DOCSLIB.ORG

Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Feasibility Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

New Jersey Shore Protection Study US Army Corps of Engineers New Jersey Department of Philadelphia District Environmental Protection Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Feasibility Study Volume 1 Final Feasibility Report Integrated Environmental Impact Statement Appendix G* – Pertinent Correspondence June 2002 New Jersey Shore Protection Study Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Final Feasibility Report Integrated Environmental Impact Statement June 2002 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Philadelphia District New Jersey Shore Protection Study Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Final Feasibility Report and Integrated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) June 2002 ABSTRACT: This feasibility report and Environmental Impact Statement presents findings of a study to determine a feasible hurricane and storm damage reduction plan for coastal communities located between Manasquan Inlet and Barnegat Inlet, NJ. The report describes the engineering, economic, social, and environmental analyses that were conducted to develop a selected plan of action. Potential impacts to cultural and environmental resources are evaluated herein in accordance with NEPA and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. NOTE TO READER: To provide full and convenient access to the environmental, economic, and engineering documentation prepared for the study, the EIS for this project has been integrated into this feasibility report in accordance with Engineering Regulation 1105-2-100. Sections required for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are noted by an asterisk (*) in the Table of Contents. Furthermore, Appendix G* – Pertinent Correspondence was bound with Volume 1 of the final report due to the significance of the content and to simplify the coordination process. New Jersey Shore Protection Study Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Final Feasibility Report and Integrated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Proposed Action: Hurricane and storm damage reduction for communities between Manasquan Inlet and Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey using beach fill to construct a protective berm and dune. Location of Action: Boroughs of Point Pleasant Beach, Bay Head, Mantoloking, Lavallette, Seaside Heights, and Seaside Park; and Townships of Brick, Dover, and Berkeley. Type of Statement: Final Feasibility Report and Integrated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Lead Agency: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District More Information: For further information please contact: Paul Gaudini, P.E., Acting Chief, Planning Division Attn: Beth Brandreth, Environmental Resources Branch U.S. Army Engineer District, Philadelphia Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390 Telephone: (215) 656-6555 Executive Summary ES-1 Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Final Feasibility Report Summary This report presents the results of a feasibility study to determine an implementable solution and the extent of Federal participation for a project that provides hurricane and storm damage reduction for communities located on the Atlantic coast of New Jersey between Manasquan Inlet and Barnegat Inlet. The lead agency for this study is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District. The Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet study covers one of six study areas recommended by the New Jersey Shore Protection Study. The study was authorized by resolutions by the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate in December 1987. This feasibility report was prepared based on recommendations of the reconnaissance study completed in March 1996 that identified potential solutions to erosion and storm damage problems within the study area. The reconnaissance study determined that such a solution was in the Federal interest and identified the Non-Federal sponsor. The feasibility study was cost shared between the Federal Government and the State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and was conducted under provisions of the Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement executed 17 April 1997. The study area is located in central New Jersey and extends approximately 24 miles from Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet. The study area lies in Ocean County and consists of a barrier spit that is connected to the mainland at the northern end and extends to the south. The feasibility study evaluated various alternative plans to provide hurricane and storm damage reduction benefits. The study area is vulnerable to storm erosion, wave, and inundation damage produced by hurricanes and northeasters. Severe storms in recent years have continued to erode the beaches and have exposed communities to potential for catastrophic coastal erosion and flooding damages. Two reaches were delineated within the study area and evaluated separately for proposed solutions. The southern reach extends approximately 10 miles from Barnegat Inlet northward to Berkeley Township and encompasses Island Beach State Park. No action is recommended for this reach, based on minimal storm damage reduction benefits and State agencies’ desires to preserve this area as a natural setting with no direct intervention to control beach processes. The northern reach extends approximately 14 miles from Berkeley Township northward to Point Pleasant Beach at Manasquan Inlet with oceanfront that is essentially fully developed. The selected plan for this reach consists of berm and dune restoration using sand obtained from offshore borrow sources. The design dune crest has a top elevation of +22 ft NAVD at all areas except Seaside Heights and northern Point Pleasant Beach, where the design dune crest elevation is +18 ft NAVD. The design berm extends 75 ft in front of the dune except at Seaside Heights and northern Point Pleasant Beach, where the design berm width is 100 ft. The design berm crest elevation corresponds to the average existing berm elevation, which is +8.5 ft NAVD at all Executive Summary ES-2 Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Final Feasibility Report areas except northern Point Pleasant Beach where the natural berm crest transitions to +11.5 ft NAVD due to influence of the Manasquan Inlet south jetty. The proposed project extends approximately 14 miles. The selected beach fill plan tapers to the existing beach width at the southern end of the project, adjacent to Island Beach State Park. The northern end of selected plan terminates at the Manasquan Inlet south jetty, with no taper. Initial sand quantity is estimated at 10,689,000 cu yds and includes design fill quantity, advanced fill, and overfill. Periodic nourishment quantity is estimated at 961,000 cu yds on a 4-year nourishment cycle. Identified borrow areas contain approximately 17.5 million cu yds for initial construction and approximately 6 nourishment cycles (through year 24). Additional borrow sites may be required for subsequent nourishment cycles, assuming no future infilling of the identified borrow areas. Alternate borrow sites to provide the remaining quantity will be identified in an off-shore area beyond the three-mile limit. Investigations during the Preconstruction, Engineering, and Design (PED) phase will identify the specific sites to be used. A Section 404(b)(1) evaluation has been prepared and is included in this Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement. This evaluation concludes that the proposed action would not result in any significant environmental impacts relative to the areas of concern under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. The selected plan has primary output based on hurricane and storm damage reduction. The plan provides average annual net benefits of approximately $5,350,000 and a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.9. The total initial project construction cost is estimated at $58,223,000 (September 2000 price level) and would be cost-shared 65% Federal, 35% non-Federal. The Federal share of this first cost is $37,845,000 and the non-Federal share is $20,378,000. Lands, Easements, Rights-of Ways, Relocations, and Dredged Material Disposal Areas (LERRD) costs are estimated at $3,691,000 and will be credited towards the Non-Federal Sponsor’s cash contribution. Periodic nourishment is expected to occur at 4-year intervals subsequent to completion of initial construction (year 0). Over 50 years, total periodic nourishment cost is estimated at $96,920,000 (September 2000 price level) and includes E&D monitoring during construction. Based on the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1999, cost sharing for periodic nourishment would be 50% Federal and 50% non-Federal for sand placement costs and 100% non-Federal for major replacement of dune grass, sand fence, and crossovers. The ultimate cost of construction which includes initial construction, project monitoring, and 50 years of periodic nourishment is estimated to be $155,143,000 (September 2000 price level), cost-shared 54% Federal and 46% non-Federal, based on WRDA 1999 cost-sharing. All costs include planning, engineering, and design. Operation, Maintenance, Repair, Replacement, and Rehabilitation (OMRR&R), estimated at $100,000 annually, is not included in this cost and is a non-Federal responsibility. Executive Summary ES-3 Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet Final Feasibility Report N E W Manasquan Inlet Extent of # Study Area Point Pleasant Beach J E R S E Y # Bay Head ± S T # I Mantoloking M I L T N Brick Township C E J Dover Township O R P D E S # 37 Lavallette O P O #Seaside Heights R P± # Seaside Park Y Berkeley Township A W Y K R A A P B T A Island Beach E G T State Park A E T S N R A N B E
Recommended publications
  • Data Dictionary for Grain-Size Data Tables

    Data Dictionary for Grain-Size Data Tables

    Data Dictionary for Grain-Size Data Tables The table below describes the attributes (data columns) for the grain-size data tables presented in this report. The metadata for the grain-size data are not complete if they are not distibuted with this document. Attribute_Label Attribute_Definition SAMPLE ID Sediment Sample identification number DEPTH (cm) Sample depth interval, in centimeters Physical description of sediment textural group - describes the dominant grain size class of the sample (after Folk, 1954): SEDIMENT TEXTURE (Folk, 1954) Sand, Clayey Sand, Muddy Sand, Silty Sand, Sandy Clay, Sandy Mud, Sandy Silt, Clay, Mud, or Silt AVERAGED SAMPLE RUNS Number of sample runs (N) included in the averaged statistics or other relavant information MEAN GRAIN SIZE (mm) Mean grain size, in microns (after Folk and Ward, 1957) MEAN GRAIN SIZE STANDARD DEVIATION (mm) Standard deviation of mean grain size, in microns SORTING (mm) Sample sorting - the standard deviation of the grain size distribution, in microns (after Folk and Ward, 1957) SORTING STANDARD DEVIATION (mm) Standard deviation of sorting, in microns SKEWNESS (mm) Sample skewness - deviation of the grain size distribution from symmetrical, in microns (after Folk and Ward, 1957) SKEWNESS STANDARD DEVIATION (mm) Standard deviation of skewness, in microns KURTOSIS (mm) Sample kurtosis - degree of curvature near the mode of the grain size distribution, in microns (after Folk and Ward, 1957) KURTOSIS STANDARD DEVIATION (mm) Standard deviation of kurtosis, in microns MEAN GRAIN SIZE (ɸ) Mean
  • Observation of Rip Currents by Synthetic Aperture Radar

    Observation of Rip Currents by Synthetic Aperture Radar

    OBSERVATION OF RIP CURRENTS BY SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR José C.B. da Silva (1) , Francisco Sancho (2) and Luis Quaresma (3) (1) Institute of Oceanography & Dept. of Physics, University of Lisbon, 1749-016 Lisbon, Portugal (2) Laboratorio Nacional de Engenharia Civil, Av. do Brasil, 101 , 1700-066, Lisbon, Portugal (3) Instituto Hidrográfico, Rua das Trinas, 49, 1249-093 Lisboa , Portugal ABSTRACT Rip currents are near-shore cellular circulations that can be described as narrow, jet-like and seaward directed flows. These flows originate close to the shoreline and may be a result of alongshore variations in the surface wave field. The onshore mass transport produced by surface waves leads to a slight increase of the mean water surface level (set-up) toward the shoreline. When this set-up is spatially non-uniform alongshore (due, for example, to non-uniform wave breaking field), a pressure gradient is produced and rip currents are formed by converging alongshore flows with offshore flows concentrated in regions of low set-up and onshore flows in between. Observation of rip currents is important in coastal engineering studies because they can cause a seaward transport of beach sand and thus change beach morphology. Since rip currents are an efficient mechanism for exchange of near-shore and offshore water, they are important for across shore mixing of heat, nutrients, pollutants and biological species. So far however, studies of rip currents have mainly relied on numerical modelling and video camera observations. We show an ENVISAT ASAR observation in Precision Image mode of bright near-shore cell-like signatures on a dark background that are interpreted as surface signatures of rip currents.
  • Part III-2 Longshore Sediment Transport

    Part III-2 Longshore Sediment Transport

    Chapter 2 EM 1110-2-1100 LONGSHORE SEDIMENT TRANSPORT (Part III) 30 April 2002 Table of Contents Page III-2-1. Introduction ............................................................ III-2-1 a. Overview ............................................................. III-2-1 b. Scope of chapter ....................................................... III-2-1 III-2-2. Longshore Sediment Transport Processes ............................... III-2-1 a. Definitions ............................................................ III-2-1 b. Modes of sediment transport .............................................. III-2-3 c. Field identification of longshore sediment transport ........................... III-2-3 (1) Experimental measurement ............................................ III-2-3 (2) Qualitative indicators of longshore transport magnitude and direction ......................................................... III-2-5 (3) Quantitative indicators of longshore transport magnitude ..................... III-2-6 (4) Longshore sediment transport estimations in the United States ................. III-2-7 III-2-3. Predicting Potential Longshore Sediment Transport ...................... III-2-7 a. Energy flux method .................................................... III-2-10 (1) Historical background ............................................... III-2-10 (2) Description ........................................................ III-2-10 (3) Variation of K with median grain size................................... III-2-13 (4) Variation of K with
  • OCEANS ´09 IEEE Bremen

    OCEANS ´09 IEEE Bremen

    11-14 May Bremen Germany Final Program OCEANS ´09 IEEE Bremen Balancing technology with future needs May 11th – 14th 2009 in Bremen, Germany Contents Welcome from the General Chair 2 Welcome 3 Useful Adresses & Phone Numbers 4 Conference Information 6 Social Events 9 Tourism Information 10 Plenary Session 12 Tutorials 15 Technical Program 24 Student Poster Program 54 Exhibitor Booth List 57 Exhibitor Profiles 63 Exhibit Floor Plan 94 Congress Center Bremen 96 OCEANS ´09 IEEE Bremen 1 Welcome from the General Chair WELCOME FROM THE GENERAL CHAIR In the Earth system the ocean plays an important role through its intensive interactions with the atmosphere, cryo- sphere, lithosphere, and biosphere. Energy and material are continually exchanged at the interfaces between water and air, ice, rocks, and sediments. In addition to the physical and chemical processes, biological processes play a significant role. Vast areas of the ocean remain unexplored. Investigation of the surface ocean is carried out by satellites. All other observations and measurements have to be carried out in-situ using research vessels and spe- cial instruments. Ocean observation requires the use of special technologies such as remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), towed camera systems etc. Seismic methods provide the foundation for mapping the bottom topography and sedimentary structures. We cordially welcome you to the international OCEANS ’09 conference and exhibition, to the world’s leading conference and exhibition in ocean science, engineering, technology and management. OCEANS conferences have become one of the largest professional meetings and expositions devoted to ocean sciences, technology, policy, engineering and education.
  • Evolution and Grain Size Distribution of Bahamian Ooid Shoals From

    Evolution and Grain Size Distribution of Bahamian Ooid Shoals From

    Movement and grain size distribution of Bahamian sand shoals from remote sensing Kathryn M. Stack Michael Lamb, Ralph Milliken, Sebastien Leprince, John Grotzinger California Institute of Technology KISS Monitoring Earth Surface Changes From Space II 3/30/10 Motivation: Understand how sediment moves underwater Transport Grain size Implicaons Evoluon of shallow Petroleum and natural CO2 reservoirs bathymetry gas reservoirs 2 How remote sensing data can help • Obtain a 2-D snapshot of a modern day shallow carbonate environment • Build up a time series of morphology and grain size • Quantify the distribution and movement of sediment at a variety of temporal and spatial scales –Tides versus storms? • Use the modern to better understand the 3-D patterns of porosity and permeability in the rock record The Bahamas: A modern carbonate environment Florida The Atlantic Ocean The Bahamas Cuba 100 km Google Earth Tongue of the Ocean Schooner Cays 20 km 20 km Exumas Lily Bank 2 km 2 km Tongue of the Ocean 10 km 1 Crest spacing ~ 1‐10 km Google Earth 3 Crest spacing ~ 100 m 2 1 km Crest spacing ~ 1 km ASTER, Band 1 20 m Sediment transport and bedform migration Bedform spatial scales = 5-10 cm, 1 m, 10-100 m, 1-10 km Temporal scales = Hours, days, years Δy Δx Transport Ideal Imaging Campaign • High enough spatial resolution to see bedform crests on a number of scales - Sub-meter resolution - Auto-detection system • High enough temporal resolution to distinguish between slow steady processes and storms - Image collection every 3 to 6 hours • Spectral resolution depending on bedform scale of interest Also useful: • High resolution water topography (sub-meter resolution) • Track currents, tides, and water velocity Application of COSI-Corr • Use the COSI-Corr software developed by Leprince et al.
  • The Effect of Variable Grain Size Distribution on Beach's

    The Effect of Variable Grain Size Distribution on Beach's

    Delft University of Technology Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences Department of Hydraulic Engineering MSc Thesis THE EFFECT OF VARIABLE GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ON BEACH’S MORPHOLOGICAL RESPONSE Graduation committee: Prof.dr.ir. A.J.H.M. Reniers Author: Dr.ir. Matthieu de Schipper Melike Koktas Ir. Tjerk Zitman Dr. Edith L. Gallagher May 2017 P a g e 2 | 67 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Field studies with in-situ sediment sampling demonstrate the spatial variability in grain size on a sandy beach. However, conventional numerical models that are used to simulate the coastal morphodynamics ignore this variability of sediment grain size and use a uniform grain size distribution of mostly around and assumed fine grain size. This thesis study investigates the importance of variable grain size distribution in a beach’s morphological response. For this purpose, first a field experiment campaign was conducted at the USACE Field Research Facility (FRF) in Duck, USA, in the spring of 2014. This experiment campaign was called SABER_Duck as an acronym for ‘Stratigraphy And BEach Response’. During SABER_Duck, in-situ swash zone grain size distribution, the prevailing hydrodynamic conditions and the time-series of the cross-shore bathymetry data were collected. The data confirmed a highly variable grain size distribution in the swash zone both vertically and horizontally. Additionally, the two trench survey observations showed the existence of continuous layers of coarse and fine sands comprising the beach stratigraphy. Secondly, a process based numerical coastal morphology model, XBeach, was chosen to simulate the beach profile response to wave and tidal action. A 1D cross-shore profile model was built and tested with the bathymetry data and accompanying boundary conditions that were collected during SABER_Duck.
  • BARNEGAT BAY 2020 BARNEGAT BAY 2020 a Vision for the Future of Conservation

    BARNEGAT BAY 2020 BARNEGAT BAY 2020 a Vision for the Future of Conservation

    A Vision for the Future of Conservation BARNEGAT BAY 2020 BARNEGAT BAY 2020 A Vision for the Future of Conservation A Report by The Trust for Public Land July 2008 © 2008 The Trust for Public Land. All rights reserved. Contents Preface 2 Introduction 3 Current Conditions 3 Priority Maps 15–22 The Greenprinting Process 25 Barnegat Bay 2020 Goals 25 Next Steps 28 Property Portraits 30 Looking Forward 34 Acknowledgements 35 Appendix 37 Preface Perched on the highest spot at Ocean County lost, and ecosystem functions, many that we take College, I can see Barnegat Bay off to the east. for granted, may be compromised. If we don’t rec- The view from this vantage point provides a respite ognize the point upon which we stand, we may lose from work and reminds me of other favorite coastal the very qualities that attracted us here. Thus, it is perches—coastal cliffs in southern New England, vital that we take immediate steps to protect the the bluffs of the Palisades along the Hudson River, remaining open space throughout the watershed. and the coastal highway that winds along the craggy coast near Big Sur. Perhaps most importantly, the In recognition of these cliffs, The Trust for Public view here reminds me that all of us in the Barnegat Land (TPL) pulled together the regional stake- Bay watershed, like the inhabitants in those other holders—local, state, and federal agencies, educa- coastal areas, are poised on the edge of other less tional institutions, and other non-governmental welcoming cliffs—cliffs of our own making.
  • Master Plan Reexamination Report & Update

    Master Plan Reexamination Report & Update

    Master Plan Reexamination Report & Update Borough of Belmar Monmouth County, New Jersey Prepared by: Zachary Zeilman, Planner August 2016 Adopted by the Planning Board: _____________ The original of this report was signed and sealed in accordance with N.J.S.A. 45:14A-12. Master Plan Reexamination Report & Update Borough of Belmar This page has been left blank intentionally 1 | Page Master Plan Reexamination Report & Update Borough of Belmar 2016 Borough of Belmar Planning Board Mayor Matthew Doherty, Class I Member Mike Campbell, Director of Public Works, Class II Member Councilman, Brian Magovern, Class III Member Ed Windas, Chairman, Class IV Member Rick Meyer, Vice Chairperson, Class IV Chris Hoffman, Class IV Member Tom Burke, Class IV Member Judy Rokoszak, Class IV Member Thea Sheridan, Class IV Member Robert Forte, Alternate #1 Larry Renolds, Alternate #2 Douglas Kovats, Esq., Board Attorney April Claudio, Board Secretary Planning Consultants David G. Roberts, P.P., A.I.C.P., LLA, LEED AP ND, Senior Associate Zachary Zeilman, Planner Maser Consulting, P.A. 331 Newman Springs Road #203 Red Bank, NJ 07701 \\maserconsulting.com\ren\general\projects\bmp\bmp-028\reports\planning\master plan reexamination\160803_belmar-masterplan-reexam_bmp028.docx 2 | Page Master Plan Reexamination Report & Update Borough of Belmar 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 4 2. PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES SINCE 2006 MASTER PLAN REEXAMINATION
  • Township of Toms River

    Township of Toms River

    FINAL REPORT PER NJDCA & OBVTA COMMENTS September 5, 2014 TOWNSHIP OF TOMS RIVER THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED WITH A GRANT FROM THE NJ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS POST SANDY RECOVERY PLANNING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM STRATEGIC RECOVERY PLANNING REPORT Prepared By: David G. Roberts, P.P., AICP, LLA, LEED AP ND Darlene A. Green, P.P., AICP Daniel N. Bloch, P.P., AICP MC Project No.: 13002007G Toms River Township | Strategic Recovery Planning Report FINAL REPORT- July 2014 CONTENTS Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Impacts & Needs Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 1 Community Profile ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Strengths and Opportunities ................................................................................................................................. 2 Impact Assessment .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Vulnerability Assessment....................................................................................................................................
  • Section 5: Risk Assessment – Flood

    Section 5: Risk Assessment – Flood

    SECTION 5: RISK ASSESSMENT – FLOOD Table of Contents SECTION 5 Risk Assessment ................................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Hazard Profile ............................................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Hazard Description ...................................................................................................................................... 5-1 Previous Occurrences and Losses ...................................................................................................... 5-39 Probability of Future Occurrences ..................................................................................................... 5-56 Climate Change Impacts .................................................................................................................... 5-61 Future Trends ..................................................................................................................................... 5-63 Scenario .............................................................................................................................................. 5-64 Issues .............................................................................................................................................. 5-64 5.3 Vulnerability Assessment .........................................................................................................................
  • The Barnegat Bay Watershed Educational Resource Guide

    The Barnegat Bay Watershed Educational Resource Guide

    Barnegat Bay Watershed Educational Resource Guide Prepared by Christine R. Raabe For the Ocean County Soil Conservation District and the Barnegat Bay Watershed Environmental Educators Roundtable Updated: March 2012 by the Barnegat Bay Partnership Table of Contents Introduction How to Use this Guide 1. Organizations and Agencies Involved with Barnegat Bay Watershed Education 2. National Organizations for Additional Resources 3. A Synopsis of Teacher Resources 4. Other Resource Guides and Directories 5. Map Resources 6. Barnegat Bay Watershed Environmental Educators Roundtable Steering Committee Members i Introduction The Ocean County Soil Conservation District and the Barnegat Bay Watershed Environmental Educators Roundtable discovered that educators within the watershed need assistance in finding pertinent information and resources if they are to effectively teach about the Barnegat Bay watershed and the issues that impact it. This guide has been compiled to answer that need. What began as a simple directory has grown into an annotated compendium of resources and organizations offering numerous programs, publications, field trips, and watershed information which educators can incorporate into their lessons and activities. It is a guide that will prove useful to anyone searching for information about the features and functions of the Barnegat Bay watershed. This Educator’s Resource Guide will be updated periodically. Please help us keep the document current by e-mailing Mary Judge at [email protected] with any additions, deletions, or corrections to the entries in this directory. Thank you for your help with this ongoing project. Original funding for this guide was provided by the USEPA and the NJDEP through the Barnegat Bay Partnership (BBP, formerly Barnegat Bay National Estuary Program) and the Partnership for Nonpoint Source Pollution Control in the Barnegat Bay Watershed.
  • T O the Bo Ocean Orough N Count H of Po Ty, New Oint Ple W Jerse Stra

    T O the Bo Ocean Orough N Count H of Po Ty, New Oint Ple W Jerse Stra

    The Borough of Point Pleasant Beach Ocean County, New Jersey Strategic Recovery Planning Report May 2014 Borough of Point Pleasant Beach Ocean County, New Jersey Strategic Recovery Planning Report May 2014 Prepared by: 11 Tindall Road Middletown, NJ 07748 ________________________ ________________________ Martin T. Truscott, PP, AICP Richard S. Cramer, PP, AICP NJ Professional Planner No.: 02443 NJ Professional Planner No.: 02207 The original of this document was signed and sealed in accordance with New Jersey Law. BOROUGH OF POINT PLEASANT BEACH STRATEGIC RECOVERY PLANNING REPORT OCEAN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY Executive Summary When Hurricane Sandy struck the coast of New Jersey on October 29, 2012, it brought extensive damage to Point Pleasant Beach Borough. A large number of residential properties and businesses suffered damage. Additionally, roadways were flooded and covered with sand, and electricity service was disrupted. The Borough also experienced damage to bulkheads, dunes, its boardwalk, and other important features. In response to the impacts of Hurricane Sandy, the Borough’s recovery efforts have been extensive. For example, it: evacuated residents; enacted a curfew and banned the sale of alcoholic beverages; filled barricades and cordoned off dangerous areas; responded to gas leaks and other disaster-related fire alarms and fires; cut and removed downed power lines; built a berm to protect property at the terminus of Arnold Avenue; cleaned sand from storm drains; made emergency repairs to sewer and water lines; removed storm-generated