the SWCB for the
                           discharge of industrial wastes to State waters. A permit will not be issued until
                           approved treatment or control facilities are provided for a potential polluting
                           activity.

                        3. Permits for Other Wastes

                                Section 62.1-44.17 provides a similar SWCB certification program for discharge
                           or control facilities for "other wastes", defined as decayed wood, sawdust, shavings,
                           bark, lime, garbage, refuse, ashes, offal, tar, oil, chemicals, and other substances,
                           except industrial wastes and sewage.

                        4. Sewage Discharge Regulations

                                Article 4 of Title 62.1 of the Code places all sewage systems and sewage treatment
                           facilities under the joint supervision of the SWCB and the State Health Department.
                           The Health Department is responsible for the issuance of permits for septic tank
                           systems, while the SWCB is given authority to issue permits prescribing the terms
                           under which any pollution discharges may be made into sewerage systems and sewage
                           treatment facilities.

                   C.   Summary of State and Federal Shoreline Permits

                            As indicated in the sections above, there are many overlapping and sometimes duplicative
                        permitting requirements operating in Virginia's coastal areas. Several steps have been
                        taken to simplify and streamline the shoreline permitting process in Virginia. In 1977 the
                        State Water Control Board and the Marine Resources Commission developed a consolidated
                        permit application, which has recently evolved into a joint locai_-state@federall permit
                        application. In addition, monthly meetings have been instituted between representatives

                                                                    -92-
<pb n="101" />

                          of State and federal permitting agencies to review pending applications, allowing a
                          substantial reduction in processing time for many projects.  This process is summarized
                          in the accompanying diagram. State and federal permitting agencies continue to work
                          on further measures to streamline shoreline permitting.

                                                                 -93-
<pb n="102" />

                                                                                             Figure 6.

                                                                                       GENERALIZED Dkn@GRAM
                                                                                                          OF
                                                        SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW PROCEDURES
                                                                                                    INCLUDING
                                                                     JOINT STATE/FEDERAL PROJECT REVIEW

                                                                                                    JOINT PERMI
                                                                                                    APPI-ICATION

                                                                                  MARINE RESOURCES =1MISSION STAFF
                                                                                     . ASSIGNS JDiNT PROCESSING NUMBER
                                                                                     .D(STRIBUTES COPIES OF APPLICAT)ON

                                               LOCAL WETLANDS
                                                      BOARD
                                               WETLAI`CS
                                                      PROCESS
                                                               S7@':,-,E HEALTH D=-L            STATE                         VIRGIN.A INSTITUTE!             IN.FORIP,,,,TI@O@N7
                                                                                                                                           SCI@"P@l              CO @@S
                                                                                              CONTROL BOARD                   of MARI N
                                                                                                                              -        1:            -        - - - - - - - - --
                                                               S.E.%-:TAERY FE&amp;                          ZLaUTV               ECOLDGIC----                    C@ VCOR VK-C PIK
                                                                 SANITATION                  CEITTIRCLTION PROCESS               ASSESS.-,-.--NT         1-0:-Z-Y. P,-ax- @@a]

                                                             .........       --------

                                                                          MARINE RESWCES
                                                                             - COMMISSION                                                            ARMY CORPS
                                                                          w
                                                                             TLAIIIVS Xxj     EOLJS   Z                                                       IRS
                                                                             t                                                                       OF ENGINEEE
                                                                             PERM.IT PROCESS                                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                                                                                                                                        DRE65:1- Z7,0 FILLMAVIGAS@-E
                                                                                                                                 waTERnAY ALTER-'TION PERMIT PF--K-ZSSES

                                                                                         STATE                                FSwS                   5        EPA                  0
                                                                                                                                                     111@2;?y 'So         xi-r- 1@ -
                                                                                       AND LDCA1-                             ADVISORY    4LD, Ii        AD     RY1 I   R
                                                                                                                                                                   I I  NOTICE
                                                                                         AD@PRCVALLS      r     CO            REVE                   RFVIE,.,,,, RE rw I

                                                                                               &gt;           JOINT
                                                                                                    STATE/FEDERAL
                                                                                              !S    PROJECT PEVEW

                                                                                                                                                         _A9BRE=T1ONS
                                                                                                          CORPS                                      SSE t@-- d
                                                                                                                                                     es-
                                                                                                        DECISION                                     COE
                                                                                                                                                     ro
                                                                                                                                                     @pS us &amp;-I C@" W Ev--l-
                                                                                                                                                     Ep- L- . ., @-- Aq,-"
                                                                                                                                                     Fews V E FW, OV W4146 5-
                                                                                                                                                     "r, N-4 M- vr,@ S--
                                                                                                                                                     POC
                                                                                                                                                     P@, r., C4@
                                                   irGrND                                                                                            ID s:- "@. 15..@-
                                                                                                        FEDERAL                                      ,OS $,.,. W@ C@,,, fi-d
                                    -------------                                                                                                    VC0 -1-
                                                           VMRC                                          PERMIT                                      A
                                                                                                                                                     -LC      ..r-c L-'-@ I-
                                                                  P@.                                                                                V.

                                                                                                       APPLCANT
                                                                                                    MAY COMMENCE
                                                                                                        PROJECT

                                     SOURCE: Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program, "Rep                                                                    'ort of the
                                                        Secretary of Commerce and Resources to the Governor &amp; the
                                                        General Assembly Regarding Senate Joint Resolution No. 62,"
                                                        Senate Document                   No. 8, Richmond, October 1978.
                                                                                  M R
                                                           F__L
                                                                                       A
                                                                                       D

                                                                                                                                        INSTI @F
                                                                                                                                 @@l N
                                                                                                                                M
                                                                                                                          LE-CU
                                                                        LR
                                                                          w=_
                                                                             t "_A
                                                                             PE

                                                                                                       NOUN Mm@fmmoe
<pb n="103" />

                       D.  Coastal Resources Management Programs

                                Both the State arid federal governments have become involved in coastal resources
                           planning and management in recognition of the unique and valuable resources of the coastal
                           zone arid the intensity of competition for use of these resources. Tile federal government,
                           in enacting the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, amended in 1976, established
                           a framework and financial. incentives for states to take primary responsibility for the
                           planning and management of coastal land and water resources. Through its Wetlands Act
                           and regulations over state fisheries and shellfish grounds, tire CoRmlonwealth was already
                           involved in coastal resources management. Virginia has been able to increase its knowledge
                           of the state's coastal management problems through participation in the Federal Coastal
                           Zone Management Program.

                           1.  Federal Coastal Zone Management Program

                                    The federal proqram, instituted by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1-972,
                               is administered by tile Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) in the Department
                               of Commerce. OCZM provides funding assistance to participating states for
                               planning and implementing a coastal zone management program, which must adhere
                               to federal guidelines designed to encourage the states to exercise their full
                               authority over the lands and waters in the coastal zone, which should include
                               unified policies, criteria, standards, and processes for dealing with land and
                               water use decisions of more than local significance.

                                    Although OCZM allows State programs to be planned and implemented through its
                               chosen agencies, including local governments, the Act requires some degree of State
                               involvement in the control of coastal land and water uses. This is significant
                               since many uses covered under the Act have traditionally been overseen exclusively
                               by local government. The Act outlines three alternative techniques for achieving
                               State involvement: 1) direct state land use and water use planning and regulation;
                               2) state standards arid guidelines for local implementation; or 3) state review of
                               all plans, projects, or regulations to ensure consistency with tile management program.
                               OCZM gives states wide latitude within these alternatives to establish specific
                               mariagement arrangements with local governments.

                                    Since the program lacks federal regulatory powers, its success depends oil tile
                               voluntary participation of states. Three types of federal grants are offered to

                                                                    -95-
<pb n="104" />

                          encourage coastal states to implement comprehensive management programs: program
                          development grants; implementation grants for federally approved programs; and
                          grants to establish estuarine sanctuaries. All 34 eligible states and territories
                          have participated in the program development stage.

                                                               -96-
<pb n="105" />

                            2.  Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program

                                     The Virginia Office of Commerce and Resources (OCR) has just completed the final
                                year of its four year program development phase under funding from the federal Office
                                of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM). In September 1977 the OCR published its recommenda-
                                tions for a comprehensive coastal resources management program, "Proposals for
                                Coastal Resources Management in Virginia," which were designed both to address the
                                specific needs of Virginia's coastal areas and to meet f ederal program approval require-
                                ments. During the 1978 General Assembly session coastal legislation was introduced
                                which would be necessary to implement certain portions of the program. These bills
                                were carried over to the 1979 legislative session, where greatly amended versions were
                                defeated.

                                     A lack of executive or legislative branch action to allow implementation of
                                several key portions of the proposed management program has resulted in a termination
                                by OCZM of Virginia's participation in the federal grant program for coastal planning
                                and implementation as of March 31, 1979. This action does not preclude the State
                                from continuing the coastal program on its own and seeking federal program approval.
                                at a later date, but it does eliminate the immediate financial incentive for the State
                                to continue program development activities, which may hamper future attempts to gain
                                legislative and executive branch support for the program.

                                     The focus of the proposed program is on coastal "edges", where land and tidal
                                waters meet. The State's coastal resources have been inventoried, and problems
                                with their use and management have been identified. OCR has also enumerated the
                                precepts of the program, as follows:

                                     1.  The historic, economic, cultural, environmental, and aesthetic
                                         heritage and values of Tidewater as we know it are worthy of
                                         our guardianship for future generations. Our decisions about
                                         these resources will be based upon these values as well as upon
                                         scientific fact.

                                     2.  The Commonwealth's coastal, estuarine, and marine environments
                                         are extremely valuable, productive, and fragile, and therefore
                                         require careful and protective stewardship by all Virginians.

                                                                      -97-
<pb n="106" />

                                3.  Increasing and competing demands for the use of our coastal
                                    lands and waters have depleted and endangered some of our
                                    coastal resources.

                                4.  A Coastal Resources Management Program must be prepared and
                                    implemented on the basis that it will benefit the citizens
                                    whom it will affect.

                                5.  Public understanding of the use and value of our coastal
                                    resources and public participation in the management of these
                                    resources is essential to the proper implementation and success
                                    of Virginia's Coastal Resources Management Program.

                                6.  Local involvement in decisions about coastal resources engenders
                                    a greater sense of public responsibility for the use of those
                                    resources.

                                7.  All interests in Tidewater--agricultural, commercial, industrial,
                                    and environmental, as well as those of the individual citizen--
                                    deserve consideration when decisions are made about the use and
                                    allocation of coastal resources.

                                B.  In addition to individual and local interests, some decisions
                                    about land and water uses in the coastal zone must be based
                                    upon national, interstate, state, and regional interests.

                                9.  The state government must assert its authority and assume greater
                                    responsibility for protecting the public interest in coastal
                                    lands and waters, in an improved partnership with local governments.

                                10. The local, state, and federal governments share the responsibility
                                    for managing coastal resources; their exercise of authority must
                                    be complementary.

                                11. The state and local governments are accountable to the public
                                    for their policies and how they carry out those policies with
                                    respect to coastal land and water management.

                                                               -98-
<pb n="107" />

                                 12.  Coastal Resources Management is a continuing planning and management
                                      effort; the methods, procedures, and techniques will continue to
                                      evolve an(] improve.

                                  In addition, four major issues have been identified as in need of legislative
                              consideration for implementation of the program: 1) mechanisms for regulation of
                              land uses having effects on the marine environment ("primarily" non-point pollution impacts)
                              and for protecting geographic areas of particular concern; 2) shoreline permitting
                              of minor projects; 3) major projects permit review; and 4) State organization and
                              authority to implement the program.

                                  Further development of the Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program will
                              undoubtedly involve these basic elements and a resolution of existing conflicts
                              within the State concerning management approaches to these issues.

                                                                 _99-
<pb n="108" />

                                                            CHAPTER V.

                                                 SOURCES OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

                  A.   Shoreline Permitting

                            Shoreline permit programs have been developed by state and federal governments to
                       protect the public interest in preserving wetlands, maintaining water quality, protecting
                       fish and wildlife, maintaining navigable waterways, preventing health hazards, insuring
                       adequate construction standards, and controlling private use of public property. Most
                       permit programs also recognize social and economic impacts of shoreline projects on the
                       community and the rights of neighboring property owners and provide a mechanism for public
                       input to the permit process.

                            Waterfront property owners, develo pers and local officials often experience confusion,
                       frustration and costly delays in obtaining permits for activities along and adjacent to the
                       shoreline. As discussed in Chapter IV, permitting agencies are working to develop a more
                       efficient shoreline permitting system. The list below indicates those agencies which should
                       be contacted when shoreline alterations are contemplated. These agencies will not only
                       provide the necessary permit application materials and instructions, but will assist the
                       applicant in assessing any technical problems associated with the application-

                       FEDERAL AGENCY

                                U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) - Baltimore District

                                Title of Permits

                                (1)  Individual Department of the Army permits for a) Activities in Navigable
                                     Waters ("Section 10 Permit"); and b) Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material
                                     into the Waters of the United States ("Section 404 Permit").

                                (2)  General permits for certain categories of activities which have only minimal
                                     individual and cumulative impact on the environment. No individual permit
                                     must be obtained for activities within these categories. The Baltimore
                                     District, which serves Prince William County, has general permits in effect
                                     for periodic maintenance dredging and certain structures for small boats
                                     (i.e., private piers of less than 40 feet which do not extend beyond the
                                     5' depth contour).

                                                                -100-
<pb n="109" />

                                   Address:

                                        Regulatory Functions Branch
                                        U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Baltimore District
                                        P.O. Box 1715
                                        Baltimore, Maryland 21203

                                   Phone Number-   (301.) 962-3477

                          STATE AGENCIES

                               1. Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC)

                                   Title of Permit: Subaqueous permit for activities affecting State-owned bottomlands

                                   Address:

                                        Virginia Marine Resources Commission
                                        P.O. Box 756
                                        2401 West Avenue
                                        Newport News, Virginia 23607

                                   Phone Number: (804) 245-2811 .

                               2.  Virginia institute of Marine Science (VIMS)

                                   Advisory role only: Subaqueous laws direct VMRC to consult with interested state
                                        agencies, including VIMSr on permit applications. The primary concern of
                                        the Institute is the effect of the project on marine and estuarine environments.
                                        While VIMS does not issue permits, it encourages persons contemplating shore-
                                        line works to consult with it prior to submitting an application.

                                   Address:

                                        Virginia Institute of Marine Science
                                        Glouchester Point, Virginia 23062

                                   Phone Number:  (804) 642-211.1

                          LOCAL AGENCY

                                   Prince William COUDty Wetlands Board

                                                                  _101-
<pb n="110" />

                                 Title of Permit:   Wetlands permit for activities affecting tidal wetlands

                                 Address:

                                      Prince William County Wetlands Board
                                      c/o office of Comprehensive Planning
                                      9300-B Peabody Street
                                      Manassas, Virginia 22110

                                 1979 Membership:

                                      Jeffrey Tyrrell, Chairman
                                      W. Shepard Elmore
                                      Dr. George Garrigan
                                      Alan Dent
                                      H. Ewing Wall

                                 Phone Number (Planning office): (703) 368-9171, Ext. 430

                   B.   Shoreline Erosion

                             Shoreline erosion, which is a naturally occurring process involving streamflow, tidal
                        action, runoff and wind, is defined as a problem when it conflicts with man's use of shore-
                        front property. The productions of shoreline erosion--sand, silt, and clay--contribute
                        to sedimentation of the Potomac Estuary and the Chesapeake Bay system. The principal
                        concern of shoreline property owners is the economic impacts of property losses due to shore-
                        line erosion, and costly structural control measures are often constructed in an attempt to
                        halt natural erosion processes.

                             The construction of shoreline erosion control structures and other human activities
                        may accelerate shoreline erosion. All shoreline erosion control structures have either a
                        short or long term impact on adjacent shorelines.     Groins and jetties, for example, interrupt
                        the flow of sand and sediments along the shoreline and may cause "starvation" of the banks
                        downstream, increasing erosion rates downstream. The best coastal engineering designs
                        attempt to achieve site specific erosion abatement while minimizing adverse erosion impacts
                        on adjacent shorelines.

                             While the Prince William County coastal zone has no areas experiencing critical erosion,
                        defined by the State as greater than 2 feet/year with endangered property improvements,
                        certain areas of the shoreline are. iindpraoing moderate erosion which ma threaten human
                                                                                                   y
                        property. The following list provides sources of technical assistance for property owners

                                                                  -102-
<pb n="111" />

                          experiencing loss of property due to shoreline erosion.

                          FEDERAL AGENCIES

                               1.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)- Baltimore District

                                        The construction of any shoreline erosion control structures below mean high
                                   water fall under the permitting program of the USACE. Any persons contemplating a
                                   project within this area should contact the Baltimore District office for the
                                   necessary permit application materials. in addition, the Corps is authorized by
                                   the 1974 Water Resources Development Act to provide technical assistance to any
                                   authorized agency of the State and its subdivisions.

                                   Address:

                                        U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Baltimore District
                                        P.O. Box 1715
                                        Baltimore, Maryland 21203

                                   Phone Number: (301.) 962-3477

                               2.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering Research Center (CERC)

                                        A more local federal source of information on shoreline erosion can be found
                                   at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. CERC is the Corps' national research center on
                                   coastal engineering, where studies are undertaken on the effectiveness of tradi-
                                   tional and innovative shoreline stabilization techniques.

                                   Address:

                                        U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                                        Coastal Engineering Research Center
                                        Kingman Building
                                        Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060

                                   Phone Number: (703) 325-7518

                          STATE AGENCIES

                               1. Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (VSWCC)

                                                                   -103-
<pb n="112" />

                                    Article 2.2 of the Code of Virginia (Shore Erosion Control) recognizes shore
                               erosion as a significant problem in the State and directs State resources to address
                               the problem. Section 21-11.18 of this Article invests the Soil and Water Conserva-
                               tion Commission with the responsibility to coordinate shore erosion control programs
                               of all State agencies and institutions and to secure the cooperation of federal
                               agencies in protecting shorefront property from erosion. However, the Commission
                               was authorized only one shore erosion engineer to carry out these responsibilities.
                               Requests for shoreline erosion control assistance may be made through the local
                               soil and water conservation district or through the State office.

                               Address:

                                    Technical Services office
                                    Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Commission
                                    830 East Main Street, Suite 800
                                    Richmond, Virginia 23219

                               Phone Number: (804) 786-2064

                           2.  Virginia I stitute of Marine Science (VIMS)

                                    VIMS offers technical advisory services to shorefront property owners on
                               shoreline erosion as well as other coastal problems. A staff person who is
                                                                                                     -nn t-n ;@n
                               experienced in structural control measures is available for consultati-11
                               landowner or local government staff.

                               Address:

                                    Virginia Institute ofMarine Science
                                    Glouchester Point, Virginia 23062

                               Phone Number: (804) 642-2111

                      LOCAL AGENCY

                               Prince William Soil and Water Conservation District

                                    While the mandate of local soil and water conservation districts is primarily
                               to address the problem of upland erosion, the local district can provide advice on
                               shoreline erosion and assist the shorefront property owner in locating further
                               technical assistance if necessary.

                                                               -104-
<pb n="113" />

   -1

                                    Address:
                                         Prince William Soil &amp; Water Conservation District
                                         8088 Sudley Road
                                        Manassas, Virginia 22110
                                   Phone Number: (703) 361-1710

   .1

                                                                  -105-
<pb n="114" />

                                                                APPENDIX I

                                                 COMMON MARINE RESOURCES OF THE
                                            POTOMAC RIVER ALONG PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY

                           alewife
                           American eel
                           Atlantic silverside (from Cockpit Point downstream)
                           bay anchovy
                           blue crabs (summer)
                           carp
                           catfish (brown bullhead, white  and channel)
                           chad

                           croaker
                           herrings (in Occoquan Creek)
                           hogehoker
                           .uvenile bluefish (from just above Quantico Creek downstream)
                           largemouth bass
                           sea nettle
                           spot
                           striped bass (summer)
                           sunfish
                         * weakfish
                         * white perch (March-early June; in tidal embayments of Occoquan, Neabsco,
                                       Powell &amp; Quantico Creeks)
                           winter jellyfish
                           yellow perch

                           Fish species which rely on Potomac estuary areas along Prince William County
                           for spawning grounds and/or nursery areas.

                         Source: Lippson, Alice Jane, ed., The Chesapeake Bay in Maryland: An Atlas of Natural Resources,
                                  Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1973.

                                  Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Water Resources Planning Board,
                                  The Water Monitor, Vol. II, No. 4, September, 1978.

                                                                    _106-
<pb n="115" />

                                                                            APPENDIX II.

                              Section 808.  Minimum Lot Size Based on Slope. The following table shall

                              be used to determine the minimum lot Size which shall be permitted.  In

                              using said table, interpolation shall be permitted.

                              Topography,              Minimum               Minimum                Minimum                  Ground Surface
                              Slope                    Area,                 Average                Average                  to Remain in its
                              Average                  (Sq. Ft.)             Width. (Ft.)           Depth (Ft.)              Natural State
                                                                                                                             (No cut or fill)

					 0-10%			15,000			 60				 90				 50%
					10-15%			18,000			 80				100				 60%
					15-20%			22,000			 80				110				 65%
					20-25%			28,000			100				120				 70%
					25-30%			35,000			100				150				 75%
					30-35%			44,000			120				175				 80%
					35-40%			54,000			150				200				 85%
					40-50%			65,000			175				250				 90%
					50-70%			85,000			200				300				 95%
					70-100%			Not less than five (5) acres.								 95%
					Over 100%			No lot development permitted.								100%

                                       808.1.      The subdivider shall submit a "Slope Map" with the tentative

                                                   map, showing by color or shading the areas of the tract

                                                   lying within each slope category.  No such map need be sub-

                                                   mitted if the average slope of the entire tract is ten

                                                   percent (10%) or less.

                                 Section 809.      Lot Sizes Based on Type and Improvements Required.

                                       809.1.      Definitions.  Hillside areas: A "Hillside Area" as referred

                                       to  herein is defined as one with an average slope of 15% or more.

                                       The standards under Section 810 (General regulations and design)

                                       apply to all hillside areas with the added provision that areas with

                                       a cross slope of 40% or greater are considered to be extremely rugged

                                       and the development of this terrain is limited to lot size types

                                       IV as deflned below:

                                       . . .  (a) Lots being served by community sewer systems may be

                                                  granted variances, as is appropriate, for lot size on
<pb n="116" />

                                  each slope/lot size gradient.
                        ...(b)    Slooe alterations shall not exceed five (504) percent of

                                  the total lot size on any lot having an average slope

                                  greater than 15%.   Such alterations should be only for

                                  grading site Improvements.
                           (c)    Type III* - Lot area 20,000 feet to    one acre:    In this

                                  classification are subdivisions in which 80% of all

                                  lots have an area of 20,000 square feet or over and the

                                  average area of all lots is 20,000 square feet or over.

                            (d)   Type IV - Lot area one acre or over'      Eighty percent

                                  or the lots in this classification shall be one acre or

                                  over, and the average area of all lots in the subdivision
      C10
                                  shall be one acre or over.

                                  *20% of the lots in any hillside subdivision (not
                                  Including lots at end of cul-de-sac) may have a reduced
                                  frontage provided that such reduction is not below the
                                  requirements of the next least restrictive type or
                                  classification of subdivision.

                        Source:    "Georgia Mountains Areawide Land Development Standards",
                                   Georgia Mountains Areawide Land Development Policies
                                   and Procedures Manual, Georgia mountains Planning and Dev-
                                   elopment Commission, Gainesville, Georgia, March 1974.
<pb n="117" />

                                                                                               Appendix III.

                      GENERAL TURFGRASS FERTILIZATION GUIDE                                                       5-10-5 fertilizer per 1,000 square feet and work this in
                           Soil tests are a guide for liming and fertilization. The                               with 4 to 6 inches of surface soil. When soils are very in-
                      following general recommendations should be adjusted                                        fertile it mav be desirable to plow in or mix 25 pounds of
                      as indicated by a soil test.                                                                0-20-0 or 15 pounds of 0-30-15 fertilizer per 1,000
                           Fertilizer rates are in pounds per 1,000 sq. ft. Equi-                                 square feet with 6 inches of soil.
                      valent amounts of similar analysis materials may be sub-                                 		Maintenance: Maintenance fertilization should be ad-
                      stituted for any fertilizer listed below.                                                   justed depending upon the availability of nitrogen in the
                           Establishment: Before seeding, apply 50 pounds of a                                    fertilizer used.

                                 FERTILIZER PROGRAMS FOR MAINTAINING KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS AND FESCUE

                      Program 1. Readily Available Nitrogen                                            thoroughly immediately following application. Do not
                           These programs include fertilizers in which 50% or                          apply more than the suggested rate in a single appli-
                      less of the nitrogen is slowly available.  The slowly avail-                     cation.
                      able portion is listed on the fertilizer bag as water insol-               2.    The December application can be omitted under some
                      uble nitrogen (WIN). Nitrogen not specifically claimed                           conditions, such as soils that are not subject to fast
                      as win can be assumed to be readily available.                     			 leaching and when grass is making satisfactory
                                                                                                       growth.
                      These comments apply to Programs 1-a and 1-b:                              3.    If inadequate fertilizer was applied in late fall, 1/2 to
                                                                           					 3/4 lb. of actual N may be applied in spring if turf
			    1. Resdily available sources of nitrogen may cause                               color and growth indicate a need.
                         burning if applied at heavy rates or not watered in

                      Program 1-a.
                                                                           Nitrogen Needed
                        Time of Application                                per 1000 Sq. Ft.				Fertilizer Example-per 1000 Sq. Ft.
                        Aug. 15 to Sept. 15                                1 to 1/2 lbs. 			            8 to 12 lbs.	12-4-8	OR
                                                                                                                  5 to 7 1/2 lbs.	20-10-10    OR
                                                                                                                  4 to 6 lbs.       25-4-7*
                        Oct. 1 to Nov. 15                                  1 1/2 lbs.                             12 lbs.           12-4-8      OR
                                                                                                                  7 1/2 lbs.        20-10-10    OR
                                                                                                                  6 lbs.            25-4-7*
                        December                                           1 to 1 1/2 lbs. 				8 to 12 lbs.      12-4-8	OR
                                                                                                                  5 to 7 1/2 lbs.   20-10-10    OR
                                                                                                                  4 to 6 lbs.       25-4-7*
                        May 20 to June 30                                  0 to 1/2 lb.                           0 to 4 lbs.       12-41-8     OR
                                                                                                                  0 to 2 1/2 lbs.   20-10-10    OR
                                                                                                                  0 to 2 lbs.       25-4-7*

                      Program 1-b
                                                                            Nitrogen Needed
                        Time of Application                                 per 1000 Sq. Ft.				Fertilizer Example-per 1000 Sq. Ft.
                        Aug. 15 to Sept. 15                                 1 to 1 1/2 lbs.                       3 to 4 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate		OR
                                                                                                                  5 to 7 lbs. ammonium nitrate lime		OR
                                                                                                                  6 to 9 lbs. nitrate of soda         	OR
                                                                                                                  2 1/2 to 3 lbs. urea
                        Oct. 1 to Nov. 15                                   1 to 1 1/2 lbs.                      10 to 15 lbs. 10-10-10 or equivalent
                        Dec. 1 to Dec. 15                                   1 to 1 1/2 lbs.                       3 to 4 1/2 ammonium nitrate         	OR
                                                                                                                  5 to 7 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate lime     OR
                                                                                                                  6 to 9 lbs. nitrate of soda               OR
                                                                                                                  2 1/2 to 3 lbs. urea
                        May 20 to June 30                                   0 to 1/2 lb.                          0 to 1 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate          OR
                                                                                                                  0 to 2 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate lime     OR
                                                                                                                  0 to 3 lbs. nitrate of soda               OR
                                                                                                                  0 to 1 1/2 lbs. urea
                      * This hypothetical fertilizer analysis is given as an illustration to group a great quality of speciality turf fertilizers that contain high
				nitrogen, low phosphate, and medium potash levels.
                        Source: VPI&amp;SU, "A Handbook of Agronomy", Publication #600, Blacksburg reprint June 1976.
<pb n="118" />

                     Program 2. Slowly Available Nitrogen                                     per 1000 sq. ft. from a quickly available source may
                        Fertilizers in which 50% or more of the nitrogen is                   be applied in late November or December.
                     water insoluble (70% or more of the total nitrogen de-              2.   If the soil is low in phosphate or potash it may be de-
                     rived from urea formaldehyde).                                           sirable to apply enough additional nutrient(s) to bring
                     Comments:                                                                the total applied for the year to 3 lbs. Fall application
                     1. If needed to improve color, 1 lb. of actual nitrogen                  is preferred.

                                                                Nitrogen Needed
                     Time of Application                        per 1000 Sq. Ft.                     Fertilizer Example-per 1000 Sq. Ft.
                     Aug. 15 to Oct. 1                          3 to 4 lbs.                          25 to 33 lbs. of 12-4-8				OR
                                                                                                     15 to 20 lbs. of 20-10-10			OR
                                                                                                      8 to 10 lbs. of
                                                                                                       urea-formalde,hyde (38-0-0)
                                                                                                       PLUS 4 to 8 lbs. of 0-25-25 or
                                                                                                       equivalent.
                     May 20 to June 30                          0 to 1 1/2 lbs.                       0 to 4 lbs. of urea-formaldehyde		OR
                                                                                                      0 to 12 lbs. of 12-4-8                    OR
                                                                                                      0 to 7 1/2 lbs. of 20-10- 10

                             FERTILIZER PROGRAMS FOR MAINTAINING BERMUDAGRASS AND ZOYSIAGRASS
                     Program 3. Readily Available Nitrogen                                          2.   The July application should not be applied on zoysia-
                        These programs include fertilizers in which 50% or                               grass and may be omitted on bermudagrass turf if
                     less of the nitrogen is slowly available. The slowly avail-                         growth and color are satisfactory.
                     able portion is listed on the fertilizer bag as water insol-                   3.   If the above amounts of phosphate and potash are in
                     uble nitrogen (WIN). Nitrogen not specifically claimed                              excess of needs, apply nitrogen alone for the March,
                     as WIN can be assumed to be readily available.                                      May, and/or June applications.
                        The following comments apply to Programs 3-a and                            4.   Nitrogen should be omitted for the fall application on
                     3-b.                                                                                zoysiagrass and on bermudagrass if not overseeded.
                     1. Readily available sources of nitrogen may cause                                  However, the phosphate and potash should be applied
                        burning, especially in hot weather, if applied at heavy                          durin the fall if these elements are not applied on a
                        rates or not watered in thoroughly after application.                            continuous basis or if a soil test indicates that either
                        Do not exceed suggested rate in a single application.                            element is low.

                     Program 3-a.
                                                                Nitrogen Needed
                     Time of Application                        per 1000 Sq. Ft.					Fertilizer Example-per 1000 Sq. Ft.
                     Sept. 1 to Oct. 15                         0 to 1 1/2 lbs.                             If overseeded:
                        or after overseeding                                                                 8 to 12 lbs. 12-4-8              OR
                                                                                                             5 to 7 1/2 lbs. 20-10-10         OR
                                                                                                             4 to 6 lbs. 25-4-7*
                                                                                                            If not over-seeded:
                                                                                                             0 to 6 lbs. 0-25-25
	               March 1 to April 1                          1 1/2 lbs.                                 12 lbs. 12-4-8                       OR
                                                                                                             7 1/2 lbs. 20-10-10                 OR
                                                                                                             6 lbs. 25-4-7*
                     May 1 to June 1                             1 1/2 lbs.                                 12 lbs. 12-4-8                       OR
                                                                                                             7 1/2 lbs. 20-10-10                 OR
                                                                                                             6 lbs. 25-4-7*
                     July 1 to Aug. 1                            1 to 1 1/2 lbs.                             8 to 12 lbs. 12-4-8                 OR
                                                                                                             5 to 7 1/2 lbs. 20-10-10            OR
                                                                                                             4 to 6 lbs. 25-4-7*

                     *This hypothetical fertilizer analysis is given as an illustration to group a great quantity of speciality turf fertilizers that contain high
                      nitrogen, low phosphate, and medium potash levels.
<pb n="119" />

                     Program 3-b.

                                                                        Nitrogen Needed
                      Time of Application                               Per 1000 Sq. Ft.					Fertilizer Example-per 1000 Sq. Ft.
                      Oct. 1 to Oct. 15                                 0 to 1 1/2 lbs.                           If overseeded:
                          or after overseeding                                                                    10 to 15 lbs. 10-10-10				OR
                                                                                                                  10 to 15 lbs. 5-10-10
                                                                                                                  If not overseeded:
                                                                                                                  0 to 6 lbs. 0-25-25
                      March 1 to April 1                                1 1/2 lbs.                                15 lbs. 10-10-10		           	 	OR
                                                                                                                  15 lbs. 10-5-5
                      May 1 to June 1                                   1 1/2 lbs.                                4 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate    		OR
                                                                                                                  7 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate lime    	OR
                                                                                                                  9 lbs. nitrate of soda              	OR
                                                                                                                  3 1/2 lbs. urea
                      July 1 to Aug. 1                                   1 to 1 1/2 lbs.                          3 to 4 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate    	OR
                                                                                                                  5 to 7 1/2 lbs. ammonium nitrate lime	OR
                                                                                                                  6 to 9 lbs. nitrate of soda               OR
                                                                                                                  2 1/2 to 3 1/2 lbs. urea

                     Program 4. Slowly Available Nitrogen                                 2.   Phosphate and potash applications should not ex-
                          Fertilizers in which 50% or more of the nitrogen is                  ceed 1 1/2 to 3 lbs. per year depending on the level in
                     water insoluble (70% or more of the total nitrogen de-                    the soil. The fall application is most important and
                     rived from urea-formaldehyde).                                            may be the only application of these nutrients needed.
                     Comments:                                                            3.   When using a complete fertilizer make certain that the
                     1. If needed to improve color of overseeded grass, 1 lb.                  water insoluble nitrogen content is 50% or more of
                        of actual nitrogen per 1000 sq. ft. from a quickly                     the total nitrogen. Otherwise, use Program 3-a.
                        available source may be applied in winter between                 4.   Unless overseeded, nitrogen should not be applied
                        November and February.                                                 during fall.

                                                                        Nitrogen Needed
                      Time of Application                               per 1000 Sq. Ft.					Fertilizer Example-per 1000 Sq. Ft.
                      Sept. 1 to Oct. 15                                0 to 3 lbs.                                If overseeded:
                       or after overseeding                                                                        25 lbs. of 12-4-8			OR
                                                                                                                   15 lbs. of 20-10-10                OR
                                                                                                                   8 lbs. urea-formaldehyde
                                                                                                                     PLUS 4 to 8 lbs. 0-25-25
                                                                                                                   If not overseeded:
                                                                                                                   4 to 8 lbs. 0-25-25 or equivalent
                       March I to April 15                               4 lbs.                                    33 lbs.of 12-4-8                                                 OR
                                                                                                                   20 lbs. of 20-10-10                                              OR
                                                                                                                   10 lbs. urea-formaldehyde
                                                                                                                     PLUS 4 to 8 lbs. of
                                                                                                                     0-25-25 or equivalent
                                                                          Lime: Apply enough to obtain and maintain a pH of
                                                                   between 6.0 and 6.5.
                                                                          Recommended height of cut for turfgrass:
                                                                          Grass                                                 Mowing Height
                                                                          Bluegrass                                             1 1/2 to 2"
                                                                          Tall fescue                                           2 to 2 1/2"
                                                                          Creeping red fescue                                   2 to 2 1/2"
                                                                          Bermudagrass     		                          1/2 to 1"
                                                                          Zoysia	                                            3/4 tp 1"
                                                                          Reference: VIP&amp;SU Ext. Div. Pub. 311
<pb n="120" />

                                                                    APPENDIX IV

										CONTENTS OF A WETLAND APPLICATION

	Content			Welands Act Requirement				VIMS Recommendation Amplification

	Identification		Name and address of applicant			Telephone numbers, home and
												business.

	Location			Map showing wetlands affected			A general vicinity map showing
					and location of work thereon.			the location of the project,
												state roads leading to the
												vicinity and county or local
												roads leading to the project.
												Where a project is difficult
												to locate on the ground, an
												additional enlarged sketch of
												the immediate vicinity, with
												directions, is helpful.

	Detail			Map drawn to appropriate and			For new channels:
					uniform scale showing the			  Slope of bank.
					area of wetland affected, with		  Depth of existing channel
                              the location of the work there-		    to which new channel is
					on, indicating the area of			    to be connected.
					existing and proposed fill and		  Whether channel is dead-end
					excavation, especially th lo-			    or will have water flow-
					cation, width, depth, and			    ing through.
					length of any proposed				  Bank erosion control meas-
					channel and the disposal area			    ures.
					all existing and proposed
					structures; sewage collection			For spoil disposal:
					and treatment facilities, util-		  Height of berm.
					ity installations, roadways,			  Width of berm at top and
					on adjacent uplands, and the 			    at bottom.
					type of equipment to be used			  Spillway detail or other
					and the means of equipment			    de-watering technique.
					access to teh activity site;			  Distance of toe of berm
					the names and addresses of 			    from existing marsh.
					owners of record of adjactent			  Erosion control during op-
					land and known claimants of			    eration and revegetating
					water rights in or adjacent to		    detail.
					the wetland of whom th appli-
					cant has notice; an estimate of		For bulkheads, groins, jetties,
					cost; the primary purpose of the		  ect.
					project; any secondary purposes		    Precise dimensions - height,
					of the project, including 			      length, width, depth to
					further projects; the public				be sunk, distances apart.
<pb n="121" />

                                         APPENDIX IV (continued)

		Wetlands Act Requirement			VIMS Recommended Amplification

		benefit to be derived from			Construction materials and
		the proposed project; a 			  details - deadmen; end-
		complete description of				  wall construction.
		measures to be taken during
		and after the alteration to			For upland development:
		reduce determental off-site
		effects; the completion date			  Drainage system and pollutant
		of the proposed work, project			    controls.
		or structure and such ad-			  Density of use--number of
		ditional materials and docu-			    houses, apartments, people
		mentation as the Wetlands			    involved in commercial
		Board may deem necessary.			    operations, number of
									    boats in marina.
									For everything:

									  Land elevations and water
									    depths.

			SOURCE:	Marcellus, Kenneth L., Georg e M. Dawes and Gene M.
					Silberhorn, "Local Management of Wetlands:
					Environmental Considerations," Special Report No. 35,
					Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester
					Point, Virginia, June 1973.
<pb n="122" />

     @41.r

                                                                                                                                                                         i@AL ZONE
                                                                                                                                                          INFORMATION CENTER

                                                                                                                                                                      DATE DUE

                                                                                                                                       F-

                                                                                                                                                              No. 2333                                      PRINTED H U S A

                                                                                                                                                                 I fil mil ifif ril 11111 lill 115111110011114111101 fill

                                                                                                                                                                     3 6668 14107 8149
</text>
</doc>
