DOCSLIB.ORG

2016 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2016 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring And Maine Department of Environmental Protection 2016 Integrated Water Quality Report 2016 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report Appendices: Acronyms, HUC Maps, Definitions, Integrated Lists of Surface Waters, And Maine’s Implementation of EPA’s 303(d) Vision Final 2/28/2018 MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 17 State House Station | Augusta, Maine 04333-0017 www.maine.gov/dep Maine DEP 2016 Integrated Report Appendices i Maine Department of Environmental Protection 2016 Integrated Water Quality Report Table of Contents Appendix I: Acronyms, Maps, Definitions ........................................................................................ 1 Acronyms Found in the Body of the 2016 Integrated Report ..................................................... 1 Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Maps for Appendices II through V ............................................... 5 10-Digit HUCs Map (named) ...................................................................................................... 6 10-Digit HUCs Map (numbered) ................................................................................................. 7 Definitions for Terms Common in Appendices II through V ....................................................... 8 Appendix II: Rivers and Streams ..................................................................................................... 9 Category 1: Rivers and Streams Fully Attaining All Designated Uses ....................................... 9 Category 2: Rivers and Streams Attaining Some Designated Uses - Insufficient Information for Other Uses ............................................................................................................................... 20 Category 3: Rivers and Streams with Insufficient Data or Information to Determine if Designated Uses are Attained (One or More Uses may be Impaired)..................................... 56 Category 4-A: Rivers and Streams with Impaired Use, TMDL Completed .............................. 66 Category 4-B: Rivers and Streams Impaired by Pollutants - Pollution Control Requirements Reasonably Expected to Result in Attainment ......................................................................... 99 Category 4-C: Rivers and Streams with Impairment not Caused by a Pollutant ................... 115 Category 5-A: Rivers and Streams Impaired by Pollutants Other Than Those Listed in 5-B Through 5-D (TMDL Required) .............................................................................................. 117 Category 5-B: Rivers and Streams Impaired for Bacteria Only, TMDL Required .................. 137 Category 5-C: Waters Impaired by Atmospheric Deposition of Mercury ............................... 137 Category 5-D: Rivers and Streams Impaired by Legacy Pollutants ....................................... 137 Appendix III: Lakes ...................................................................................................................... 145 Category 1: Lake Waters Fully Attaining All Designated Uses .............................................. 145 Category 2: Lake Waters within Hydrologic Unit Attaining Some Designated Uses - Insufficient Information for Other Uses (HUCs with lakes added are in bold) .......................................... 149 Category 3: Lake Waters with Insufficient Data or Information to determine if Designated Uses are Attained (One or More Uses may be Impaired) ............................................................... 154 Category 4-A: Waters Impaired by Atmospheric Deposition of Mercury................................ 154 Category 4-A: Lake Waters with Impaired Use Other than Mercury, TMDL Completed ....... 155 Category 4-C: Lake Waters with Impairment not Caused by a Pollutant ............................... 156 Category 5-A: Lake Waters Needing TMDLs ......................................................................... 156 Appendix IV Maine Wetlands Assessment .................................................................................. 158 Category 1: Wetland Habitat Fully Attaining All Designated Uses ......................................... 158 Category 2: Wetland Habitat Attaining Some Designated Uses - Insufficient Information for Other Uses ............................................................................................................................. 158 Category 3: Wetland Habitat with Insufficient Data or Information to Determine if Designated Uses are Attained (One or More Uses may be Impaired) ...................................................... 163 Maine DEP 2016 Integrated Report Appendices ii Maine Department of Environmental Protection 2016 Integrated Water Quality Report Category 4-A: Wetland Habitat with Impaired Use, TMDL Completed .................................. 165 Category 4-B: Wetland Habitat Impaired by Pollutants - Pollution Control Requirements Reasonably Expected to Result in Attainment ....................................................................... 167 Category 4-C: Wetland Habitat with Impairment not Caused by a Pollutant ......................... 167 Category 5-A: Wetland Habitat Impaired by Pollutants Other Than Those Listed in 5-B Through 5-D (TMDL Required) .............................................................................................. 168 Category 5-D: Wetland Habitat Impaired by Legacy Pollutants ............................................. 168 Appendix V: Estuarine and Marine Waters ................................................................................. 170 Category 1: Estuarine and Marine Waters Fully Attaining All Designated Uses .................... 170 Category 2: Estuarine and Marine Waters Attaining Some Designated Uses – Insufficient Information for Other Uses ..................................................................................................... 170 Category 3: Estuarine and Marine Waters with Insufficient Data or Information to Determine if Designated Uses are Attained (One or More Uses may be Impaired)................................... 173 Category 4-A(a): Estuarine and Marine Waters with Impaired Use - TMDL Completed ....... 173 Category 4-A(b): Estuarine and Marine Waters with Impaired Use – TMDL Completed (Bacteria from Combined Sewer Overflows) .......................................................................... 174 Category 4-B-1: Estuarine and Marine Waters Impaired by Pollutants – Pollution Control Requirements Reasonably Expected to Result in Attainment ............................................... 175 Category 4-C: Estuarine and Marine Waters with Impairment not Caused by a Pollutant .... 176 Category 5-A: Estuarine and Marine Waters Impaired by Pollutants Other Than Those Listed in 5-B Through 5-D - TMDL Required .................................................................................... 176 Category 5-B-1(a): Estuarine and Marine Waters Impaired for Bacteria Only – TMDL Required ................................................................................................................................................ 177 Category 5-B-1(b): Estuarine and Marine Waters Impaired for Bacteria Only (Formerly Category 2) – TMDL Required ............................................................................................... 191 Category 5-B-1(c): Estuarine and Marine Waters Impaired for Bacteria Only (Formerly Category 3) – TMDL Required ............................................................................................... 198 Category 5-D: Estuarine and Marine Waters Impaired by Legacy Pollutants ........................ 199 Appendix VI: Maine’s Implementation of EPA’s 303(d) Vision .................................................... 200 Maine DEP 2016 Integrated Report Appendices iii Maine Department of Environmental Protection 2016 Integrated Water Quality Report APPENDIX I: ACRONYMS , MAPS , DEFINITIONS Acronyms Found in the Body of the 2016 Integrated Report No. Term Meaning or Definition 1 303(d) List List of a state's Impaired Waters The 305(b) report is a complete assessment of all water quality management sub- 2 305(b) Report segments in the state for which uses and standards are available. (a.k.a. The Integrated Report) 3 ACE Army Corps of Engineers 4 ADB EPA Database (short for Assessment DataBase) 5 ALU Aquatic Life Use 6 AQUA Index Aquifer Quantitative Use Assessment Index 7 AST Above Ground Storage tank 8 AU Assessment Unit 9 BEACH Beaches Environmental Assessment, Closure and Health 10 BEP, Board Board of Environmental Protection 11 BMP Best Management Practice 12 BOD Biological or Biochemical Oxygen Demand 13 BRFSS Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Survey 14 CAFO Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation 15 CBD Center for Biological Diversity 16 CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response and Comprehensive Liability Act 17 Cfs Cubic feet per second 18 CHL a Chlorophyll a 19 CSO Combined Sewer Overflow 20 CWA Clean Water Act 21 CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund 22 DACF Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry 23 DACF - BAFRR DACF - Bureau of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources 24 DACF - BAFRR - DAPH DACF - BAFRR - Division of Animal and Plant Health 25 DACF – BAFRR - DAPH - BPC DACF – BAFRR - DAPH - Board of Pesticides Control 26 DACF - BAFRR - DARD DACF - BAFRR - Division of Agricultural Resource Development 27 DCFA - BRILUP DCFA - Bureau of Resource Information and Land Use Planning 28 DCFA - BRILUP - LUPC DCFA - BRILUP - Land Use Planning Commission 29
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Preliminary Flood Insurance Study
    VOLUME 4 OF 4 YORK COUNTY, MAINE (ALL JURISDICTIONS) COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER ACTON, TOWN OF 230190 OGUNQUIT, TOWN OF 230632 ALFRED, TOWN OF 230191 OLD ORCHARD BEACH, TOWN OF 230153 ARUNDEL, TOWN Of 230192 PARSONSFIELD, TOWN OF 230154 BERWICK, TOWN OF 230144 SACO, CITY OF 230155 BIDDEFORD, CITY OF 230145 SANFORD, CITY OF 230156 BUXTON, TOWN OF 230146 SHAPLEIGH, TOWN OF 230198 CORNISH, TOWN OF 230147 SOUTH BERWICK, TOWN OF 230157 DAYTON, TOWN OF 230148 WATERBORO, TOWN OF 230199 ELIOT, TOWN OF 230149 WELLS, TOWN OF 230158 HOLLIS, TOWN OF 230150 YORK, TOWN OF 230159 KENNEBUNK, TOWN OF 230151 KENNEBUNKPORT, TOWN OF 230170 KITTERY, TOWN OF 230171 LEBANON, TOWN OF 230193 LIMERICK, TOWN OF 230194 LIMINGTON, TOWN OF 230152 LYMAN, TOWN OF 230195 NEWFIELD, TOWN OF 230196 NORTH BERWICK, TOWN OF 230197 EFFECTIVE: FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 23005CV004A Version Number 2.3.2.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 1 Page SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 The National Flood Insurance Program 1 1.2 Purpose of this Flood Insurance Study Report 2 1.3 Jurisdictions Included in the Flood Insurance Study Project 2 1.4 Considerations for using this Flood Insurance Study Report 20 SECTION 2.0 – FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS 31 2.1 Floodplain Boundaries 31 2.2 Floodways 43 2.3 Base Flood Elevations 44 2.4 Non-Encroachment Zones 44 2.5 Coastal Flood Hazard Areas 45 2.5.1 Water Elevations and the Effects of Waves 45 2.5.2 Floodplain Boundaries and BFEs for Coastal Areas 46 2.5.3 Coastal High Hazard Areas 47 2.5.4 Limit of Moderate Wave Action 48 SECTION
    [Show full text]
  • Implementation of the Great Works River Non-Point Source Pollution Watershed Management Plan" (2010)
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository PREP Publications Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership 2010 Implementation of the Great Works River Non- Point Source Pollution Watershed Management Plan PREP Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.unh.edu/prep Part of the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation PREP, "Implementation of the Great Works River Non-Point Source Pollution Watershed Management Plan" (2010). PREP Publications. Paper 72. http://scholars.unh.edu/prep/72 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in PREP Publications by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Implementation of the Great Works River Non- point Source Pollution Watershed Management Plan 09-060 A Final Report to The Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership Submitted by Tin Smith Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve 342 Laudholm Farm Road Wells Maine 04090 207-646-1555 x 119 [email protected] May 2010 This project was funded in part by a grant from the Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership as authorized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Estuary Program. Table of Contents I. Abstract 1 II. Executive Summary 1 III. Introduction 3 IV. Project Goals and Objectives 4 V. Activities 5 VI. Outcomes 7 VII. Appendices 9 I. Abstract This project was a collaboration between the Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve, Great Works Regional Land Trust, and the Great Works River Watershed Coalition to implement five of the “Highest Priority” tasks from the Action Plan of the Great Works River Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Management Plan (2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Plan Vol. 1, Part 4
    Vol. I, 2009 Edgecomb Comprehensive Plan 24 PART 4 NATURAL RESOURCES CRITICAL NATURAL RESOURCES MAINE’S GROWTH MANAGEMENT GOAL To protect the state's other critical natural resources, including without limitation, wetlands, wildlife and fisheries habitat, sand dunes, shorelands, scenic vistas, and unique natural areas. TOWN VISION To protect Edgecomb’s critical natural resources within and surrounding Edgecomb’s privately- owned undeveloped and unfragmented lands; Edgecomb’s only great pond, Lily Pond; the town- owned Charles and Constance Schmid Land Preserve as well as Edgecomb’s tidal frontage and its scenic vistas. CITIZENS’ VIEW (SURVEY RESPONSE) ● 58%, or 205 respondents, choose to live in Edgecomb because of its proximity to water, clear skies and starry nights. ● 54%, or 177 respondents, enjoy the respect for privacy in Edgecomb. Unfragmented Parcels ● 71%, or 253 respondents, defined rural as (Source: Beginning with Habitat) “the bulk of our land remaining undeveloped, with large tracts of backland, fields and forests.” ● 28%, or 94 respondents, objected to forestry operations “in their back yard.” ● 54%, or 191 respondents, felt that nature preserves are an acceptable trade-off for lost tax revenue. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS The topography of the upper part of the peninsula comprising the Town of Edgecomb is typical of Maine coastline peninsulas. A gently rolling landscape of rocky, clay soil, remaining from land which was heavily wooded before clearing and settlement of the 18th century, is laid over a granite skeleton. A mixture of second and third growth woodland is broken by the pattern of open fields surviving from 18th and 19th century farms when agriculture and fishing were the major sources of livelihood for inhabitants.
    [Show full text]
  • Help DSF Achieve Significant Landmarks Small Property, Big Impact
    *In-ter-vale n. [a blending of INTERVAL + VALE] [Americanism, Chiefly New England] low, flat land between hills or along a river. Webster’s New World Dictionary PROTECTING RIVERS AND WILD ATLANTIC SALMON SINCE 1982 Downeast Salmon Federation P.O. Box 201 Columbia Falls, Maine 04623 INTERVALE D OWNEAST S ALMON F E D ERATION Spring 2019 Documenting the Success of MEANDERS “Choosing to save a river is the Peter Gray Parr Project more often an act of passion than of careful calculation. You make the choice because the river has touched your life in an intimate and irreversible way, because you are unwilling to accept its loss." — David Bolling Photo credit: Keith Williams Help DSF Achieve Thank You to Our ince 2012, over 1 million fall Atlantic Salmon migrate erratic environmental Major Business parr (juvenile Atlantic Salmon) from the rivers to the sea) conditions. In 2018, the Shave been raised in the Peter populations resulting from the estimated total production Significant Landmarks Partners Gray Hatchery and released into PGPP are 4 times higher than was 0.73 smolt per unit of e have been very busy at DSF this events over the last year. There are the East Machias River. During smolt populations generated habitat, increasing from Wpast winter! From our community plans to add several more events this time period, the watershed from other stocking methods; 0.39 at the start of the PGPP; outreach events to our wild Atlantic throughout 2019. You can see experienced record-setting heat, • Age distribution of the PGPP • The neighboring Narraguagus Salmon hatcheries, we are constantly our upcoming schedule at www.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 Long Island Tax Database Rev 2020/01/14
    Page 1 Long Island Tax Database Rev 2020/01/14 Lot # Name1 Addr1 Addr2 Town State Zip Lot # Addr4 Size Exempt H.Exempt Land Value Build Value Total Value Tax Notes 275-0 205 Island Avenue Realty Trust c/o Mark E. Cushing - Trustee 241 Depot Street Duxbury MA 02332 275-0 205 Island Ave. 23,679 $229,340 $72,332 $301,672 $2,377.18 174-0 67 Fowler Road, LLC c/o Barron, Carlene 1 Bexhill Way South Portland ME 04106 174-0 67 Fowler Rd. 28,238 $96,619 $105,867 $202,486 $1,595.59 707-0 Adams, Charles H. etal Jts. 734 Island Avenue Long Island ME 04050 707-0 734 Island Ave. 28,031 $231,516 $68,965 $300,481 $2,367.79 278-0 Aierstok, Mark D. Aierstok, Elaina C. Jts. 32 Losee Lane Rhinebeck NY 12572 278-0 235 Island Ave. 26,236 $0 $274,618 $94,022 $368,640 $2,904.88 128-0 Allen, Ralph L. Jr. Stewart, Donna E. 22 Harrington Lane Long Island ME 04050 128-0 24 Harrington Lane 14,180 $224,590 $30,032 $254,622 $2,006.42 138-0 Allen, Ralph L. Jr. Stewart, Donna E. 22 Harrington Lane Long Island ME 04050 138-0 Island/ Harrington 13,200 $22,800 $0 $22,800 $179.66 650-0 Andrews, Christopher Sean Andrews, Lorien Faith 72 Foreside Road Cumberland ME 04110 650-0 Fern Ave. 60,000 $92,525 $0 $92,525 $729.10 729-0 Arbour, Ellen M. etal 10170 NE Winters Road Bainbridge Is WA 98110 729-0 Island Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Surplus, Five-Year Review, 09-30-2006, Sdms
    Superfund Records Center SITE: £•' g*- vH J ^ p BREAK: SDMS DOCID 260018 OTHER: t FIVE-YEAR REVIEW EASTERN SURPLUS COMPANY SUPERFUND SITE MEDDYBEMPS, MAINE Prepared by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 Boston, Massachusetts 0<\ /\ I Susan Studlien, Director Date ' * Office of Site Remediation and Restoration ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the first five-year review for the Eastern Surplus Company Superfund Site (Site). This statutory five-year review is required since hazardous contamination remains at the Site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. The review was completed in accordance with EPA guidance entitled "Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance," OSWER No. 9355.7-03B-P, June 2001. Starting in 1946, two owners, Harry Smith, Sr., and Harry Smith, Jr., used the Site as a storage and salvage yard. The area north of Route 191 at one time had debris/junk covering over 50% of the area, with thick vegetation covering the remaining areas. Some of the junk/surplus materials contained hazardous substances that were released into the site soils and further released into the groundwater. In 1985 Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP) performed an inspection and identified the Site as an uncontrolled hazardous substance site. Maine DEP initiated a removal action to stabilize the Site, including removing approximately 120 transformers and other waste and fencing the Site. At the request of Maine DEP, EPA then took over the removal activities. Most of the liquid hazardous waste, drums, containers, and compressed gas cylinders were removed during the first EPA removal action in the 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • Goose Rocks Beach Final Report Pages 1
    Summer 2006 Goose Rocks Beach Water Quality Monitoring Project FINAL REPORT - November 2006 FB Environmental Hillier & Associates Jackson Estuarine Laboratory environmental Final Report - November 2006 Water Quality Monitoring Report for Goose Rocks Beach Watershed TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Project Background 1 1.2 Problem Definition 2 2. Description of Study Area 2 2.1 Bedrock Geology 2 2.2 Topography 2 2.3 Surficial Geology___________________________________________________ 3 2.4 Soils 3 2.4 Landcover 4 2.5 Beach and Marshes_____________________________________________________4 3. Study Design 5 3.1 Preliminary Hotspots Identification_ 5 3.2 Field Reconnaissance 9 3.3 Sampling Regime 9 4. Field Sampling 10 4.1 Water Quality Monitoring 10 4.2 Field Observations 11 4.3 Fluorometric Assessment 11 5. Results 14 5.1 Enterococci 14 5.2 Fluorometry 15 5.3 Discussion of Human-Nonhuman Sources___________________________________19 6. Recommendations 19 6.1 Strategies for Additional Characterization of Potential Bacteria Sources 19 6.2 Management Strategies 21 6.3 Potential Funding Sources for Additional Work 24 REFERENCES 25 APPENDICES Appendix A: Raw Data Results and Field Observations 27 Appendix B: Goose Rocks Beach Watershed Maps 33 Appendix C: Summary Charts for Bacteria and Flourescence Results 44 Appendix D: DEP’s Suggested Work Plan for Decreasing Bacteria Concentrations GRB 68 Appendix E: Glossary of Terms___________________________________________________71 i Final Report—November 2006 Water Quality
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo Salar)
    Final Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Approved: Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Date NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate actions that are thought to be necessary to recover andlor protect endangered species. Recovery plans are prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies and others. This Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) was prepared by the staff of the Northeast Regional Offices of NMFS with the assistance of the FWS and the Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission (ASC). While the State of Maine provided recommendations for this plan, it was developed using federal guidelines and policies pertaining to recovery plans for federally listed species. Recovery plans are not regulatory or decision documents. The recommendations in a recovery plan are not considered final decisions unless and until they are actually proposed for implementation. Objectives will only be attained and hnds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities and other budgetary constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Mainedot Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation
    Maine State Library Digital Maine Transportation Documents Transportation 2-2019 MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalmaine.com/mdot_docs Recommended Citation Maine Department of Transportation, "MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021" (2019). Transportation Documents. 124. https://digitalmaine.com/mdot_docs/124 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Transportation at Digital Maine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transportation Documents by an authorized administrator of Digital Maine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 February 2019 February 21, 2019 MaineDOT Customers and Partners: On behalf of the 2,000 valued employees of the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT), I am privileged to present this 2019 Edition of our Work Plan for the three Calendar Years 2019, 2020 and 2021. Implementation of this plan allows us to achieve our mission of responsibly providing our customers with the safest and most reliable transportation system possible, given available resources. Like all recent editions, this Work Plan includes all capital projects and programs, maintenance and operations activities, planning initiatives, and administrative functions. This plan contains 2,193 individual work items with a total value of $2.44 billion, consisting principally of work to be delivered or coordinated through MaineDOT, but also including funding and work delivered by other transportation agencies that receive federal funds directly including airports and transit agencies. Although I have the pleasure of presenting this plan, it is really the product of staff efforts dating back to the summer of last year.
    [Show full text]
  • Chebeague Island, Maine
    Photograph by Cathy MacNeill Town of Chebeague Island, Maine Comprehensive Plan Draft March 14, 2011 Volume I: Findings, Goals and Recommendations 1 Members of the Town of Chebeague Island Comprehensive Planning Committee 2008-2011 Sam Birkett Leila Bisharat Ernie Burgess Donna Damon Mabel Doughty Bob Earnest Jane Frizzell Beth Howe Peter Olney Also involved: Sam Ballard Erno Bonebakker Donna Colbeth David Hill Sheila Jordan Philip Jordan Andy LeMaistre Albert Traina Vail Traina Carol White The research on the condition of the Town’s roads was done by Mark Dyer, Beth Howe and Herb Maine. Consultants: Hugh Coxe, New England Planning Concepts Judy Colby-George, Spatial Alternatives Thea Youngs, Island Institute GIS Fellow Sue Burgess, Editor i Town of Chebeague Island Comprehensive Plan Table of Contents Volume I: Findings, Goals and Recommendations A Future Vision for Chebeague 2 Part I: Introduction and Summary 4 1. Introduction 5 2. Goals, Recommendations and Implementation: A Summary 16 Table 1: All Recommendations 18 Part II: Discussion of Issues and Recommendations 53 1. Clean Waters 54 a. Groundwater 57 b. Surface Water 60 c. The Waters of Casco Bay 60 2. Preserving Community 63 a. Present and Future Population 64 b. The Chebeague Economy 67 c. The Cost of Living: Housing, Energy and Transportation 90 d. Education 100 e. Community Services Provided by Island Organizations 105 3. Future Use of the Town’s Land and Waters 113 a. Future Land Use 115 b. Historic and Archaeological Resources 141 c. Wharves, Waterfront and the Outer Islands 147 d. Management of the Town’s Waters 160 4.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 Comprehensive Plan.Pdf
    NAPLES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgments 1 INTRODUCTION 3 What is a Comprehensive Plan? 3 How can a Comprehensive Plan serve the Town of Naples? 3 What is Smart Growth? 4 Benefits After Adoption 5 Public Participation in the Planning Process 5 Goals, Objectives and Policies 6 Implementation Strategies 6 SECTION 1: ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE FUTURE 8 1.1 Community Character 9 1.2 Survey Results 15 1.3 Vision Statement 20 SECTION 2: INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 23 2.1 The People of Naples 24 2.2 Housing 38 2.3 The Economy 54 2.4 Existing Land Use 62 2.5 Natural Resources Inventory 75 2.6 Agricultural and Forest Resources 109 2.7 Cultural Resources 112 2.8 Public Facilities and Services 115 2.9 Transportation 122 2.10 Recreation and Public Access 127 2.11 Fiscal Capacity 131 SECTION 3: SUMMARY AND FINDINGS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND FUTURE LAND USE NEEDS 139 3.1 Projected Growth and its Impacts 140 3.2 Projected Growth and What Naples Wants 142 3.3 Summary Listing of Planning Issues facing the Town of Naples 142 SECTION 4: GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND STRATEGIES 148 4.1 Goals, Objectives, Policies and Strategies of the Town of Naples 149 4.1.1 Citizen Participation 150 4.1.2 Fiscal Policy 152 4.1.2.1 Capital Investment Plan 155 4.1.3 Public Facilities and Services 158 4.1.4 Recreation and Public Access 163 4.1.5 Cultural Resources 166 ii 4.1.6 Economic Expansion 170 4.1.7 Housing 176 4.1.8 Future Land Use 181 4.1.9 Transportation 186 4.1.10 Agriculture and Forest Resources 192 4.1.11 Water Resources 196 4.1.12 Critical Natural Resources 204 SECTION 5: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN 209 5.1 Future Land Use Planning Process 210 5.2 Future Land Use Map 210 SECTION 6: APPENDIX 215 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Notice to Flood Insurance Study Users
    LINCOLN COUNTY, MAINE (ALL JURISDICTIONS) Lincoln County COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER Alna, Town of 230083 Monhegan Plantation 230511 Bar Island 230916 Newcastle, Town of 230218 Boothbay, Town of 230212 Nobleboro, Town of 230219 Boothbay Harbor, Town of 230213 Polins Ledges Island 230929 Bremen, Town of 230214 Ross Island 230922 Bristol, Town of 230215 Somerville, Town of 230512 Damariscotta, Town of 230216 South Bristol, Town of 230220 Dresden, Town of 230084 Southport, Town of 230221 Edgecomb, Town of 230217 Thief Island 230920 Haddock Island 230918 Thrumcap Island 230928 Hibberts Gore, Township of 230712 Waldoboro, Town of 230086 Hungry Island 230917 Webber Dry Ledge Island 230930 Indian Island 230919 Western Egg Rock Island 230926 Jefferson, Town of 230085 Westport, Town of 230222 Jones Garden Island 230925 Whitefield, Town of 230087 Killick Stone Island 230927 Wiscasset, Town of 230223 Louds Island 230915 Wreck Island 230924 Marsh Island 230921 Wreck Island Ledge 230923 PRELIMINARY DATE: February 7, 2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 23015CV001A NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report.
    [Show full text]