DOCSLIB.ORG

Preliminary Flood Insurance Study Information Volume 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preliminary Flood Insurance Study Information Volume 1 VOLUME 1 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 23005CV001A 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 3.0 – INSURANCE APPLICATIONS 49 3.1 National Flood Insurance Program Insurance Zones 49 3.2 Coastal Barrier Resources System 51 SECTION 4.0 – AREA STUDIED 51 4.1 Basin Description 51 4.2 Principal Flood Problems 52 4.3 Non-Levee Flood Protection Measures 54 4.4 Levees 57 SECTION 5.0 – ENGINEERING METHODS 58 5.1 Hydrologic Analyses 58 5.2 Hydraulic Analyses 78 5.3 Coastal Analyses 106 5.3.1 Total Stillwater Elevations 110 5.3.2 Waves 111 5.3.3 Coastal Erosion 111 5.3.4 Wave Hazard Analyses 112 5.4 Alluvial Fan Analyses 123 i TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Volume 1 - continued Figures Page Figure 1: FIRM Index 23 Figure 2: FIRM Notes to Users 24 Figure 3: Map Legend for FIRM 27 Figure 4: Floodway Schematic 43 Figure 5: Wave Runup Transect Schematic 46 Figure 6: Coastal Transect Schematic 48 Figure 7: Frequency Discharge-Drainage Area Curves 76 Figure 8: 1% Annual Chance Total Stillwater Elevations for Coastal Areas 110 Figure 9: Transect Location Map 121 Tables Page Table 1: Listing of NFIP Jurisdictions 2 Table 2: Flooding Sources Included in this FIS Report 33 Table 3: Flood Zone Designations by Community 50 Table 4: Coastal Barrier Resources System Information 51 Table 5: Basin Characteristics 52 Table 6: Principal Flood Problems 52 Table 7: Historic Flooding Elevations 54 Table 8: Non-Levee Flood Protection Measures 54 Table 9: Levees 57 Table 10: Summary of Discharges 64 Table 11: Summary of Non-Coastal Stillwater Elevations 77 Table 12: Stream Gage Information used to Determine Discharges 78 Table 13: Summary of Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses 89 Table 14: Roughness Coefficients 105 Table 15: Summary of Coastal Analyses 107 Table 16: Tide Gage Analysis Specifics 111 Table 17: Coastal Transect Parameters 113 Table 18: Summary of Alluvial Fan Analyses 123 Table 19: Results of Alluvial Fan Analyses 123 Volume 2 SECTION 6.0 – MAPPING METHODS 124 6.1 Vertical and Horizontal Control 124 6.2 Base Map 125 6.3 Floodplain and Floodway Delineation 126 6.4 Coastal Flood Hazard Mapping 190 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Volume 2 - continued 6.5 FIRM Revisions 200 6.5.1 Letters of Map Amendment 200 6.5.2 Letters of Map Revision Based on Fill 200 6.5.3 Letters of Map Revision 201 6.5.4 Physical Map Revisions 202 6.5.5 Contracted Restudies 202 6.5.6 Community Map History 202 SECTION 7.0 – CONTRACTED STUDIES AND COMMUNITY COORDINATION 204 7.1 Contracted Studies 204 7.2 Community Meetings 213 SECTION 8.0 – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 217 SECTION 9.0 – BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES 219 Tables Page Table 20: Countywide Vertical Datum Conversion 124 Table 21: Stream-Based Vertical Datum Conversion 125 Table 22: Base Map Sources 126 Table 23: Summary of Topographic Elevation Data used in Mapping 127 Table 24: Floodway Data 128 Table 25: Flood Hazard and Non-Encroachment Data for Selected Streams 190187 Table 26: Summary of Coastal Transect Mapping Considerations 191 Table 27: Incorporated Letters of Map Change 201 Table 28: Community Map History 203 Table 29: Summary of Contracted Studies Included in this FIS Report 205 Table 30: Community Meetings 214 Table 31: Map Repositories 217 Table 32: Additional Information 219 Table 33: Bibliography and References 220 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Volume 3 – continued Exhibits Flood Profiles Panel Batson River 01-02 P Blacksmith Brook 03 P Bridges Swamp 04 P Cape Neddick River 05-06 P Chickering Creek 07 P Cider Hill Creek 08-09 P Coffin Brook 10 P Coffin Brook Tributary 1 11-12 P Cooks Brook 13-16 P Day Brook 17 P Depot Brook 18 P Dolly Gordon Brook 19-20 P Driscoll Brook 21-22 P Ferguson Brook 23-24 P Fuller Brook 25 P Goodall Brook 26 P Goosefare Brook 27-29 P Great Works River 30-41 P Green Brook 42-43 P Hill Creek 44 P Josias River 45 P Keay Brook 46-47 P Kennebunk River 48-53 P Little Ossipee River 54-66 P Little River (Town of Berwick) 67-70 P Little River (Town of Cornish) 71 P Little River (Town of Kennebunk) 72 P Little River 73-74 P Littlefield River 75-78 P Merriland River (Lower Reach) 79 P Merriland River (Upper Reach) 80 P Middle Branch Mousam River 81 P Mill Brook 82 P Moors Brook 83 P iv TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Volume 4 Exhibits Flood Profiles Panel Mousam River (City of Sanford) 84-89 P Mousam River (Lower Reach) 90-91 P Mousam River (Town of Kennebunk) 92-95 P Mulloy Brook 96 P Ogunquit River 97-99 P Ogunquit River Tributary 100 P Ossipee River 101-106 P Saco River 107-124 P Saco River - Left Channel 125 P Salmon Falls River 126-141 P Sawyer Brook 142 P Smith Brook 143 P South Branch of West Brook 144 P Spinney Creek 145 P Spruce Creek 146 P Stevens Brook 147 P Thatcher Brook 148 P Tributary 1 to Cape Neddick River 149 P Tributary 1 to Green Brook 150 P Tributary to Middle Branch Mousam River 151 P Unnamed Tributary to Stony Brook 152 P Webhannet River 153 P West Brook 154 P Worster Brook 155-157 P Worster Brook Tributary 3 158-159 P Published Separately Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) v FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY REPORT YORK COUNTY, MAINE SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION 1.1 The National Flood Insurance Program The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is a voluntary Federal program that enables property owners in participating communities to purchase insurance protection against losses from flooding. This insurance is designed to provide an alternative to disaster assistance to meet the escalating costs of repairing damage to buildings and their contents caused by floods. For decades, the national response to flood disasters was generally limited to constructing flood-control works such as dams, levees, sea-walls, and the like, and providing disaster relief to flood victims. This approach did not reduce losses nor did it discourage unwise development. In some instances, it may have actually encouraged additional development. To compound the problem, the public generally could not buy flood coverage from insurance companies, and building techniques to reduce flood damage were often overlooked. In the face of mounting flood losses and escalating costs of disaster relief to the general taxpayers, the U.S. Congress created the NFIP. The intent was to reduce future flood damage through community floodplain management ordinances, and provide protection for property owners against potential losses through an insurance mechanism that requires a premium to be paid for the protection. The U.S. Congress established the NFIP on August 1, 1968, with the passage of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The NFIP was broadened and modified with the passage of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 and other legislative measures. It was further modified by the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 and the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004. The NFIP is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Participation in the NFIP is based on an agreement between local communities and the Federal Government. If a community adopts and enforces floodplain management regulations to reduce future flood risks to new construction and substantially improved structures in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), the Federal Government will make flood insurance available within the community as a financial protection against flood losses. The community’s floodplain management regulations must meet or exceed criteria established in accordance with Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 60, Criteria for Land Management and Use . SFHAs are delineated on the community’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Under the NFIP, buildings that were built before the flood hazard was identified on the community’s FIRMs are generally referred to as “Pre-FIRM” buildings. When the NFIP was created, the U.S. Congress recognized that insurance for Pre-FIRM buildings would be prohibitively expensive if the premiums were not subsidized by the Federal 1 Government.
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]
  • Saco River Saco & Biddeford, Maine
    Environmental Assessment Finding of No Significant Impact, and Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation for Maintenance Dredging DRAFT Saco River Saco & Biddeford, Maine US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS New England District March 2016 Draft Environmental Assessment: Saco River FNP DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation Saco River Saco & Biddeford, Maine FEDERAL NAVIGATION PROJECT MAINTENANCE DREDGING March 2016 New England District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 696 Virginia Rd Concord, Massachusetts 01742-2751 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT HISTORY, NEED, AND AUTHORITY .......................................... 1 3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................... 3 4.0 ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................ 6 4.1 No Action Alternative ..................................................................................... 6 4.2 Maintaining Channel at Authorized Dimensions............................................. 6 4.3 Alternative Dredging Methods ........................................................................ 6 4.3.1 Hydraulic Cutterhead Dredge....................................................................... 7 4.3.2 Hopper Dredge ........................................................................................... 7 4.3.3 Mechanical Dredge ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Conservation Planning for Watersheds of Southern Maine
    watermark volume 26 issue 1 5 stewardship / conserving natural resources Status of Conservation Planning for Watersheds of Southern Maine The Wells Reserve has produced or assisted with every key conservation planning document prepared for What is a watershed? southern Maine watersheds over the past decade. Use this chart to learn which plans cover your town, then An area in which water, sediments, download the plan(s) from our website or read them at the Dorothy Fish Coastal Resource Library. and dissolved material drain to a To get involved in land or water protection in your area, contact the individuals or organizations named common outlet, such as a river, lake, in the plans. Key contacts for most towns and watersheds can also be found at swim.wellsreserve.org. If these bay, or ocean. avenues don’t work out, call the Wells Reserve stewardship coordinator, Tin Smith, at 646-1555 ext 119. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Watershed A geographic area in which water flows on its way to a larger water body, such as a stream, river, estuary, lake, or Town Bridges Swamp Neddick River Cape River Works Great Josias River Kennebunk River Little River Mousam River Ogunquit River River Piscataqua River Salmon Falls Southside Brook Creek Spruce River Webhannet River York ocean. Coastal and ocean resources Acton 7 11 are affected not only by activities in Alfred 4 7 coastal areas but also by those in Arundel 4 7 upland watersheds. Berwick 2,3 2,11 U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy Eliot 2,11 2,11 2,13,14 2,16,17 Kennebunk 4 5,6 7 Kennebunkport 4 Why these watersheds? Kittery 11 11 0 13,14 16,17 The chart shows the Maine watersheds Lebanon 11 and towns that are included in the web- Lyman 4 7 based Seacoast Watershed Information North Berwick 2,3 2,11 Manager (swim.wellsreserve.org).
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Volunteer Manual Saco River Corridor Commission
    Volunteer: _________________________________ Site(s): ____________________________________ 2019 Volunteer Manual Saco River Corridor Commission 2019 RIVERS Water Quality Monitoring Program is coordinated by: Dear RIVERS Volunteer, On behalf of Green Mountain Conservation Group and the Saco River Corridor Commission we would like to thank you for volunteering with the 2019 RIVERS Water Quality Monitoring Program. Since 2001, the Regional Interstate Volunteers for the Ecosystems and Rivers of Saco (RIVERS) program has depended on dedicated community members to conduct high quality citizen science in the Saco/Ossipee Watershed. By volunteering with RIVERS, you are collecting data to better understand the water quality in our area. You are helping to identify locations where water quality has been impacted, in addition to collecting valuable baseline data that can be utilized in planning for future regional development. While science is our goal, your safety is our top priority. Data collection is nice, but not at the expense of your well-being. If at any point in time you feel unsafe at your site, discontinue monitoring and leave. This includes but is not limited to high waters, suspicious persons, or inclement weather. Follow your gut, and only do what you feel comfortable with. Reach out to your volunteer coordinator if you have any issues or concerns about the program, even while out sampling. We want to help you if you get stuck on what to do, are having equipment issues, or have general comments on how to improve the program. We are here to help and value feedback from our volunteers. The RIVERS program is only successful because of you - our intrepid, boots-on-the-ground volunteer group.
    [Show full text]
  • Official List of Public Waters
    Official List of Public Waters New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Water Division Dam Bureau 29 Hazen Drive PO Box 95 Concord, NH 03302-0095 (603) 271-3406 https://www.des.nh.gov NH Official List of Public Waters Revision Date October 9, 2020 Robert R. Scott, Commissioner Thomas E. O’Donovan, Division Director OFFICIAL LIST OF PUBLIC WATERS Published Pursuant to RSA 271:20 II (effective June 26, 1990) IMPORTANT NOTE: Do not use this list for determining water bodies that are subject to the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act (CSPA). The CSPA list is available on the NHDES website. Public waters in New Hampshire are prescribed by common law as great ponds (natural waterbodies of 10 acres or more in size), public rivers and streams, and tidal waters. These common law public waters are held by the State in trust for the people of New Hampshire. The State holds the land underlying great ponds and tidal waters (including tidal rivers) in trust for the people of New Hampshire. Generally, but with some exceptions, private property owners hold title to the land underlying freshwater rivers and streams, and the State has an easement over this land for public purposes. Several New Hampshire statutes further define public waters as including artificial impoundments 10 acres or more in size, solely for the purpose of applying specific statutes. Most artificial impoundments were created by the construction of a dam, but some were created by actions such as dredging or as a result of urbanization (usually due to the effect of road crossings obstructing flow and increased runoff from the surrounding area).
    [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]
  • Shorey's Brook Dam to Be Removed in York County
    FALL 2011/ WINTER 2012 THE NEWSLETTER OF MAINE RIVERS Shorey’s Brook Dam to be Removed in York County Much of the 4.3-mile Shorey’s in August 2010. Led by project Brook in South Berwick has manager and stewardship not actually looked like a coordinator Darrell DeTour, typical brook for many years. GWRLT has gathered many !e culprit is a dam perched partners, including the Wells several hundred yards below National Estuarine Research Route 101. Built as early as Reserve, the National the 1630s, it has morphed over Oceanic and Atmospheric the centuries into a decrepit Administration, Conservation hodgepodge of industrial Decrepit and inconspicuous, the Shorey’s Brook dam Law Foundation, the US Fish material, impenetrable by is di!cult to capture in a picture. Right, Tin Smith and Wildlife Service, and anadromous "sh including leads a tour of the restoration site. others, to plan, permit, and alewives, smelt, and Atlantic fund the removal. salmon. A dam removal is currently on track to take place !is project promises to be a success in Maine both for in November to restore the brook. In early October we reconnecting long-fragmented habitat and as a model to toured the dam removal site with members of Great Works inspire other entities—land trusts, municipalities, and Regional Land Trust and other project partners. others—who may be considering a dam removal project !e Great Works Regional Land Trust (GWRLT) acquired but are daunted by the perceived complexity and cost. To the 27-acre Raymond & Simone Savage Wildlife Preserve date this project has drawn little controversy and is on that surrounds Shorey’s Brook in 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Firm Map Index Nfip
    MAP NUMBER MAP DATES Great Works Goodall MAP REPOSITORIES River Brook TOWN OF LYMAN L i This FIRM Index displays the map date for each t B t Duck Brook (Maps available for reference only, not for l CITY OF SACO og e Estes Lake FIRM panel at the time that this Index was Br R distribution.) ook Mousam ive TOWN OF W TOWN OF printed. Because this Index may not be r River Mousam ard Brook 9 River ALFRED ARUNDEL (! distributed to unaffected communities in 23031C0361G 23031C0362G Bush Brook 23031C0391G 23031C0392G subsequent revisions, users may determine the 23031C0411G 23031C0412G 23031C0416G 23031C0417G CITY OF BIDDEFORD ACTON, TOWN OF: Salmon 23031C0440G 23031C0441G 23031C0442G 23031C0461G current map date for each FIRM panel by visiting TOWN OF (!35 23031C0462G 23031C0466G 23031C0467G 23031C0486G Town Hall Falls River Round Swamps the FEMA Map Service Center website at S 35 H Road KENNEBUNK mit Little Old Fishing k Brook h http://msc.fema.gov, or by calling the FEMA Map SANFORD Mousam o B River Acton, Maine 04001 23031C0370G Pond 1 o r r o 23031C0390G REGIONAL Kennebunk ¤£ ok Information eXchange (FMIX) at 1-877-336-2627. River B River l B Sand AIRPORT il a Great Works River tso ALFRED, TOWN OF: Pond M n 23031C0495G*** Communities annexing land on adjacent FIRM f R TOWN OF LEBANON i Town Hall 99 of v 23031C0490G*** (! e panels must obtain a current copy of the 4 G 23031C0363G 23031C0364G** (! TOWN OF r 16 Saco Road 23031C0393G adjacent panel as well as the current FIRM 23031C0394G 23031C0413G 23031C0420G KENNEBUNKPORT Alfred, Maine 04002 23031C0414G 23031C0438G 23031C0439G 23031C0443G 23031C0444G 23031C0463G Index.
    [Show full text]
  • Pease Development Authority Functional Replacement Project Biological Assessment
    0 US.Deportment New HampshireDivision 53 Pleasant Street, Suite 2200 dl'a'lsporfalion Concord, NH 03301 Federal Highway June 4, 2019 (603) 228-0417 Admlnlstraffon In Reply Refer To: HDA-NH Zach Jylkka Fisheries Biologist Protected Resources Division Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office NOAA Fisheries 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA O1930 Subject: Pease Development Authority, Port of NH Functional Replacement Project Portsmouth 15731. Piscataqua River Biological Assessment Dear Mr. Jylkka: The Pease Development Authority Division of Ports and Harbors and Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) are proposing the functional replacement of the barge wharf to compensate for impacts caused by the new alignment of the recently replaced Sarah Mildred Long Bridge in Portsmouth. NH. This letter is to request Endangered Species Act concurrence from your office for the proposed project. The FHW A has made the determination that the proposed activity may affect. but is not likely to adversely affect, any species listed as threatened or endangered or critical habitat designated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The Biological Assessment (BA) supporting this determination is enclosed. Please contact me at 603-410-4870 or [email protected] should you have any questions. S cerely. n e,t,V-~- Ja ·son S. Sikor Env ronmental Programs Manager Enclosure 2 ecc: Christine Perron, McFarland Johnson MikeJohnson, NOAA M. Laurin, NHDOT Project file 15731 Biological Assessment
    [Show full text]
  • A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire New Hampshire Estuaries Project
    AR-293 University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository PREP Publications Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership 2000 A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire New Hampshire Estuaries Project Stephen H. Jones University of New Hampshire Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.unh.edu/prep Part of the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation New Hampshire Estuaries Project and Jones, Stephen H., "A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire" (2000). PREP Publications. Paper 294. http://scholars.unh.edu/prep/294 This Report 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]. A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire Published by the New Hampshire Estuaries Project Edited by Dr. Stephen H. Jones Jackson estuarine Laboratory, university of New Hampshire Durham, NH 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................i LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................viii
    [Show full text]
  • SMPDC Region
    Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission Region Shelburne Batchelders Grant Twp Woodstock Sumner Hartford Mason Twp Beans Purchase Greenwood West Paris Miles Knob !! Miles Notch Number Eight Pond ! Albany Twp Shirley Brook ! Speckled Mountain ! Red Rock Brook Pine Mountain ! ! Lombard Pond ! Isaiah Mountain 3 ! 1 1 Hannah Brook E ! ! Ha T Stoneham ! y R R Sugarloaf Mountain d Willard Brook ! Goodwin Brook T Sugarloaf Mountain S ! B W Virginia Lake in Basin Brook ir Buckfield Brickett Place ! c B ! ! H h ! ro u Cecil Mountain w t A n R ! v R Bickford Brook d Co d d ld ! ! R Bro ok T rl B k Bartlett Brook o d a o R ! n r llen u C G B Beaver Brook ! d r r Mason Hill o Palmer Mountain M d o ! v f o d ! e u R k R r S n r c d i to t n a R e H A ld e R B o in u d k se Rattlesnake Mountain e d r i r Rd ! R Little Pond a f e a t d d m W e ! tl is R B l d t d s i d l n S L R A R l Rattlesnake Brook R n R il M A c ! I t ! a ! o B H in s ! d rs l e n e n r ! e l M S i a t e t d t Adams Mountain id e d u Shell Pond u l B n o l d h e Harding Hill o S o ! a y R R P G m d W d Stiles Mountain d d Great B!rook o Pine Hill R ! n n R ! R d ! y o n ! lle P Pine Hill d R a ee Cold B!rook d Pike's Peak V ll K n e c ! Foster Hill Little Deer HillDeer Hill ee h M Birch Island ! ! ! ! r S ! rg oe Mud Pond Upper Bay ve J Bradley Pond E ! Sheep Islan!d A ! ! nd Amos Mountain C Allen Mountain Paris re ! us ! n w Flat Hill h Rattlesnake Island L s m L ! Deer Hill Spring Harndon Hill Horseshoe Pond r n a Trout Pond ! ! ! e n W d P ! lm o ! Weymouth HillWeymouth
    [Show full text]