DOCSLIB.ORG

Long Island Sound Enhanced Implementation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Long Island Sound Enhanced Implementation Plan NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF EVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Long Island Sound Enhanced Implementation Plan 4/18/2013 Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 1 New York State Long Island Sound Enhanced Implementation Plan ......................................................... 1 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Background........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 LIS N TMDL .................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Waste Load Allocation .......................................................................................................... 6 2.1.2 Load Allocation ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Land Use in the New York portion of the LIS Watershed ............................................................. 7 2.2.1 Urban .................................................................................................................................. 10 2.2.2 Agricultural .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.2.3 Forested .............................................................................................................................. 11 3 Drivers of Changes of Nitrogen Load from Nonpoint Sources ........................................................... 11 3.1 Land Cover Changes in the NYS Portion of the LIS Watershed ................................................... 12 3.1.1 Bronx ................................................................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Northern Long Island .......................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Population/Demographics .......................................................................................................... 13 3.2.1 Westchester County ............................................................................................................ 14 3.2.2 The Bronx ............................................................................................................................ 14 3.2.3 New York County................................................................................................................. 15 3.2.4 Kings County ........................................................................................................................ 15 3.2.5 Queens County .................................................................................................................... 15 3.2.6 Nassau County .................................................................................................................... 16 3.2.7 Suffolk County ..................................................................................................................... 16 3.3 Golf Courses ................................................................................................................................ 17 3.4 Residential Fertilizer Use ............................................................................................................ 19 3.4.1 NYS Nutrient Runoff Law .................................................................................................... 19 3.4.2 Nassau County Fertilizer Law – Local Law No 11-2009 ....................................................... 19 3.4.3 Suffolk County local law (41-2007) ..................................................................................... 19 3.4.4 Westchester County 2009 Lawn Fertilizer Law ................................................................... 19 3.5 Septic Systems ............................................................................................................................ 20 Page i 3.5.1 Regulations .......................................................................................................................... 21 3.6 Number of Cars ........................................................................................................................... 22 3.7 Number of Airports ..................................................................................................................... 22 3.8 Seaports ...................................................................................................................................... 22 4 Regulated Stormwater and Other Permitted Programs .................................................................... 23 4.1 SPDES Phase I MS4 Permit .......................................................................................................... 23 4.1.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................. 23 4.1.2 Description of Nitrogen Control Requirements .................................................................. 24 Inspections and Cleaning ............................................................................................................................ 27 Hood Replacement ..................................................................................................................................... 27 Catch Basin Retrofitting, Repair, and Reconstruction ................................................................................ 27 Floatables Containment and Capture ......................................................................................................... 28 4.1.3 Estimated Effectiveness of Nitrogen Controls or General Measures ................................. 29 4.1.4 Relative Change in Scope and Effectiveness of Program from 1990 to 2012 ..................... 30 4.2 SPDES Phase II MS4 Permit (GP-0-10-002) ................................................................................. 30 4.2.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................. 30 4.2.2 Description of Nitrogen Control Requirements .................................................................. 31 4.2.3 Estimated Effectiveness of Nitrogen Controls or General Measures ................................. 32 4.2.4 Relative Change in Scope and Effectiveness of Program from 1990 to 2012 ..................... 42 4.3 Stormwater from Construction Activity General Permit (GP-0-10-001)..................................... 43 4.3.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................. 43 4.3.2 Description of Nitrogen Control Requirements .................................................................. 43 4.3.3 Estimated Effectiveness of Nitrogen Controls or General Measures ................................. 44 4.3.4 Relative Change in Scope and Effectiveness of Program from 1990 to 2012 ..................... 44 4.4 SPDES Phase II Multi Sector General Permit (MSGP) for Stormwater Discharges associated with Industrial Activity (GP-0-12-001) ............................................................................................................ 44 4.4.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................. 44 4.4.2 Description of Nitrogen Control Requirements .................................................................. 45 4.4.3 Estimated Effectiveness of Nitrogen Controls or General Measures ................................. 46 4.4.4 Relative Change in Scope and Effectiveness of Program from 1990 to 2012 ..................... 46 4.5 NYS Environmental Conservation Law & Clean Water Act General Permit for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) (GP-0-09-001) ............................................................................... 46 Page ii 4.5.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................. 46 4.5.2 Description of Nitrogen Control Requirements .................................................................. 47 4.5.3 Estimated Effectiveness of Nitrogen Controls or General Measures ................................. 47 4.5.4 Relative Change in Scope and Effectiveness of Program from 1990 to 2012 ..................... 47 4.6 Clean Water Act General Permit for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) (GP-04- 02) 48 4.6.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................. 48 4.6.2 Description of Nitrogen Control Requirements .................................................................. 48 4.6.3 Estimated Effectiveness of Nitrogen Controls or General Measures ................................. 48 4.6.4 Relative Change in Scope and Effectiveness of Program from 1990 to 2012 ..................... 49 4.7 SPDES General Permit for Private, Commercial or Institutional (PCI) Facilities discharging 1,000 to 10,000 gallons per day of sanitary wastewater to groundwater (GP-0-05-001) ............................... 49 4.7.1 General Program Information ............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Long Island Sound Habitat Restoration Initiative
    LONG ISLAND SOUND HABITAT RESTORATION INITIATIVE Technical Support for Coastal Habitat Restoration FEBRUARY 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................i GUIDING PRINCIPLES.................................................................................. ii PROJECT BOUNDARY.................................................................................. iv SITE IDENTIFICATION AND RANKING........................................................... iv LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................... vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................... vi APPENDIX I-A: RANKING CRITERIA .....................................................................I-A-1 SECTION 1: TIDAL WETLANDS ................................................1-1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 1-1 Salt Marshes ....................................................................................................1-1 Brackish Marshes .............................................................................................1-3 Tidal Fresh Marshes .........................................................................................1-4 VALUES AND FUNCTIONS ........................................................................... 1-4 STATUS AND TRENDS ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Policy Statement 2014 Melinda Katz
    THE OFFICE OF THE QUEENS BOROUGH PRESIDENT Strategic Policy Statement 2014 Melinda Katz Queens Borough President The Borough of Queens is home to more than 2.3 million residents, representing more than 120 countries and speaking more than 135 languages1. The seamless knit that ties these distinct cultures and transforms them into shared communities is what defines the character of Queens. The Borough’s diverse population continues to steadily grow. Foreign-born residents now represent 48% of the Borough’s population2. Traditional immigrant gateways like Sunnyside, Woodside, Jackson Heights, Elmhurst, Corona, and Flushing are now communities with the highest foreign-born population in the entire city3. Immigrant and Intercultural Services The immigrant population remains largely underserved. This is primarily due to linguistic and cultural barriers. Residents with limited English proficiency now represent 28% of the Borough4, indicating a need for a wide range of social service support and language access to City services. All services should be available in multiple languages, and outreach should be improved so that culturally sensitive programming can be made available. The Borough President is actively working with the Queens General Assembly, a working group organized by the Office of the Queens Borough President, to address many of these issues. Cultural Queens is amidst a cultural transformation. The Borough is home to some of the most iconic buildings and structures in the world, including the globally recognized Unisphere and New York State Pavilion. Areas like Astoria and Long Island City are establishing themselves as major cultural hubs. In early 2014, the New York City Council designated the area surrounding Kaufman Astoria Studios as the city’s first arts district through a City Council Proclamation The areas unique mix of adaptively reused residential, commercial, and manufacturing buildings serve as a catalyst for growth in culture and the arts.
    [Show full text]
  • 1928-02-00 Index
    THE CITY RECORD. INDEX FOR FEBRUARY, 1928. t r ACCOUNTS, COMMISSIONER OF— ALDERMEN, BOARD OF— ALDERMEN, BOARD OF— Changes in the department, etc., 995, 1018, 1040, 1424. Finance, Committee on, report of the— Public Letting, Committee on, report of the— In favor of adopting resolution amending a resolution In favor of adopting resolution authorizing the Presi- ALDERMEN, BOARD OF— for special revenue bonds, $25,000, for making re- American Legion, T. J. Oakley Rhinelander 2d, Post dent of the Borough of Manhattan to contract for pairs to and waterproofing the Soldiers and Sailors No. 6, request for amendment to chapter 1, of article the making safe of roadways, sidewalks and sewers Monument in Riverside drive by extending the time 2, section 8, of the Code of Ordinances, relating to during the year 1928 when emergency arises, with- for use thereof to December 31, 1928, 984, 1217. out public letting; amount, $10,000, 1215, 1406, office hours, 1556. In favor of adopting a resolution amending resolution In favor of adopting resolution authorizing County An ordinance to amend section 2 of article 1 of chapter granting permission to the Church of Mount Carmel, Clerk, Bronx County, to purchase photostat equip- 11 of the Code of Ordinances, relating to the dis- Borough of Manhattan, to construct and maintain a ment, without public letting; amount, $5,470.50, 1215, charge of small-arms, 1574. vault without payment of the usual fee, 984, 1220. 1406. Assessors, Board of, summary of report for 1927 sub- In favor of adopting resolution amending a resolution In favor of adopting resolution authorizing Commis- mitted to his Honor the Mayor, 1215.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary
    The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 1972 A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary Raymond B. Marcin The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Raymond B. Marcin, A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary, 46 CONN. B.J. 506 (1972). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 506 CONNECTICUT BAR JOURNAL [Vol. 46 A HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT'S LONG ISLAND SOUND BOUNDARY By RAYMOND B. MARciN* THE SCENEt Long before remembered time, ice fields blanketed central India, discharging floes into a sea covering the Plains of Punjab. The Argentine Pampas lay frozen and still beneath a crush of ice. Ice sheets were carving their presence into the highest mountains of Hawaii and New Guinea. On the western land mass, ice gutted what was, in pre-glacial time, a stream valley near the northeastern shore. In this alien epoch, when woolly mammoth and caribou roamed the North American tundra, the ice began to melt. Receding glaciers left an inland lake where the primeval stream valley had been. For a time the waters of the lake reposed in bo- real calm, until, with the melting of the polar cap, the level of the great salt ocean rose to the level of the lake.
    [Show full text]
  • 33 CFR Ch. I (7–1–10 Edition)
    § 117.791 33 CFR Ch. I (7–1–10 Edition) from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 7 (d) The draw of the state highway p.m., Monday through Friday, except bridge, mile 150.2 between Troy and federal holidays. The draw of the Menands, need not be opened for the Broadway Bridge need not open for the passage of vessels. passage of vessel traffic from 7 a.m. to (e) The draw of the highway bridge, 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday mile 152.7 between Troy and Green Is- through Friday, except federal holi- land, operates as follows: days. (1) From April 1 through December (2) The draws of the Willis Avenue 15, the draw shall open on signal from Bridge, mile 1.5, Third Avenue Bridge, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.; except that, the draw mile 1.9, and the Madison Avenue need not be opened from 6 p.m. to 7 Bridge, mile 2.3, need not open for the a.m., unless notice is given before 4:30 passage of vessel traffic at various p.m. of the time the vessel is expected times between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on the to pass, and need not open from 7 a.m. first Sunday in May and November. to 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. The exact time and date of each bridge (2) From December 16 through March closure will be published in the Local 31, the draw need not be opened.
    [Show full text]
  • Newtown Creek Project Packet
    NEWTOWN CREEK PROJECT PACKET Name: ________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTORY READING: Encyclopedia. “Newtown Creek.” The Encyclopedia of New York City. 2nd ed. 2010. Print. Adaptation Newtown Creek is a tributary of the East River. It extends inland for a distance of 3.5 miles, including a number of canals into Brooklyn, and it is the boundary between Brooklyn and Queens. The creek was the route by which European colonists first reached Maspeth in 1642. During the American Revolution the British spent the winter near the creek. Commercial vessels and small boats sailed the creek in the early nineteenth century. About 1860 the first oil and coal oil refineries opened along the banks and began dumping sludge and acids into the water; sewers were built to accommodate the growing neighborhoods of Williamsburg and Greenpoint and discharged their wastes directly into the creek, which by 1900 was known for pollution and foul odors. The water corroded the paint on the undersides of ships, and noxious deposits were left on the banks by the tides. High-level bridges were built from 1903 (some remain). State and city commissions sought unsuccessfully to improve the creek as it became of the busiest commercial waterways in the country, second only to the Mississippi River. The creek was dredged constantly and widened by the federal government to accommodate marine traffic; the creek’s natural depth was between 4 and 12 feet. After World War II the creek’s importance as a shipping route decreased, but it continued to be the site of many industrial plants. During the 1940s and 1950s, leaks at oil refineries including ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco precipitated one of the largest underground oil spills in history.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Flushing Meadows Corona Park Strategic Framework Plan
    Possible reconfiguration of the Meadow Lake edge with new topographic variation Flushing Meadows Corona Park Strategic Framework Plan 36 Quennell Rothschild & Partners | Smith-Miller + Hawkinson Architects Vision & Goals The river and the lakes organize the space of the Park. Our view of the Park as an ecology of activity calls for a large-scale reorganization of program. As the first phase in the installation of corridors of activity we propose to daylight the Flushing River and to reconfigure the lakes to create a continuous ribbon of water back to Flushing Bay. RECONFIGURE & RESTORE THE LAKES Flushing Meadows Corona Park is defined by water. Today, the Park meets Flushing Bay at its extreme northern channel without significantly impacting the ecological characteristics of Willow and Meadow Lakes and their end. At its southern end, the Park is dominated by the two large lakes, Willow Lake and Meadow Lake, created for shorelines. In fact, additional dredged material would be valuable resource for the reconfiguration of the lakes’ the 1939 World’s Fair. shoreline. This proposal would, of course, require construction of a larger bridge at Jewel Avenue and a redesign of the Park road system. The hydrology of FMCP was shaped by humans. The site prior to human interference was a tidal wetland. Between 1906 and 1934, the site was filled with ash and garbage. Historic maps prior to the ‘39 Fair show the Flushing To realize the lakes’ ecological value and their potential as a recreation resource with more usable shoreline and Creek meandering along widely varying routes through what later became the Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Past Tibor T. Polgar Fellowships
    Past Tibor T. Polgar Fellowships The Hudson River estuary stretches from its tidal limit at the Federal Dam at Troy, New York, to its merger with the New York Bight, south of New York City. Within that reach, the estuary displays a broad transition from tidal freshwater to marine conditions that are reflected in its physical composition and the biota it supports. These characteristics present a major opportunity and challenge for researchers to describe the makeup and workings of a complex and dynamic ecosystem. The Tibor T. Polgar Fellowship Program provides funds for graduate and undergraduate students to study selected aspects of the physical, chemical, biological, and public policy realms of the estuary. Since its inception in 1985, the program has provided approximately $1 million in funding to 189 students and can boast the involvement of 116 advisors from 64 institutions. The program is named in memory of Dr. Tibor T. Polgar, an estuarine biologist who was a key advisor to the Hudson River Foundation for Science and Environmental Research when the fellowship program was created. The program is conducted jointly by the Hudson River Foundation and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. The fellowships are funded by the Foundation. Past reports of the Tibor T. Polgar Fellowship program are listed below. Download the entire report or particular sections as PDF files. Final Reports of the Tibor T. Polgar Fellowship Program, 2019 - Sarah Fernald, David Yozzo, and Helena Andreyko, editors I. Use of Gadolinium to Track Sewage Effluent Through the Poughkeepsie, New York Water System – Matthew Badia, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • July 8 Grants Press Release
    CITY PARKS FOUNDATION ANNOUNCES 109 GRANTS THROUGH NYC GREEN RELIEF & RECOVERY FUND AND GREEN / ARTS LIVE NYC GRANT APPLICATION NOW OPEN FOR PARK VOLUNTEER GROUPS Funding Awarded For Maintenance and Stewardship of Parks by Nonprofit Organizations and For Free Live Performances in Parks, Plazas, and Gardens Across NYC July 8, 2021 - NEW YORK, NY - City Parks Foundation announced today the selection of 109 grants through two competitive funding opportunities - the NYC Green Relief & Recovery Fund and GREEN / ARTS LIVE NYC. More than ever before, New Yorkers have come to rely on parks and open spaces, the most fundamentally democratic and accessible of public resources. Parks are critical to our city’s recovery and reopening – offering fresh air, recreation, and creativity - and a crucial part of New York’s equitable economic recovery and environmental resilience. These grant programs will help to support artists in hosting free, public performances and programs in parks, plazas, and gardens across NYC, along with the nonprofit organizations that help maintain many of our city’s open spaces. Both grant programs are administered by City Parks Foundation. The NYC Green Relief & Recovery Fund will award nearly $2M via 64 grants to NYC-based small and medium-sized nonprofit organizations. Grants will help to support basic maintenance and operations within heavily-used parks and open spaces during a busy summer and fall with the city’s reopening. Notable projects supported by this fund include the Harlem Youth Gardener Program founded during summer 2020 through a collaboration between Friends of Morningside Park Inc., Friends of St. Nicholas Park, Marcus Garvey Park Alliance, & Jackie Robinson Park Conservancy to engage neighborhood youth ages 14-19 in paid horticulture along with the Bronx River Alliance’s EELS Youth Internship Program and Volunteer Program to invite thousands of Bronxites to participate in stewardship of the parks lining the river banks.
    [Show full text]
  • New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan
    NEW YORK CITY CoMPREHENSWE WATERFRONT PLAN Reclaiming the City's Edge For Public Discussion Summer 1992 DAVID N. DINKINS, Mayor City of New lVrk RICHARD L. SCHAFFER, Director Department of City Planning NYC DCP 92-27 NEW YORK CITY COMPREHENSIVE WATERFRONT PLAN CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMA RY 1 INTRODUCTION: SETTING THE COURSE 1 2 PLANNING FRA MEWORK 5 HISTORICAL CONTEXT 5 LEGAL CONTEXT 7 REGULATORY CONTEXT 10 3 THE NATURAL WATERFRONT 17 WATERFRONT RESOURCES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE 17 Wetlands 18 Significant Coastal Habitats 21 Beaches and Coastal Erosion Areas 22 Water Quality 26 THE PLAN FOR THE NATURAL WATERFRONT 33 Citywide Strategy 33 Special Natural Waterfront Areas 35 4 THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT 51 THE EXISTING PUBLIC WATERFRONT 52 THE ACCESSIBLE WATERFRONT: ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES 63 THE PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT 70 Regulatory Strategy 70 Public Access Opportunities 71 5 THE WORKING WATERFRONT 83 HISTORY 83 THE WORKING WATERFRONT TODAY 85 WORKING WATERFRONT ISSUES 101 THE PLAN FOR THE WORKING WATERFRONT 106 Designation Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas 107 JFK and LaGuardia Airport Areas 114 Citywide Strategy fo r the Wo rking Waterfront 115 6 THE REDEVELOPING WATER FRONT 119 THE REDEVELOPING WATERFRONT TODAY 119 THE IMPORTANCE OF REDEVELOPMENT 122 WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES 125 REDEVELOPMENT CRITERIA 127 THE PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPING WATERFRONT 128 7 WATER FRONT ZONING PROPOSAL 145 WATERFRONT AREA 146 ZONING LOTS 147 CALCULATING FLOOR AREA ON WATERFRONTAGE loTS 148 DEFINITION OF WATER DEPENDENT & WATERFRONT ENHANCING USES
    [Show full text]
  • Hutchinson River CSO Long Term Control Plan (LTCP)
    Hutchinson River CSO Long Term Control Plan (LTCP) The Hutchinson River is an area of significant natural resources that provides communities in the Bronx with nature access at Pelham Bay Park as well as other areas along the river. DEP will complete a Long Term Control Plan to better understand how combined sewer overflows (CSOs) affect water quality and related recreational uses in the Hutchinson River waterbody. The goal for the combined sewer overflow Long Term Control Plan is to identify the appropriate controls necessary to achieve waterbody-specific water quality standards, consistent with EPA’s 1994 CSO Policy and subsequent guidance. The Hutchinson River begins in Westchester County, flows through the Bronx into Eastchester Bay Tributary to East River. The Hutchinson River is classified for primary and secondary recreation contact and fishing. The portion of the river within New York City can be affected by pollutant loads originating in the upstream portions of the river located in Westchester County. In anticipation of developing and finalizing the Hutchinson River LTCP, DEP will continue to study and evaluate load reduction alternatives in the Hutchinson River as well as collaborate with DEC to approach multi-jurisdictional issues. In addition, DEP is investing approximately $18 million dollars in Green Infrastructure in the combined sewer areas over the next few years. DEP is investing approximately $18 million dollars in three large projects New York City Housing Authority Retrofit – Edenwald Houses • Impervious area managed:
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Populations of Terns and Skimmers on Long Island Sound and Eastern Long Island: 1972-19751
    1974-1977 No. 73 PROCEEDINGS OF THE LINNA A SOCIETY OF NEW YORK For the Three Years Ending March 1977 Date of Issue: August 1977 EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Members who participated in editing this issue of the Proceedings were: Berry Baker, Eugene Eisenmann, John Farrand, Jr., and Mary LeCroy. The Committee wishes to thank Alice Oliveri for typing manuscripts. Catherine Pessino, Editor Breeding Populations of Terns and Skimmers on Long Island Sound and Eastern Long Island: 1972-19751 DAVID DUFFY By 1972, it had become apparent to many working on colonial sea­ birds that the nesting terns and skimmers of Long Island were being increasingly exposed to a broad spectrum of pressures that might be causing severe changes in their populations. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) had been implicated in birth deformities of Common and Roseate Terns (Sterna hirundo and S. dougallii; Hays and Risebrough 1972). Mercury had been linked to feather loss in young terns (Gochfeld 1971). Egg shell thinning had been noted at several colonies in the area (Hays, pers. com.; pers. obs.); such thinning is believed to be caused by deriva­ tives of DDT (Wiemeyer and Porter 1970; Peakall 1970). Further pressure on tern populations had come from invasions of nesting sites by rats, development of recreational beaches, human harassment, and natural suc­ cession rendering colony sites unfit for nesting. For all of these factors there were only scattered and often anecdotal accounts of acute situations. What, if any, long-term effect there might be for the tern populations was unknown. Were Common and Roseate Terns holding their own? Or were they, instead, retreating to a few, safe colonies as their populations declined? Little as we knew of Commons and Rose­ ates, we knew even less of what was happening to Least Terns (Sterna albifrons) and Black Skimmers (Rynchops niger).
    [Show full text]