DOCSLIB.ORG

CT SLAMM Project Areas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CT SLAMM Project Areas Advancing Existing Assessment of Connecticut Marshes’ Response to SLR Final Report September, 2016 (corrected January 2019 to fix road-flooding-counting statistics) Prepared for: Northeast Regional Oceans Council Prepared by: Jonathan Clough President Amy Polaczyk Research Associate Marco Propato Research Associate NROC Report USF&W Grant Number F14AC01001 This project is supported in full by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Award # F14AC01001 Acknowledgements Warren Pinnacle would like to thank the following individuals for their support during this project: Sarah Hamm, Dewberry, LLC. David Kozak, CT DEEP Stephen Lloyd, The Nature Conservancy Kevin O’Brien, CT DEEP Nathan Vinhatiero, RPS Thanks to the Association of United States Delegates to the Gulf of Maine Council (USGOMA) for their assistance Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ iii Figure Listing ................................................................................................................. vi Table Listing ................................................................................................................. viii Acronyms and Abbreviations List ..................................................................................... x 1 Background ............................................................................................................ 11 1.1 Model Summary .............................................................................................................. 12 2 Methods.................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Study Area ....................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Spatial Data ..................................................................................................................... 13 2.2.1 Elevation Data ......................................................................................................... 14 2.2.2 Slope Layer ............................................................................................................. 15 2.2.3 Elevation transformation ........................................................................................... 15 2.2.4 Land coverage .......................................................................................................... 15 2.2.5 Dikes and Impoundments .......................................................................................... 16 2.2.6 Percent Impervious ................................................................................................... 16 2.3 Model Timesteps .............................................................................................................. 17 2.4 Sea Level Rise Scenarios .................................................................................................. 17 2.5 Tide Ranges .................................................................................................................... 18 2.5.1 Wetland Boundary Elevation ..................................................................................... 18 2.6 Inundation Heights ........................................................................................................... 19 2.6.1 30-day, 60-day, and 90-days inundation frequency ...................................................... 19 2.6.2 Storm Surge ............................................................................................................. 20 2.7 Accretion Rates .............................................................................................................. 21 2.8 Erosion Rates ................................................................................................................. 21 2.9 Marsh Collapse Data ........................................................................................................ 22 2.10 Infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 22 2.10.1 Roads and Railroads ................................................................................................. 23 2.10.1.1 Roads and railroads elevations ................................................................................ 24 2.10.2 Critical Infrastructure................................................................................................ 24 2.11 Model Calibration ............................................................................................................ 25 2.11.1 Hydrologic Enforcement ........................................................................................... 26 Advancing Existing Assessment of Connecticut Marshes’ Response to SLR iii 2.11.2 Muted-Tidal Areas ................................................................................................... 27 2.12 Model Setup .................................................................................................................... 28 2.12.1 Area 1 - Fairfield County .......................................................................................... 29 2.12.2 Area 2 - New Haven and Middlesex Counties ............................................................. 35 2.12.3 Area 3 - New London County .................................................................................... 41 2.13 Uncertainty Analysis Setup ............................................................................................... 48 2.13.1 SLR by 2100 ............................................................................................................ 49 2.13.2 Digital Elevation Map Uncertainty ............................................................................. 49 2.13.3 Vertical Datum Correction ........................................................................................ 50 2.13.4 Great Diurnal Tide Range ......................................................................................... 50 2.13.5 Wetland Boundary Elevation ..................................................................................... 50 2.13.6 Erosion .................................................................................................................... 50 2.13.7 Accretion ................................................................................................................. 50 2.13.8 Marsh Collapse ........................................................................................................ 50 3 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................ 51 3.1 Entire Study Area ............................................................................................................. 51 3.2 Road-Inundation Results ................................................................................................... 52 3.3 Infrastructure Results ........................................................................................................ 55 3.3.1 Schools.................................................................................................................... 57 3.3.2 Power Plants ............................................................................................................ 59 3.4 Effects of road elevation on marsh inundation ..................................................................... 60 3.5 Areas with muted tides ..................................................................................................... 61 3.6 Marsh migration ............................................................................................................... 63 3.7 Water connectivity ........................................................................................................... 65 3.8 Uncertainty results ........................................................................................................... 66 4 Conclusions (Lessons Learned) ................................................................................ 72 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................. 75 Appendix A: Previous SLAMM Application and GIS Methods ........................................ 77 Elevation transformation ............................................................................................................... 77 Wetland Layers and translation to SLAMM .................................................................................... 77 Dikes and Impoundments .............................................................................................................. 78 Historic sea level rise rates ............................................................................................................ 79 Tide Ranges ................................................................................................................................. 79 Elevations expressed in half tide units (HTU) ................................................................................. 80 Wetland Boundary Elevation ......................................................................................................... 81 Advancing Existing Assessment of Connecticut Marshes’ Response to SLR iv Accretion Rates ...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geological Survey
    imiF.NT OF Tim BULLETIN UN ITKI) STATKS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY No. 115 A (lECKJKAPHIC DKTIOXARY OF KHODK ISLAM; WASHINGTON GOVKRNMKNT PRINTING OFF1OK 181)4 LIBRARY CATALOGUE SLIPS. i United States. Department of the interior. (U. S. geological survey). Department of the interior | | Bulletin | of the | United States | geological survey | no. 115 | [Seal of the department] | Washington | government printing office | 1894 Second title: United States geological survey | J. W. Powell, director | | A | geographic dictionary | of | Rhode Island | by | Henry Gannett | [Vignette] | Washington | government printing office 11894 8°. 31 pp. Gannett (Henry). United States geological survey | J. W. Powell, director | | A | geographic dictionary | of | Khode Island | hy | Henry Gannett | [Vignette] Washington | government printing office | 1894 8°. 31 pp. [UNITED STATES. Department of the interior. (U. S. geological survey). Bulletin 115]. 8 United States geological survey | J. W. Powell, director | | * A | geographic dictionary | of | Ehode Island | by | Henry -| Gannett | [Vignette] | . g Washington | government printing office | 1894 JS 8°. 31pp. a* [UNITED STATES. Department of the interior. (Z7. S. geological survey). ~ . Bulletin 115]. ADVERTISEMENT. [Bulletin No. 115.] The publications of the United States Geological Survey are issued in accordance with the statute approved March 3, 1879, which declares that "The publications of the Geological Survey shall consist of the annual report of operations, geological and economic maps illustrating the resources and classification of the lands, and reports upon general and economic geology and paleontology. The annual report of operations of the Geological Survey shall accompany the annual report of the Secretary of the Interior. All special memoirs and reports of said Survey shall be issued in uniform quarto series if deemed necessary by tlie Director, but other­ wise in ordinary octavos.
    [Show full text]
  • Pawcatuck River Watershed TMDL Factsheet
    Pawcatuck River Watershed Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) What is a TMDL? A TMDL can be thought of as a water pollution budget. Any waterbody that needs a TMDL is overspending its daily budget for a substance. These waterbodies are considered to be polluted or impaired by CT DEEP. The amount of the substance must be reduced to a lower level for the waterbody to be within its budget. The goal for all waterbodies is to have substance concentrations within their planned budgets. Pollution Sources All sources of pollution are reviewed while developing a TMDL. This includes sources that are caused by manmade structures such as a sewage treatment plant and sources that reach waterbodies as surface runoff during rain. The TMDL process also builds in a cushion to account for any unknown 98% reduction sources to a waterbody. Piece by Piece To create a TMDL, the waterbody is cut into pieces known as segments. These segments are like pieces of a puzzle. Each Figure 1 Sample Bacteria Comparison piece is reviewed for available data and pollution levels. A budget is determined for each piece as are the reduced budget goals. Reaching these goals allows for a waterbody to meet the planned budget. This will reduce pollution and improve water quality. Fix what is Broken The TMDL provides goals for the waterbody and attempts to identify sources of water pollution. During the process there are suggestions made to fix known sources. These efforts will reduce the amount of the polluting substance that is reaching a waterbody. As suggested fixes are implemented, the results will be protection of natural resources and cleaner water.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimated Water Use and Availability in the Pawtucket and Quinebaug
    Estimated Water Use and Availability in the Pawtuxet and Quinebaug River Basins, Rhode Island, 1995–99 By Emily C. Wild and Mark T. Nimiroski Prepared in cooperation with the Rhode Island Water Resources Board Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5154 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Wild, E.C., and Nimiroski, M.T., 2007, Estimated water use and availability in the Pawtuxet and Quinebaug River Basins, Rhode Island, 1995–99: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5154, 68 p. iii Contents Abstract . 1 Introduction . 2 Purpose and Scope . 2 Previous Investigations . 2 Climatological Setting . 6 The Pawtuxet River Basin . 6 Land Use . 7 Pawtuxet River Subbasins . 7 Minor Civil Divisions . 17 The Quinebaug River Basin . 20 Estimated Water Use . 20 New England Water-Use Data System .
    [Show full text]
  • Preserving Connecticut's Bridges Report Appendix
    Preserving Connecticut's Bridges Report Appendix - September 2018 Year Open/Posted/Cl Rank Town Facility Carried Features Intersected Location Lanes ADT Deck Superstructure Substructure Built osed Hartford County Ranked by Lowest Score 1 Bloomfield ROUTE 189 WASH BROOK 0.4 MILE NORTH OF RTE 178 1916 2 9,800 Open 6 2 7 2 South Windsor MAIN STREET PODUNK RIVER 0.5 MILES SOUTH OF I-291 1907 2 1,510 Posted 5 3 6 3 Bloomfield ROUTE 178 BEAMAN BROOK 1.2 MI EAST OF ROUTE 189 1915 2 12,000 Open 6 3 7 4 Bristol MELLEN STREET PEQUABUCK RIVER 300 FT SOUTH OF ROUTE 72 1956 2 2,920 Open 3 6 7 5 Southington SPRING STREET QUINNIPIAC RIVER 0.6 MI W. OF ROUTE 10 1960 2 3,866 Open 3 7 6 6 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 MARKET STREET & I-91 NB EAST END I-91 & I-84 INT 1961 4 125,700 Open 5 4 4 7 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 EB AMTRAK;LOCAL RDS;PARKING EASTBOUND 1965 3 66,450 Open 6 4 4 8 Hartford INTERSTATE-91 NB PARK RIVER & CSO RR AT EXIT 29A 1964 2 48,200 Open 5 4 4 9 New Britain SR 555 (WEST MAIN PAN AM SOUTHERN RAILROAD 0.4 MILE EAST OF RTE 372 1930 3 10,600 Open 4 5 4 10 West Hartford NORTH MAIN STREET WEST BRANCH TROUT BROOK 0.3 MILE NORTH OF FERN ST 1901 4 10,280 Open N 4 4 11 Manchester HARTFORD ROAD SOUTH FORK HOCKANUM RIV 2000 FT EAST OF SR 502 1875 2 5,610 Open N 4 4 12 Avon OLD FARMS ROAD FARMINGTON RIVER 500 FEET WEST OF ROUTE 10 1950 2 4,999 Open 4 4 6 13 Marlborough JONES HOLLOW ROAD BLACKLEDGE RIVER 3.6 MILES NORTH OF RTE 66 1929 2 1,255 Open 5 4 4 14 Enfield SOUTH RIVER STREET FRESHWATER BROOK 50 FT N OF ASNUNTUCK ST 1920 2 1,016 Open 5 4 4 15 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 EB BROAD ST, I-84 RAMP 191 1.17 MI S OF JCT US 44 WB 1966 3 71,450 Open 6 4 5 16 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 EAST NEW PARK AV,AMTRAK,SR504 NEW PARK AV,AMTRAK,SR504 1967 3 69,000 Open 6 4 5 17 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 WB AMTRAK;LOCAL RDS;PARKING .82 MI N OF JCT SR 504 SB 1965 4 66,150 Open 6 4 5 18 Hartford I-91 SB & TR 835 CONNECTICUT SOUTHERN RR AT EXIT 29A 1958 5 46,450 Open 6 5 4 19 Hartford SR 530 -AIRPORT RD ROUTE 15 422 FT E OF I-91 1964 5 27,200 Open 5 6 4 20 Bristol MEMORIAL BLVD.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterbody Regulations and Boat Launches
    to boating in Connecticut! TheWelcome map with local ordinances, state boat launches, pumpout facilities, and Boating Infrastructure Grant funded transient facilities is back again. New this year is an alphabetical list of state boat launches located on Connecticut lakes, ponds, and rivers listed by the waterbody name. If you’re exploring a familiar waterbody or starting a new adventure, be sure to have the proper safety equipment by checking the list on page 32 or requesting a Vessel Safety Check by boating staff (see page 14 for additional information). Reference Reference Reference Name Town Number Name Town Number Name Town Number Amos Lake Preston P12 Dog Pond Goshen G2 Lake Zoar Southbury S9 Anderson Pond North Stonington N23 Dooley Pond Middletown M11 Lantern Hill Ledyard L2 Avery Pond Preston P13 Eagleville Lake Coventry C23 Leonard Pond Kent K3 Babcock Pond Colchester C13 East River Guilford G26 Lieutenant River Old Lyme O3 Baldwin Bridge Old Saybrook O6 Four Mile River Old Lyme O1 Lighthouse Point New Haven N7 Ball Pond New Fairfield N4 Gardner Lake Salem S1 Little Pond Thompson T1 Bantam Lake Morris M19 Glasgo Pond Griswold G11 Long Pond North Stonington N27 Barn Island Stonington S17 Gorton Pond East Lyme E9 Mamanasco Lake Ridgefield R2 Bashan Lake East Haddam E1 Grand Street East Lyme E13 Mansfield Hollow Lake Mansfield M3 Batterson Park Pond New Britain N2 Great Island Old Lyme O2 Mashapaug Lake Union U3 Bayberry Lane Groton G14 Green Falls Reservoir Voluntown V5 Messerschmidt Pond Westbrook W10 Beach Pond Voluntown V3 Guilford
    [Show full text]
  • Ashaway River Watershed Description
    Ashaway River Watershed Description This TMDL applies to the Ashaway River assessment unit Assessment Unit Facts (RI0008039R-02A), a 1.8-mile long stream located in (RI0008039R-02A) Hopkinton, RI (Figure 1). The Town of Hopkinton is Town: Hopkinton located in the southwestern corner of the state and is Impaired Segment bordered by Connecticut to the east and Westerly, RI, to Length: 1.8 miles the south. The Ashaway River is located in the Classification: Class A southwestern section of town along the Connecticut border. Direct Watershed: 28.2 mi2 (18060 acres) The Ashaway River watershed is presented in Figure 2 Imperious Cover: < 1% with land use types indicated. Watershed Planning Area: Wood – Pawcatuck The Ashaway River begins at the confluence of Parmenter (#23) Brook and the Green Fall River in the southwestern section of Hopkinton, near Route 216. The brook flows south parallel to Laurel Street through a residential area before it empties into the Pawcatuck River along the Connecticut border. The Ashaway River watershed covers 28.2 square miles in both Rhode Island and Connecticut, with the majority of the watershed located in Connecticut. Non-developed areas occupy a large portion (84%) of the watershed. Developed uses (including residential and commercial uses) occupy approximately 5%. Agricultural land uses occupy 7% and wetlands and other surface waters occupy 4%. Water/ The Town of Hopkinton is 44 square miles and has a Wetlands (4%) Agriculture population of approximately 8,000 people. Hopkinton has Non- (7%) Developed over 1,000 acres of open space supporting various (84%) Developed recreational activities, including hiking, fishing, and (5%) canoeing.
    [Show full text]
  • CT Pawcatuck River Watershed Bacteria TMDL
    CT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CT Pawcatuck River Watershed Bacteria TMDL FB Environmental and CT DEEP 9/18/2014 CONTENTS CONNECTICUT IMPAIRED SEGMENTS .............................................................................................................. 6 RHODE ISLAND IMPAIRED SEGMENTS ........................................................................................................... 11 LAND USE ..................................................................................................................................................... 17 SHELLFISH BED CLASSIFICATIONS, CLOSURES, AND LEASE LOCATIONS ...................................................... 19 WHY IS A TMDL NEEDED? ........................................................................................................................... 23 TRIBUTARIES AND LOADING .......................................................................................................................... 27 POTENTIAL BACTERIA SOURCES ................................................................................................................... 29 POINT SOURCES ............................................................................................................................................ 34 OTHER PERMITTED SOURCES ........................................................................................................................ 34 MUNICIPAL STORMWATER PERMITTED SOURCES ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Schenob Brook
    Sages Ravine Brook Schenob BrookSchenob Brook Housatonic River Valley Brook Moore Brook Connecticut River North Canaan Watchaug Brook Scantic RiverScantic River Whiting River Doolittle Lake Brook Muddy Brook Quinebaug River Blackberry River Hartland East Branch Salmon Brook Somers Union Colebrook East Branch Salmon Brook Lebanon Brook Fivemile RiverRocky Brook Blackberry RiverBlackberry River English Neighborhood Brook Sandy BrookSandy Brook Muddy Brook Freshwater Brook Ellis Brook Spruce Swamp Creek Connecticut River Furnace Brook Freshwater Brook Furnace Brook Suffield Scantic RiverScantic River Roaring Brook Bigelow Brook Salisbury Housatonic River Scantic River Gulf Stream Bigelow Brook Norfolk East Branch Farmington RiverWest Branch Salmon Brook Enfield Stafford Muddy BrookMuddy Brook Factory Brook Hollenbeck River Abbey Brook Roaring Brook Woodstock Wangum Lake Brook Still River Granby Edson BrookEdson Brook Thompson Factory Brook Still River Stony Brook Stony Brook Stony Brook Crystal Lake Brook Wangum Lake Brook Middle RiverMiddle River Sucker BrookSalmon Creek Abbey Brook Salmon Creek Mad RiverMad River East Granby French RiverFrench River Hall Meadow Brook Willimantic River Barkhamsted Connecticut River Fenton River Mill Brook Salmon Creek West Branch Salmon Brook Connecticut River Still River Salmon BrookSalmon Brook Thompson Brook Still River Canaan Brown Brook Winchester Broad BrookBroad Brook Bigelow Brook Bungee Brook Little RiverLittle River Fivemile River West Branch Farmington River Windsor Locks Willimantic River First
    [Show full text]
  • Establishing Nitrogen Endpoints for Three Long Island Sound Watershed Groupings: Embayments, Large Riverine Systems, and Western Long Island Sound Open Water
    Establishing Nitrogen Endpoints for Three Long Island Sound Watershed Groupings: Embayments, Large Riverine Systems, and Western Long Island Sound Open Water Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges Submitted to: Submitted by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Tetra Tech, Inc. Region 1 and Long Island Sound Office March 27, 2018 Establishing N Endpoints for LIS Watershed Groupings Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges This Tetra Tech technical study was commissioned by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to synthesize and analyze water quality data to assess nitrogen-related water quality conditions in Long Island Sound and its embayments, based on the best scientific information reasonably available. This study is neither a proposed TMDL, nor proposed water quality criteria, nor recommended criteria. The study is not a regulation, and is not guidance, and cannot impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, Tribes, or the regulated community, and might not apply to a particular situation or circumstance. Rather, it is intended as a source of relevant information to be used by water quality managers, at their discretion, in developing nitrogen reduction strategies. B-i Establishing N Endpoints for LIS Watershed Groupings Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges Contents Introduction and Methods Overview .................................................................................................... B-1 Traditional Point Sources ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Sea Grant Project Report
    1 CONNECTICUT SEA GRANT PROJECT REPORT Please complete this progress or final report form and return by the date indicated in the emailed progress report request from the Connecticut Sea Grant College Program. Fill in the requested information using your word processor (i.e., Microsoft Word), and e-mail the completed form to Dr. Syma Ebbin [email protected], Research Coordinator, Connecticut Sea Grant College Program. Do NOT mail or fax hard copies. Please try to address the specific sections below. If applicable, you can attach files of electronic publications when you return the form. If you have questions, please call Syma Ebbin at (860) 405-9278. Please fill out all of the following that apply to your specific research or development project. Pay particular attention to goals, accomplishments, benefits, impacts and publications, where applicable. Project #: __R/CE-34-CTNY__ Check one: [ ] Progress Report [ x ] Final report Duration (dates) of entire project, including extensions: From [March 1, 2013] to [August 28, 2015 ]. Project Title or Topic: Comparative analysis and model development for determining the susceptibility to eutrophication of Long Island Sound embayment. Principal Investigator(s) and Affiliation(s): 1. Jamie Vaudrey, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut 2. Charles Yarish, Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut 3. Jang Kyun Kim, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut 4. Christopher Pickerell, Marine Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County 5. Lorne Brousseau, Marine Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County A. COLLABORATORS AND PARTNERS: (List any additional organizations or partners involved in the project.) Justin Eddings, Marine Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County Michael Sautkulis, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County Veronica Ortiz, University of Connecticut Jeniam Foundation (Tripp Killin, Exec.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
    The Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay: An Interstate Management Plan Adopted July 14, 1992 This document was prepared for the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Counci l and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Long Island Sound Programs by Timothy P. Dillingham Rush Abrams Alan Desbonnet Jeffrey M. Willis Project Coordinators: Timothy P. Dillingham Marybeth G. Hart Published July 1993 The preparation of this publication was financed by a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini str ati on, under t he provi sions of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (Publ ic Law 92-583). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This plan i s the culmination of the ef forts of many indi vidual s who's concern for the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay has persevered throughout the Project's four year history. Without all of them, the Project would not have been a success. We would like to thank the members of the Project's Citizens Advisory Committee, who gave generousl y of their time, energy, and thought in developing this plan during their three year involvement in the Pr oject. They demanded special att enti on be given to the valuable resources of the estuary and backed up their concerns with i deas and suggestions on how to successfully complete the Project. Their participation throughout the Project's numerous meetings and planning process contributed significantly to the final form of the plan. Members of the Planning and Procedures Subcommit tee of the Rhode Isl and Coastal Resources Management Council also attended meetings, providing their expertise in dealing with coastal resources management issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Pawcatuck Revitalization Strategies April 2005
    Pawcatuck Revitalization Strategies April 2005 Pawcatuck Revitalization Organization Yale Urban Design Workshop Phillips Preiss Shapiro Associates, Inc. AMS Advisory Services, LLC Pawcatuck Revitalization Strategies APRIL 2005 Study Sponsor PAWCATUCK REVITALIZATION ORGANIZATION Study Preparers YALE URBAN DESIGN WORKSHOP Alan Plattus Keith Krumweide Ed Mitchell Aniket Shahane Ashley Forde PHILLIPS PREISS SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES, INC. AMS ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC Funding Partners COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND THE WASHINGTON TRUST COMPANY CHARTER OAK FEDERAL CREDIT UNION TOWN OF STONINGTON Pawcatuck Revitalization Strategies TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 Introduction 4 CHAPTER 2 Study Area 6 CHAPTER 3 Demographic & Economic Profi le Demographic Data 8 Economic Profi le 24 CHAPTER 4 Stakeholder Input Business & Stakeholder Interviews 28 Resident Survey 32 CHAPTER 5 Site & Neighborhood Assessment 42 CHAPTER 6 Economic Development Strategies Overview 56 Targeted Development Opportunities 60 CHAPTER 7 Urban Design Strategies Overview 66 Downtown Pawcatuck / Coggswell Street 70 Mechanic Street 72 Riverwalk 76 CHAPTER 8 Implementation & Action Items 78 APPENDIX A Economic Development Property Analysis 90 APPENDIX B Survey Instruments 112 Chapter 1 Introduction BACKGROUND The Village of Pawcatuck grew up on the western bank of the Pawcatuck River which forms the state bound- ary between Connecticut and Rhode Island. It is part of the Town of Stonington and is one of four recognized villages within Stonington. Pawcatuck is directly across the river from Westerly, R.I., with which it shares his- toric commercial ties and economic activity. The earliest industries in Pawcatuck were founded in the late 1600’s along the river, establishing the origins of the village more than 300 years ago. Pawcatuck continues to retain its industrial base with such companies as Davis-Standard, Cottrell Brewery and Hi-Tech Profi les.
    [Show full text]