2. Community Profile
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
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 ..................................... -
Village of Montgomery Comprehensive Plan
Village of Montgomery Comprehensive Plan Village of Montgomery Comprehensive Plan Village of Montgomery, NY Prepared by the Village of Montgomery Comprehensive Plan Committee With Planit Main Street, Inc. Draft Update March 17, 2017 Village of Montgomery, New York i Village of Montgomery Comprehensive Plan Acknowledgements Village of Montgomery Board Hon. L. Stephen Brescia Mayor JoAnn Scheels, Deputy Mayor Darlene Andolsek, Trustee Michael R. Hembury, Trustee Walter Lindner, Trustee Comprehensive Plan Committee Kevin Conero, Chairman Darlene Andolsek Ken Blake Shane Daley Bill Freeman Sophia Romano JoAnn Scheels By far the Thomas Steed greatest and Charles Wallace* most admirable form of wisdom is that needed to Kevin Dowd, Village Attorney plan and beautify cities and human Consultants communities. - Socrates PLANIT MAIN STREET, INC. Alan J. Sorensen, AICP – Author All photos and illustrations unless noted otherwise © Planit Main Street, Inc., all rights reserved. This publication is produced for the sole use of the Village of Montgomery and may not be made available to other parties without the written permission of Planit Main Street, Inc. Three photos on the front cover were contributed by Donna Dolan Jacke [Orange Tractor, Wallkill River and BBQ]. *deceased Village of Montgomery, New York ii Village of Montgomery Comprehensive Plan Acknowledgements Continued Village Staff Members and Volunteers Monserrate Stanley, Village Clerk Tina Murphy, Deputy Village Clerk Marion Wild, Village Historian Geographic Information Systems Mapping Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps were prepared by Planit Main Street, Inc. except for the water resources maps that were prepared by staff members from the Orange County Planning Department. Funding The Hudson River Valley Greenway and Orange County Planning Department provided funding, in part, for the creation of this Comprehensive Plan. -
Wallkill River
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge At the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge, we conserve the biological diversity of the Wallkill Valley by protecting and managing land, with a special emphasis on s% i 7 7 7* 7 migrating wate / fo wl, wintering raptors, and endangered species, while providing \ opportunities for scientific research J *tind compatible I public use. ' Our Mission Congress established the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge in 1990 "to preserve and enhance refuge lands and waters in a manner that will conserve the natural diversity of fish, wildlife, plants, This blue goose, and their habitats for present and designed by J.N. future generations and to provide "Ding" Darling, opportunities for compatible has become the scientific research, environmental symbol of the education, and fish and wildlife- National Wildlife oriented recreation." Congress Refuge System. /. also required the protection of •/. aquatic habitats within the refuge, •- including the Wallkill River and '53 Papakating Creek. - The individual purposes of this Wallkill River refuge are supported by the mission in fall The refuge is located along a nine-mile of the National Wildlife Refuge stretch of the Wallkill River, and lies in System, of which the Wallkill River a rolling valley within the Appalachian refuge is a part. That mission is Ridge and Valley physiographic "to administer a national network province. The Wallkill Valley is of lands and waters for the bounded by the Kittatinny Ridge to conservation, management, and the west and the New York/New where appropriate, restoration of Jersey Highlands to the east. This the fish, wildlife, and plant resources area is part of the Great Valley, which and their habitats within the United extends from Canada to the southern States for the benefit of present and United States. -
Sussex County Open Space and Recreation Plan.”
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN for the County of Sussex “People and Nature Together” Compiled by Morris Land Conservancy with the Sussex County Open Space Committee September 30, 2003 County of Sussex Open Space and Recreation Plan produced by Morris Land Conservancy’s Partners for Greener Communities team: David Epstein, Executive Director Laura Szwak, Assistant Director Barbara Heskins Davis, Director of Municipal Programs Robert Sheffield, Planning Manager Tanya Nolte, Mapping Manager Sandy Urgo, Land Preservation Specialist Anne Bowman, Land Acquisition Administrator Holly Szoke, Communications Manager Letty Lisk, Office Manager Student Interns: Melissa Haupt Brian Henderson Brian Licinski Ken Sicknick Erin Siek Andrew Szwak Dolce Vieira OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN for County of Sussex “People and Nature Together” Compiled by: Morris Land Conservancy a nonprofit land trust with the County of Sussex Open Space Advisory Committee September 2003 County of Sussex Board of Chosen Freeholders Harold J. Wirths, Director Joann D’Angeli, Deputy Director Gary R. Chiusano, Member Glen Vetrano, Member Susan M. Zellman, Member County of Sussex Open Space Advisory Committee Austin Carew, Chairperson Glen Vetrano, Freeholder Liaison Ray Bonker Louis Cherepy Libby Herland William Hookway Tom Meyer Barbara Rosko Eric Snyder Donna Traylor Acknowledgements Morris Land Conservancy would like to acknowledge the following individuals and organizations for their help in providing information, guidance, research and mapping materials for the County of -
Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan February 2009 This Blue Goose, Designed by J.N
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan February 2009 This blue goose, designed by J.N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fi sh, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefi t of the American people. The Service manages the 97-million acre National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of more than 548 national wildlife refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas. It also operates 69 national fi sh hatcheries and 81 ecological services fi eld stations. The agency enforces federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally signifi cant fi sheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, administers the Endangered Species Act, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance Program which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fi shing and hunting equipment to state wildlife agencies. Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long term guidance for management decisions and set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes and identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffi ng increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan February 2009 Submitted by: Edward Henry Date Refuge Manager Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge Concurrence by: Janet M. -
NY Excluding Long Island 2017
DISCONTINUED SURFACE-WATER DISCHARGE OR STAGE-ONLY STATIONS The following continuous-record surface-water discharge or stage-only stations (gaging stations) in eastern New York excluding Long Island have been discontinued. Daily streamflow or stage records were collected and published for the period of record, expressed in water years, shown for each station. Those stations with an asterisk (*) before the station number are currently operated as crest-stage partial-record station and those with a double asterisk (**) after the station name had revisions published after the site was discontinued. Those stations with a (‡) following the Period of Record have no winter record. [Letters after station name designate type of data collected: (d) discharge, (e) elevation, (g) gage height] Period of Station Drainage record Station name number area (mi2) (water years) HOUSATONIC RIVER BASIN Tenmile River near Wassaic, NY (d) 01199420 120 1959-61 Swamp River near Dover Plains, NY (d) 01199490 46.6 1961-68 Tenmile River at Dover Plains, NY (d) 01199500 189 1901-04 BLIND BROOK BASIN Blind Brook at Rye, NY (d) 01300000 8.86 1944-89 BEAVER SWAMP BROOK BASIN Beaver Swamp Brook at Mamaroneck, NY (d) 01300500 4.42 1944-89 MAMARONECK RIVER BASIN Mamaroneck River at Mamaroneck, NY (d) 01301000 23.1 1944-89 BRONX RIVER BASIN Bronx River at Bronxville, NY (d) 01302000 26.5 1944-89 HUDSON RIVER BASIN Opalescent River near Tahawus, NY (d) 01311900 9.02 1921-23 Fishing Brook (County Line Flow Outlet) near Newcomb, NY (d) 0131199050 25.2 2007-10 Arbutus Pond Outlet -
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? 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 -
Village Board Meeting July 25, 2011 Members Present: Mayor
Village Board Meeting July 25, 2011 Members present: Mayor Roddey, Trustees Char, Mattheus, and Smith Absent: Trustee Stewart Also present: Attorney Donovan, Engineer Tully, and Village Clerk Strobl Mayor Roddey called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance, and a Moment of Silence to honor the victims of the recent tragedy in Norway. On a motion by Trustee Char, seconded by Trustee Mattheus, the Agenda was modified by the addition of: Items of Business #5 King Zak escrow refunds; and an Executive Session to discuss arbitration with the Town. Char aye Mattheus aye Smith aye Stewart absent On a motion by Trustee Char, seconded by Trustee Smith, the Public Hearing on proposed Local Law #1 of 2011 was opened at 7:33 p.m. Char aye Mattheus aye Smith aye Stewart absent LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Goshen, New York, will hold a Public Hearing at Village Hall, 276 Main Street, Goshen, New York, on July 25, 2011, at 7:30 p.m. or as soon after as may be heard, to consider the adoption of proposed Local Law #1 of 2011. This proposed Local Law is to amend Section 5.2 of Appendix A of the Code of the Village of Goshen entitled Supplementary regulations applying to nonresidential buildings by the repeal of Section 5.2.3.3, Lighting and signage. The Village of Goshen will make every effort to assure that the Public Hearing is accessible to persons with disabilities. -
A Bibliography of the Wallkill River Watershed
wallkill river watershed alliance we fight dirty A Bibliography of the Wallkill River Watershed Many of the documents listed below will eventually be found in the documents section of the Wallkill River Watershed Alliance’s website at www.wallkillalliance.org/files Amendment to the Sussex County Water Quality Management Plan, Total Maximum Daily Load to Address Arsenic in the Wallkill River and Papakating Creek, Northwest Water Region. (2004). New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Watershed Management, Bureau of Environmental Analysis and Restoration. Barbour, J., G. (undated manuscript). Ecological issues of Glenmere Lake, Town of Warwick, New York. Barringer, J. L., Bonin, J. L., Deluca, M. J., Romagna, T., Cenno, K., Marzo, A., Kratzer, T., Hirst, B. (2007). Sources and temporal dynamics of arsenic in a New Jersey watershed, USA. Science of the Total Environment, 379, 56-74. Barringer, J. L., Wilson, T. P., Szabo, Z., Bonin, J. L., Fischer, J. M., Smith, N. P., (2008). Diurnal variations in, and influences on, concentrations of particulate and dissolved arsenic and metals in the mildly alkaline Wallkill River, New Jersey, USA. Environmental Geology, 53, 1183-1199. Bugliosi, E. F., Casey, G. D., Ramelot, D. (1998). Geohydrology and water quality of the Wallkill River valley near Middletown, New York. United States Geological Survey, Open File Report 97-241. Dwaar Kill, Lower and Tribs Fact Sheet. (2007). Waterbody Inventory/Priority Waterbodies List. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water. Dwaar Kill, and Tribs Fact Sheet. (2007). Waterbody Inventory/Priority Waterbodies List. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water. -
NYSDEC Recovery Plan for NYS Populations of Northern Cricket Frog (Acris Crepitans)
Recovery Plan for New York State Populations of the Northern Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans) Division of Fish, Wildlife & Marine Resources i TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments iv Executive summary v Introduction 1 Natural history --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Taxonomic status 1 Physical description 2 Range 2 Breeding biology 2 Developmental biology 3 Non-breeding biology 4 Status Assessment ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Population status and distribution 5 Threats to the species 6 Habitat loss and degradation 6 Upland habitat loss and degradation 7 Aquatic habitat loss and degradation 8 Other chemical pollutants 9 Climate change 10 Parasites and pathogens 11 Ultraviolet radiation 12 Non-native species 12 Assessment of current conservation efforts 13 Research and monitoring 13 Regulatory protection 14 Recovery Strategy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 15 Strategy components 15 Recovery units 16 Recovery objectives 18 Recovery tasks 18 Monitoring tasks 19 Management tasks 19 Research tasks 20 Outreach tasks 21 Literature cited 22 Appendix I. Northern cricket frog Project screening process 42 Appendix II. Northern cricket frog Calling survey protocols 44 Appendix III. Population viability analysis 46 Appendix IV. Public comments and responses 66 iii Acknowledgments Thanks to Kelly McKean, Jason Martin and Kristen Marcell who provided significant review and -
Appendix-J-JCMUA-SIAR-092520.Pdf
Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission October 2020 PVSC Treatment District Regional Long Term Control Plan Appendix J Selection and Implementation of Alternatives Report for Jersey City MUA Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority Selection and Implementation of Alternatives Report NJPDES Permit No. NJ0108723 March 2020 Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority January 2020 Selection and Implementation of Alternatives Report Page 1 of 45 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A - INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 4 SECTION B - SCREENING OF CSO CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES ........................................ 9 SECTION C - EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES................................................................ 10 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 10 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNAtIVES.................................. 11 SECTION D - SELECTION OF RECOMMENDED LTCP ....................................................... 12 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 12 LTCP SELECTION PROCESS ..................................................................................... 12 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................. 12 D.3.1 Description ............................................................................................................... 13 D.3.2