DOCSLIB.ORG

Orange County Stormwater Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

County Of Orange, New York Stormwater Management Plan INTRODUCTION Regulations promulgated by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“NYSDEC”) and commonly referred to as the Phase II Stormwater Program requires certain municipalities and other entities that operate Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (“MS4’s”) to prepare and implement a Stormwater Management Program. Based on NYSDEC’s criteria, the County of Orange is considered to be a regulated MS4. Even without this regulation, it would be environmentally responsible for the County to address stormwater runoff concerns. In fact, the County had numerous proactive water conservation programs in place before the ‘Phase II’ regulations. This document will describe the County’s Stormwater Management Program with a focus on the ‘six minimum measures’ that are required components as determined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) and NYSDEC. Orange Counties Stormwater Contact(s): Orange County Department of Planning/Water Authority: Stormwater Management Officer (“SMO”) David Church, AICP Commissioner of Planning 124 Main Street Goshen, NY 10924 Phone: 845.615.3840 Orange County Department of Public Works: Charles Lee, P.E. 2455-2459 Route 17M P.O. Box 509 Goshen, NY 10924 845.291.2750 Orange County Department of Parks and Recreation: Richard Rose, Jr. Commissioner of Parks and Recreation 211 Route 416 Montgomery, NY 12549 845.615.3830 Orange County Soil and Water Conservation District: Kevin Sumner District Manager 225 Dolson Avenue, Suite 103 Middletown, NY 10940 845.343.1873 The County of Orange, in compliance with the General Permit, shall prepare an Annual Report. The Annual Report will portray to the public and the NYSDEC a summary of activities performed throughout the reporting period, March 10 of the previous year through March 9 of the current year. The 1 | P a g e County Of Orange, New York Stormwater Management Plan preparation of the report shall be a collaborative effort between the Orange County Department of Planning (“OCPD”), Orange County Department of Public Works (“OCDPW”), Orange County Department of Parks and Recreation (“OCDPR”), Orange County Water Authority (“OCWA”) and the Orange County Soil and Water Conservation District (“OCSWCD”). The collaborative team will meet on an annual basis for preparation purposes and will meet at additional times throughout the year as deemed appropriate, or as needed. Orange County Planning Department and OCSWCD will continually provide the Annual Report to the public and can be obtained at the following locations: http://www.orangecountygov.com/content/124/1362/1462/4625/default.aspx or http://www.ocsoilny.org/ms4-annual-report.html The County will continually work to see that the Stormwater Management Plan (“SWMP”) goals are met. Additions and/or revisions to the MS4 program requirements will be done as necessary and as NYSDEC issues revisions or updates to the MS4 Stormwater Program. 2 | P a g e County Of Orange, New York Stormwater Management Plan BACKGROUND The majority of the information outlined in the SWMP are applicable County-wide, even though regulation stipulates aspects of the SWMP are only required in regulated MS4 areas. The Orange County Department of Planning (“OCDP”), as part of the Comprehensive Plan has identified Priority Growth Areas. The Areas identified with respect to centralized water and sewer service areas, land use, local zoning districts, certain environmental constraints and protected open space and development that is sensitive to the surrounding resources is encouraged. See SWMP Figure 1, Priority Areas of Orange County. There are numerous documents that provide extensive background information on Orange County including the geologic, socio-economic, and political setting and related statistics. Therefore this document will not attempt to repeat this information www.orangecountygov.com/filestorage/124/1362/1460/4304/Orange_County_Comprehensive_P lan_2010_update.pdf http://www.orangecountygov.com/filestorage/124/1362/1460/4304/Supplement_1_Open_Space_ Plan.pdf http://www.orangecountygov.com/filestorage/124/1362/1460/4304/Supplement_2_Water_Maste r_Plan.pdf It should also be noted that several existing plans address water resource protection generally and even stormwater specifically. For example, see the above-referenced Open Space Plan and the County Water Master Plan. Others include the Wallkill River Watershed and Conservation Plan, www.orangecountygov.com/filestorage/124/1362/1462/4625/Wallkill_River_Watershed_Conser vation_and_Management_Plan.pdf or www.ocsoil.org/WatershedPlan.html the Moodna Watershed Management Plan, http://www.orangecountygov.com/filestorage/124/1362/1462/4625/Moodna_Creek_Watershed_ Plan_Final.pdf and the Orange County Water Quality Strategy http://www.ocsoilny.org/uploads/6/8/4/7/6847549/water_quality_strategyrevised.pdf The Water Quality Strategy provides detailed recommendations on all aspects of ‘nonpoint source’ pollution in the County including stormwater. The Strategy and both Watershed Plans recommend, among other stormwater management recommendations, the creation of a technical staff position with exclusive stormwater management responsibilities. Even as the accomplishments and goals highlighted below are considered, this recommendation should be considered key. For the most part, staff with ‘already full plates’ has been expected to develop and implement a stormwater plan including the ‘six minimum measures’ to comply with the Phase II regulations. A number of grants, pro-actively sought by the County and its supported agencies such as the Soil and Water Conservation District (“OCSWCD”) and the Orange County Water Authority (“OCWA”) have also helped in the Phase II Plan development and implementation. For 3 | P a g e Miles Legend: 0 2 4 6 8 10 Regulated MS4 Areas 1 Inch = 3.4 Miles Census Urban Areas, 2000 Priority Growth Areas C R AW F O R D Major Rivers N E W B U R G H Wiinnddiinngg H iillllss PPaarrkk County Parkland M O N T G O M E R Y C rroonnoom eerr H iillll PPaarrkk County-Owned Land A llggoonnqquuiinn PPaarrkk Interstate New York New Jersey WA L LTKhhIooLm Laass B uullll M eem PPaarrkk N E W W I N D S O R Pennsylvania B llaacckkbbuurrnn FFaarrm D & H C aannaall H iillll H oolldd M uusseeuum K oow aaw eessee U nniiqquuee A rreeaa Municipal Boundaries M O U N T H O P E H A M P T O N B U R G H D E E R P A R K Villages/Cities Towns SSw aarrttoouutt H oom eesstteeaadd B L O O M I N G G R O V E C O R N W A L L y 84 t n WA WA Y A N D A u G R E E N V I L L E o G O S H E N G oonnzzaaggaa H I G H L A N D S C 17 e g M I N I S I N K C H E S T E R W O O D B U R Y n a r O M O N R O E n WA R W I C K i s a 87 e r T U X E D O A Or a n ge Co u n t y P l an n i n g D ep a rt m en t Waarrw iicckk C oouunnttyy PPaarrkk y t Ma p Up dat ed: Fe br ua ry 20 12 i r The County of Orange makes no warranty whatsoever as to the accuracy or o completeness of any information depicted on this map. Data depicted here may i have been developed in cooperation with other County departments, as well as r other Federal, State and Local government agencies. The County of Orange P hereby disclaims liability for any loss or damage resulting from the use of the information and/or representations contained herein. SWMP Figure 1 County Of Orange, New York Stormwater Management Plan example, beginning in 2004 the OCSWCD coordinated an Orange County MS4 ‘Cooperation Project’ wherein over twenty County MS4’s including the County undertook similar work tasks and coordinated educational and public outreach efforts. These grants and projects helped greatly in reaching required minimum goals for Phase II compliance and water resource protection programming. However, without dedicated staff, stormwater management will likely continue to struggle for adequate attention and financial resources in view of the myriad issues facing municipal program managers and staff. Therefore, an overarching goal in concert with the below six minimum measures should be creative thinking and funding to allow for a stormwater specialist with Countywide responsibilities. All waters associated with Orange County are of a concern. The availability and quality are an important aspect to the Counties residents’ quality of life. The waterbodies that are listed by the NYSDEC as part of the SWMP will be adopted by the County Legislature as those of concern and priority. The waterbodies are as follows: Lower Hudson River Basin Waterbody Inventory/Priority Waterbodies List Report, 2008 Waterbody/Segment name Water Index Class Hudson River* H (portion 3) B Hudson River* H ( portion 4a) A Highland Brook and tribs. H-71 A(T) Moodna Creek, Upper and tribs. H-89 C Woodbury Creek and tribs H-89-7 C Otterkill/Black Meadow Creek and tribs. H-89-20 C Quassaick Creek and minor tribs. H-94 C Orange Lake* H-94-6-P340 B Wallkill River, Upper, and minor tribs. H-139-13 (portion 3) B Wallkill River, Upper, and minor tribs. H-139-13 (portion 4) C Shawangunk Lake/Highland Lake H-139-13-19-28-0491, P492 AA Tin Brook, Lower and tribs. H-139-13-33 A Masonic Creek and tribs H-139-13-51 B Monhagen Brook and tribs* H-139-13-52 C Quaker Creek and tribs* H-139-13-59 C Wawayanda Creek, Lower and tribs H-139-13-61-9 C(T) Wawayanda Creek, Upper and tribs H-139-13-61-9 B(T) 4 | P a g e County Of Orange, New York Stormwater Management Plan * signifies that the waterbody is also designated on the New York State Section 303(d) List of Impaired/TMDL Waters, in addition to the those listed as follows: New York State Section 303(d) List of Impaired/TMDL Waters, 2010 Waterbody/Segment name Water Index Class Minor tribs.
Recommended publications
  • Inspiring People to Stop Water Pollution Through Community Science

    Inspiring People to Stop Water Pollution Through Community Science

    Inspiring People to Stop Water Pollution through Community Science Dan Shapley Water Quality Program Manager Mohawk Watershed Symposium March 20, 2015 Inspiring Through Citizen Science • Our Water Quality Monitoring Program • Grassroots Inspiration 74 Sample sites 155 miles since 2008 Dr. Gregory O’Mullan Dr. Andrew Juhl Community Partners • Catskill Creek Watershed Awareness Project • Gardiner Environmental Conservation Commission • Montgomery Conservation Advisory Council • New York City Water Trail Association • Quassaick Creek Watershed Alliance • Rochester Environmental Conservation Commission • Rosendale Commission for Conservation of the Environment • Sparkill Creek Watershed Alliance • Wawarsing Environmental Conservation Commission Citizen Studies 8 Projects Catskill Creek 19 sites on 45 miles 149 Sites 212 Miles Esopus Creek 10 sites on 25 miles Rondout Creek Esopus Creek 17 sites on 43 miles Wallkill River 21 sites on 64 miles Rondout Creek Pocantico River 13 sites on 10 miles Sparkill Creek 16 sites on 8 miles Wallkill River Quassaick Creek Pocantico River 14 sites on 17 miles NYC Waterfront Sparkill Creek 39 sites in NYC, NJ & Yonkers Citizen Non-Tidal Tributary Sampling Sites % Samples Failing EPA-Recommended Beach Advisory Value (2012-2013) Catskill Creek 33% 67% Esopus Creek 31% 69% Rondout Creek 66% 34% Wallkill River 86% 14% Pocantico River 80% 20% Sparkill Creek 89% 11% Hudson River 23% 77% (2008-2013) % Beach Advisory % Acceptable Pollution Enforcement East River Illegal sewage discharge stopped in Hallets Cove Catskill
  • Town of Chester CPP Plan 3-26-19

    Town of Chester CPP Plan 3-26-19

    Community Preservation Plan Town of Chester, NY March 26, 2019 Committee Draft Prepared by the Town of Chester Community Preservation Plan Committee Prepared with technical assistance from: Planit Main Street, Inc. Preface The Town of Chester has long recognized that community planning is an ongoing process. In 2015, the Town Board adopted a Comprehensive Plan, which was an update of its 2003 Comprehensive Plan. The 2015 Comprehensive Plan recommended additional actions, plans and detailed studies to pursue the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Among these were additional measures to protect natural resources, agricultural resources and open space. In September 2017, the Town Board appointed a Community Preservation Plan Committee (CPPC) to guide undertake the creation of the Town’s first Community Preservation Plan. This Community Preservation Plan is not a new departure - rather it incorporates and builds upon the recommendations of the Town’s adopted 2015 Comprehensive Plan and its existing land use regulations. i Acknowledgements The 2017 Community Preservation Plan (CPP) Steering Committee acknowledges the extraordinary work of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee in creating the Town’s 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Chester Town Board Hon. Alex Jamieson, Supervisor Robert Valentine - Deputy Supervisor Brendan W. Medican - Councilman Cynthia Smith - Councilwomen Ryan C. Wensley – Councilman Linda Zappala, Town Clerk Clifton Patrick, Town Historian Town of Chester Community Preservation Plan Committee (CPPC) NAME TITLE Donald Serotta Chairman Suzanne Bellanich Member Tim Diltz Member Richard Logothetis Member Tracy Schuh Member Robert Valentine Member Consultant Alan J. Sorensen, AICP, Planit Main Street, Inc. ii Contents 1.0 Introduction, Purpose and Summary .............................................................................................. 4 2.0 Community Preservation Target Areas, Projects, Parcels and Priorities .....................................
  • Public Road Scenic Alternative Phasing

    Public Road Scenic Alternative Phasing

    Figure 4: Public Road Scenic Alternative Phasing Plan BT Holdings - Chester Development Village of Chester, Town of Chester, Orange County, New York Source: Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, 08/18/11 Scale: As shown File 05009 08/26/11 JS/05009 Tim Miller Associates, Inc.,10 North Street, Cold Spring, New York 10516 (845) 265-4400 Fax (845) 265-4418 Project Description August 18, 2011 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Comment 2.0-1 (Public Hearing, January 7, 2010, Steven Neuhaus, Town of Chester Town Supervisor): On August 10th, 2009, I sent a letter on behalf of the Town to the Village of Chester regarding our DEIS comments. We feel that there are at least twenty comments that weren't answered as thoroughly, or to our liking. I'd like to suggest or recommend that the BT Holdings engineers and architects or planners sit down with the Town's engineers and consultants, and just go through them item by item, so they are thoroughly explained and looked at. Response 2.0-1: During the course of the environmental review of the BT Holdings project, the Village of Chester circulated a notice of intent to be lead agency which the Town of Chester acknowledged. However, due to the nature of this specific project, the Village of Chester went above and beyond the measures normally taken to insure that a coordinated review of this project was conducted. To that end, in order to have benefit of the Town's comments as early in the process as possible, the Village gave the Town a preliminary working copy of the DEIS prior to its being accepted as complete by the Village.
  • Army Corps of Engineers Response Document Draft

    Army Corps of Engineers Response Document Draft

    3.0 ORANGE COUNTY Orange County has experienced numerous water resource problems along the main stem and the associated tributaries of the Moodna Creek and the Ramapo River that are typically affected by flooding during heavy rain events over the past several years including streambank erosion, agradation, sedimentation, deposition, blockages, environmental degradation, water quality and especially flooding. However, since October 2005, the flooding issues have severely increased and flooding continues during storm events that may or may not be considered significant. Areas affected as a result of creek flows are documented in the attached trip reports (Appendix D). Throughout the Orange County watershed, site visits confirmed opportunities to stabilize the eroding or threatened banks restore the riparian habitat while controlling sediment transport and improving water quality, and balance the flow regime. If the local municipalities choose to request Federal involvement, there are several options, depending on their budget, desired timeframe and intended results. The most viable options include a specifically authorized watershed study or program, or an emergency streambank protection project (Section 14 of the Continuing Authorities Program), or pursing a Continuing Authorities Program study for Flood Risk Management or Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration (Section 205 and Section 206 of the Continuing Authorities Program, respectively). Limited Federal involvement could also be provided in the form of the Planning Assistance to States or Support for Others programs provide assistance and limited funds outside of traditional Corps authorities. A watershed study focusing on restoration of the Moodna Creek, Otter Creek, Ramapo River and their associated tributaries could address various problems using a systematic approach.
  • How's the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks?

    How's the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks?

    How’s the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks? Cizen Science Fecal Contaminaon Study How’s the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks? Background & Problem Methods Results: 2012-2013 Potenal Polluon Sources © Riverkeeper 2014 © Riverkeeper 2014 Photo: Rob Friedman “SWIMMABILITY” FECAL PATHOGEN CONTAMINATION LOAD © Riverkeeper 2014 Government Pathogen Tesng © Riverkeeper 2014 Riverkeeper’s Fecal Contaminaon Study 2006 - Present Enterococcus (“Entero”) EPA-recommended fecal indicator Monthly sampling: May – Oct EPA Guideline for Primary Contact: Acceptable: 0-60 Entero per 100 mL Beach Advisory: >60 Entero per 100 mL © Riverkeeper 2014 Science Partners & Supporters Funders Science Partners • HSBC • Dr. Gregory O’Mullan Queens • Clinton Global Iniave College, City University of New • The Eppley Foundaon for York Research • Dr. Andrew Juhl, Lamont- • The Dextra Baldwin Doherty Earth Observatory, McGonagle Foundaon, Inc. Columbia University • The Hudson River Foundaon for Science and Environmental Research, Inc. • Hudson River Estuary Program, NYS DEC • New England Interstate Water Polluon Control Commission (2008-2013) © Riverkeeper 2014 Riverkeeper’s Cizen Science Program Goals 1. Fill a data gap 2. Raise awareness about fecal contaminaon in tributaries 3. Involve local residents in finding and eliminang Photo: John Gephards sources of contaminaon © Riverkeeper 2014 Riverkeeper’s Cizen Science Studies Tributaries sampled: • Catskill Creek • 45 river miles • 19 sites (many added in 2014) • Esopus Creek • 25 river miles
  • NYSWRI-Supported American Eel Research Project Counts Record

    NYSWRI-Supported American Eel Research Project Counts Record

    For Release: IMMEDIATE Contact: Lori Severino Tuesday, April 3, 2012 518-402-8000 CITIZEN SCIENTISTS SET TO TRACK RECORD NUMBER OF HUDSON RIVER EELS Annual Juvenile Eel Migration is Larger and Earlier than Usual High school students and community volunteers throughout the Hudson Valley are engaging in research on migrating juvenile American eels in Hudson River tributaries as part of New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) American Eel Research Project, the agency announced today. American eels have one of the most unusual life cycles of any fish. They are born in the Sargasso Sea north of Puerto Rico, and every spring they arrive in estuaries like the Hudson River as translucent, two-inch long “glass eels.” As part of the research project, volunteers and students check a ten-foot cone-shaped net (“fyke net”) specifically designed to catch this small species and then they count and release the glass eels back into the water and record environmental data on temperature and tides. Most of the eels are released above dams and other barriers so that they have better access to habitat. Eels will live in freshwater streams and lakes for up to 20 years before returning to the sea. “The American Eel Research project is an excellent way to connect students and the community with nature while gathering research that can be valuable for the future study of this species and its role in our ecosystem,” said Kathleen Moser, DEC’s Assistant Commissioner of Natural Resources. “We thank the hundreds of volunteers and partner organizations that continue to support the Eel Project and its annual research efforts.” Now in its fifth year, volunteers and organizational support for the project has expanded greatly.
  • SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) Facilities

    SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) Facilities

    SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) Facilities Status DEC Region NPDES ID Terminated 8 NYR00B679 Terminated 4 NYR00E979 Terminated 4 NYR00E094 Terminated 3 NYR00F907 Terminated 4 NYR00F128 Terminated 3 NYR00F294 Active 4 NYR00F440 Terminated 5 NYR00E193 Active 8 NYR00F759 No Exposure 1 NYR00G254 No Exposure 2 NYR00F729 Active 4 NYR00B055 Active 4 NYR00B054 No Exposure 8 NYR00G118 Active 3 NYR00B923 No Exposure 3 NYR00E656 Terminated 2 NYR00D894 No Exposure 1 NYR00F797 Active 3 NYR00B036 Page 1 of 1078 09/28/2021 SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) Facilities Name of Facility Location of Facility J A YANSICK LUMBER CO STATE RTE 70 LOCHVUE SPRING AVE EXT MAIN BROTHERS OIL CO INC - ROXBURY TERMINAL 25 LOCUST ST MONDELEZ GLOBAL LLC - NEWBURGH 800 CORPORATE BLVD TRAVIS 8412 STATE HWY 7 WASSAIC PIT BOX 221A P&M BRICK LLC MARINE TERMINAL 2170 RIVER RD CLINTON QUARRY LOST NATION RD ELMIRA ROAD MATERIALSLLC 1 COUNTY ROUTE 77A AEROFLEX PLAINVIEW 35 S. SERVICE RD. PRATT INSTITUTE MANHATTAN CAMPUS OPERATIONS 142-144 W 14TH ST WEST SAND LAKE PIT 3600 STATE RTE 43 HEMSTREET PARK BANK 3040 RIVER ROAD LOVE BEETS 1150 LEE RDSECT A FIRST STUDENT INC #12370 32 FITCHETT WAY UNITED STATES MINT NYS RTE 218 SWING STAGING INCORPORATED 55-51 43RD ST L-3 NARDA-ATM 49 RIDER AVE JOSEPH Y. RESNICK AIRPORT 199 AIRPORT ROAD Page 2 of 1078 09/28/2021 SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) Facilities City of Facility Zip of Facility County Name Sector Code HUNT 14846 Livingston POESTENKILL 12140 Rensselaer ROXBURY 12474 Delaware NEWBURGH 12550 Orange MARYLAND
  • Town of New Windsor Comprehensive Plan Update

    Town of New Windsor Comprehensive Plan Update

    TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Working Draft January 2021 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Jerry Argenio, Planning Board Chairman Stephen A. Bedetti, Town Councilman Ron Eaton Dominick Lucera Steven Moreau, Town Councilman Richard Ostner David Zagon, Town Attorney Jennifer Gallagher, Town Building Inspector John McDonald, Chief Information Technology Officer Michael Weeks, Town Engineer TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR TOWN BOARD George Meyers, Town Supervisor Andrew Regenbaum, Councilman Steve Moreau, Councilman Stephen A. Bedetti, Councilman Sylvia Santiago, Councilwoman PLANNING CONSULTANT Lanc & Tully Engineering and Surveying, PC 3132 Route 207 Campbell Hall, New York 10916 Kristen O’Donnell Draft Presented to the Town Board: February 3, 2021 New Windsor 2021 Comprehensive Plan Update i TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ………….…………………………………………………………….….……...1 A. Mission Statement B. Principles of the Plan C. General Planning Policies D. Background II. Population, Housing and Residential Development …………………….………………...4 A. Goals B. Summary of Existing Conditions C. Recommendations III. Economic Development ……………………………………………………………………11 A. Goals B. Summary of Existing Conditions C. Employment D. Recommendations IV. Natural Resources ……………………………………………….…….………………..….15 A. Goals B. Summary of Existing Conditions C. Recommendations V. Transportation …………………………………………...………………………………….20 A. Goals B. Summary of Existing Conditions C. Recommendations VI. Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation ....…………………………………….……30
  • Chapter 2: Assessment of Waterbodies and Watershed Resources

    Chapter 2: Assessment of Waterbodies and Watershed Resources

    Chapter 2: Assessment of Waterbodies and Watershed Resources CHAPTER 2. ASSESSMENT OF WATERBODIES AND WATERSHED RESOURCES □□□□□ 2: 1 Introduction 2: 1.1 BACKGROUND This assessment compiles a wealth of existing information and characterizes the values and impairments of the watershed while also enhancing the reader’s awareness of the Quassaick Creek, its tributaries, and water resource issues in general. This Chapter is organized with the following sub- sections to describe the physical, ecological, and human characteristics within the Watershed. Figures and maps have been included to illustrate these features, and are interspersed throughout the report. o Section 1: Introduction o Section 2: Geological Resources o Section 3: Water Resources o Section 4: Living Resources o Section 5: Land Use and Land Cover o Section 6: Pollutant and Nutrient Loading o Section 7: Community Profile o Section 8: Summary 2: 1.2 WATERSHED OVERVIEW Quassaick Creek is one of 65 major streams and rivers that flow into the Hudson River Estuary. Hudson River Estuary tributaries vary in size from small intermittent streams that may dry-up during summer months, to larger rivers with watersheds that cover hundreds of square miles. Quassaick Creek is an average sized tributary compared to all other tributaries, draining approximately 56 square miles of land in Orange and Ulster Counties. Tributaries such as the Quassaick are interwoven components of the Hudson Estuary ecosystem and are influenced by diurnal tides (i.e., twice daily). Due to impoundments and barriers in the lower Quassaick Creek, however, tidal influence is limited to only the mouth of the Creek, east of the American Felt and Filter dam.
  • Reclaiming Newburgh's Other Waterfront

    Reclaiming Newburgh's Other Waterfront

    Reclaiming Newburgh’s Other Waterfront A Planning Primer for The Quassaick Creek Corridor Newburgh in Context The City’s primary waterfront is the Hudson River. Newburgh was the first deep water anchorage beyond the Appalachian ridge, a stepping stone on the way West up the Hudson, along the Erie Canal to the Great Lakes. Looking Southward The northern “gateway” through the Appalachian ridge. Breakneck Ridge on the right, Storm King Mountain on the left. Straight ahead through the notch is West Point. Newburgh, NY’s Hudson riverfront Perennially viewed as the “silver bullet” for economic development; but connection to the City is limited by topography, private interests and ownership along the Hudson River frontage, lack of contiguity of public lands, brownfield contamination along the western side of Water Street. This area is a regional attraction; but it offers little to the City’s residents. Newburgh’s Other Waterfront The Quassaick Creek The urban reach of Quassaick Creek, winds around and through the City of Newburgh, NY for two and a half miles and empties into the Hudson at the city’s southern boundary. View from over the Hudson looking westward. In the distance is Washington Lake, the City’s drinking water reservoir. Newburgh’s Other Waterfront Historically the stream corridor was Newburgh’s life line. It provided the native people with a sheltering valley and fresh water. Later populations harnessed its energy to drive the mills that were the foundation of Newburgh’s economy for more than a century. It now offers opportunities for neighborhood revitalization; but hardly anyone knows it’s there.
  • REVISED UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN for the TOWN of GOSHEN Goshen, New York

    REVISED UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN for the TOWN of GOSHEN Goshen, New York

    REVISED UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF GOSHEN Goshen, New York PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT Prepared for: Town of Goshen July 17, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT REVISED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Town of Goshen, New York 41 Webster Avenue Goshen, NY 10924 Prepared by: Town of Goshen Town Board Douglas Bloomfield, Supervisor Kenneth Newbold Louis Cappella George Lyons Philip Canterino Legal Counsel Dennis Caplicki, Attorney for the Town Richard B. Golden, Planning Board Attorney Kelly M. Naughton, Planning Board Attorney And Edwin Garling, Planner for the Town Prepared with the assistance of: BFJ Planning: Frank Fish, FAICP, Principal Georges Jacquemart, Principal Sarah K. Yackel, AICP, Associate Alireza Rabiee, Senior Transportation Planner Áine Balfe, Planner T. 212.353.7474 And Riddick Associates, P.C. Dennis Lindsay, Town Consulting Engineer T. 845.357.7238 July 17, 2008 Updated Town of Goshen Comprehensive Plan, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 What is a Comprehensive Plan? 2 1.2 Goals and Objectives 4 1.3 The Planning Process 4 1.4 Planning in Goshen 5 1.5 Regional Planning Context 11 2.0 Existing Conditions 16 2.1 Geography 16 2.2 Water Supply 16 2.3 Political Structure 18 2.4 Demographics 23 2.5 Existing Land Uses 26 2.6 Review of Existing Zoning 31 2.7 Traffic Analysis 34 3.0 Comprehensive Plan 51 3.1 Goals and Objectives 51 3.2 Key Elements 52 3.3 Land Use Recommendations 55 3.4 Open Space and Recreation Plan 58 3.5 Economic Plan 64 3.6 Other Plan Recommendations 66 4.0 Implementation 67 4.1 State Environmental
  • Intermunicipal Watershed Management Program Report

    Intermunicipal Watershed Management Program Report

    NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE INTERMUNICIPAL WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FEBRUARY 2010 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY All New Yorkers depend on clean water for drinking, recreation, and economic sustainability. Watershed management is critical to protect and restore New York’s coastal waterbodies and inland waterways. Through the Intermunicipal Watershed Management Program, the Department of State has taken the lead in providing professional expertise and financial assistance to municipalities to protect and improve water quality. Across New York State, 37 Intermunicipal Watershed Management Plans are being developed and implemented with funding and assistance from the Department of State. A Comprehensive Approach - The Department of State has developed an integrated, comprehensive approach to watershed management planning - this approach is a major component of the Department of State’s Intermunicipal Watershed Management Program. More than 458 communities in 53 counties, comprising watersheds of over 11,500 square miles (over 7 million acres), are actively involved with the Department in watershed planning across New York State. This represents 21% of New York’s land mass and 55% of the communities eligible for funding from the Department of State through the NYS Environmental Protection Fund Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. Funding - Together, the Department and its partners have invested over $38 million through the Environmental Protection Fund Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (EPF LWRP), Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act, and Great Lakes Coastal Watershed Restoration Program to prepare and implement watershed management plans. As a direct result of the Department’s involvement, as well as local expertise and matching funds, water quality is improving in New York waterbodies.