DOCSLIB.ORG

Calendar No. 104

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Calendar No. 104 111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! 1st Session SENATE 111–45 ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2010 JULY 9, 2009.—Ordered to be printed Mr. DORGAN, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 1436] The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1436) mak- ing appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass. The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the bill (H.R. 0000) making appropriations for energy and water develop- ment and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, reports the same to the Senate with an amendment, and an amendment to the title, and recommends that the bill as amended do pass. Amount in new budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2010 Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $34,271,000,000 Amount of 2009 appropriations ............................... 92,533,165,000 Amount of 2010 budget estimate ............................ 34,914,709,000 Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 2009 appropriations .......................................... ¥58,262,165,000 2010 budget estimate ........................................ ¥643,709,000 50–870 PDF CONTENTS Page Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Estimates and Recommendations ..................................................... 4 Title I: Department of Defense—Civil: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers—Civil: General Investigations ....................................................................... 16 Construction, General ........................................................................ 32 Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries ........................... 50 Operation and Maintenance, General .............................................. 52 Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies .......................................... 73 Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program ......................... 74 General Expenses ............................................................................... 74 General Provisions—Corps of Engineers—Civil .............................. 76 Title II: Department of the Interior: Central Utah Project Completion Account .............................................. 78 Bureau of Reclamation: Water and Related Resources ........................................................... 78 Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ......................................... 86 California Bay-Delta Restoration ...................................................... 86 Policy and Administration ................................................................. 86 General Provisions—Department of the Interior .................................... 87 Title III: Department of Energy: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ............................................... 89 Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability ..................................... 96 Nuclear Energy .................................................................................. 97 Fossil Energy Research and Development ....................................... 100 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ........................................ 102 Strategic Petroleum Reserve ............................................................. 102 Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve .............................................. 102 Energy Information Administration ................................................. 103 Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup ..................................................... 103 Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund .. 104 Science ........................................................................................................ 104 High Energy Physics .......................................................................... 105 Nuclear Physics .................................................................................. 105 Biological and Environmental Research .......................................... 105 Basic Energy Sciences ....................................................................... 105 Nuclear Waste Disposal ............................................................................ 108 Departmental Administration .................................................................. 109 Office of Inspector General ....................................................................... 109 Atomic Energy Defense Activities: National Nuclear Security Administration: Weapons Activities ...................................................................... 110 Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ............................................. 115 Naval Reactors ............................................................................ 117 Office of the Administrator ........................................................ 118 Environmental and Other Defense Activities: Defense Environmental Cleanup ...................................................... 118 Other Defense Activities .................................................................... 121 Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal ...................................................... 121 Power Marketing Administrations: Operation and Maintenance, Southeastern Power Adminis- tration ....................................................................................... 122 (2) 3 Page Title III—Continued Department of Energy—Continued Environmental and Other Defense Activities—Continued Power Marketing Administrations—Continued Operation and Maintenance, Southwestern Power Adminis- tration ....................................................................................... 122 Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration ..................................... 122 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Salaries and Expenses .. 123 General Provisions—Department of Energy ........................................... 154 Title IV: Independent Agencies: Appalachian Regional Commission .......................................................... 155 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ................................................. 155 Delta Regional Authority .......................................................................... 156 Denali Commission ................................................................................... 156 Nuclear Regulatory Commission .............................................................. 156 Office of Inspector General ................................................................ 157 Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board .................................................. 157 Tennessee Valley Authority Office of the Inspector General ................. 157 General Provision—Independent Agencies ............................................. 158 Title V: General Provisions ..................................................................................... 159 Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of the Senate ................................................................................................................... 160 Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of the Senate ................................................................................................................... 160 Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of the Senate ................................................................................................................... 161 Budgetary Impact Statement ................................................................................. 166 Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items ...................................... 166 Comparative Statement of Budget Authority ........................................................ 230 PURPOSE The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for the fiscal year 2010 beginning October 1, 2009, and ending September 30, 2010, for energy and water development, and for other related pur- poses. It supplies funds for water resources development programs and related activities of the Department of the Army, Civil Func- tions—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Civil Works Program in title I; for the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation in title II; for the Department of Energy’s energy research activities, including environmental restoration and waste management, and atomic energy defense activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration in title III; and for related independent agencies and commissions, including the Appalachian Regional Commission, Delta Regional Authority, Denali Commission, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in title IV. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fiscal year 2010 budget estimates for the bill total $34,914,709,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The rec- ommendation of the Committee totals $34,271,000,000. This is $643,709,000 below the budget estimates and $58,262,165,000 below the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year. SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS The Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water held three sessions in connection with the fiscal year 2010 appropriation bill. Witnesses included officials and
Recommended publications
  • Narrow River Watershed Plan (Draft)

    Narrow River Watershed Plan (Draft)

    DRAFT Narrow River Watershed Plan Prepared by: Office of Water Resources Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management 235 Promenade Street Providence, RI 02908 Draft: December 24, 2019, clean for local review DRAFT Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 8 A) Purpose of Plan................................................................................................................. 8 B) Water Quality and Aquatic Habitat Goals for the Watershed ........................................ 12 1) Open Shellfishing Areas ............................................................................................. 12 2) Protect Drinking Water Supplies ................................................................................ 12 3) Protect and Restore Fish and Wildlife Habitat ........................................................... 12 4) Protect and Restore Wetlands and Their Buffers ....................................................... 13 5) Protect and Restore Recreational Opportunities ......................................................... 14 C) Approach for Developing the Plan/ How this Plan was Developed .............................. 15 II. Watershed Description .........................................................................................................
  • Coastal Resources Management Council

    Coastal Resources Management Council

    650-RICR-20-00-01 650 – COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT COUNCIL CHAPTER 20 – COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SUBCHAPTER 00 – N/A PART 1 – COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM – RED BOOK Table of Contents 1.1 Authorities and Purpose, Definitions and Procedures 1.1.1 Authority and Purpose 1.1.2 Definitions 1.1.3 Alterations and Activities that require an Assent from the Coastal Resources Management Council (formerly § 100) 1.1.4 Applications for Category A and Category B Council Assents (formerly § 110) 1.1.5 Variances (formerly § 120) 1.1.6 Special Exceptions (formerly § 130) 1.1.7 Setbacks (formerly § 140) 1.1.8 Climate Change and Sea Level Rise (formerly § 145) 1.1.9 Coastal Buffer Zones (formerly § 150) 1.1.10 Fees (formerly § 160) 1.1.11 Violations and Enforcement Actions (formerly § 170) 1.1.12 Emergency Assents (formerly § 180) 1.2 Areas Under Council Jurisdiction 1.2.1 Tidal and Coastal Pond Waters (formerly § 200) 1.2.2 Shoreline Features (formerly § 210) 1.2.3 Areas of Historic and Archaeological Significance (formerly § 220) 1.3 Activities Under Council Jurisdiction 1.3.1 In Tidal and Coastal Pond Waters, on Shoreline Features and Their Contiguous Areas (formerly § 300) 1.3.2 Alterations to Freshwater Flows to Tidal Waters and Water Bodies and Coastal Ponds (formerly § 310) 1.3.3 Inland activities and alterations that are subject to Council permitting (formerly § 320) 1.3.4 Activities located within critical coastal areas (formerly § 325) 1.3.5 Guidelines for the protection and enhancement of the scenic value of the coastal region (formerly § 330) 1.3.6 Protection and enhancement of public access to the shore (formerly § 335) 1.3.7 Federal Consistency (formerly § 400) 1.4 Maps of Water Use Categories - Watch Hill to Little Compton and Block Island 1.5 Shoreline Change Maps 1.6 Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) Maps 1.1 Authorities and Purpose, Definitions and Procedures 1.1.1 Authority and Purpose Pursuant to the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.
  • Download The

    Download The

    COMPLIMENTARY JULYMAY 2021 2020 smithfieldtimesri.net Smithfield Town Fireworks at Bryant University, 2019 BOSTON MA BOSTON 55800 PERMIT NO. PERMIT PAID Our customers U.S. POSTAGE U.S. ECRWSS Local Postal Customer Postal Local are our owners. PRSRT STD PRSRT Federally insured by NCUA PROACTIVE PROACTIVE SOPHISTICATED CARE SOPHISTICATED CARE OUR PATIENTS ENJOY: OUR • Therapy PATIENTS up to 7 Days aENJOY: Week Raising the bar in the delivery • TherapyBrand New up State-of-the-artto 7 Days a Week Rehab Gym & Equipment Raisingof short-term the bar in rehabilitative the delivery • BrandIndividualized New State-of-the-art Evaluations & Rehab Treatment Gym Programs & Equipment ofand short-term skilled nursing rehabilitative care in • IndividualizedComprehensive Evaluations Discharge Planning& Treatment that Programs Begins on Day One and skilled nursing care in • ComprehensiveSemi-Private and Discharge Private Rooms Planning with that Cable Begins TV on Day One Northern Rhode Island • Semi-PrivateConcierge Services and Private Rooms with Cable TV Northern Rhode Island • Concierge Services CARDIAC ORTHOPEDIC PULMONARY REHABILITATION CARDIAC REHABILITATION ORTHOPEDIC PULMONARY CARE Under the REHABILITATION direction of a leading • Physicians REHABILITATION & Physiatrist On-Site • Tracheostomy Care CARE Cardiologist/Pulmonologist, our specialized Under the direction of a leading • PhysiciansIndividualized & Physiatrist Aggressive On-Site Rehab • TracheostomyRespiratory Therapists Care nurses provide care to patients recovering Cardiologist/Pulmonologist,
  • Field Guide to Coastal Environmental Geology of Rhode Island's Barrier Beach Coastline

    Field Guide to Coastal Environmental Geology of Rhode Island's Barrier Beach Coastline

    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository New England Intercollegiate Geological NEIGC Trips Excursion Collection 1-1-1981 Field Guide to Coastal Environmental Geology of Rhode Island's Barrier Beach Coastline Fisher, John J. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/neigc_trips Recommended Citation Fisher, John J., "Field Guide to Coastal Environmental Geology of Rhode Island's Barrier Beach Coastline" (1981). NEIGC Trips. 297. https://scholars.unh.edu/neigc_trips/297 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the New England Intercollegiate Geological Excursion Collection at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in NEIGC Trips by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 153 Trip B-6 Field Guide to Coastal Environmental Geology of Rhode Island's Barrier Beach Coastline fcy John J. Fisher Department of Geology University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI 02881 Introduction The Rhode Island southern coastline, 30 km in length, can he classified as a barrier beach complex shoreline. Developed from a mainland consisting pri­ marily of a glacial outwash plain, it has been submerged by recent sea level rise. Headlands (locally called "points") composed of till and outwash plain deposits separate a series of lagoon-like hays (locally called "ponds") that are drowned glacial outwash channels. Interconnecting baymouth harriers (locally called "harrier "beaches") with several inlets make up the major shoreform of this coast (Figure l). This field guide is an introduction to the coastal environmental geology features of the Rhode Island harrier beach coast.
  • Town of Westerly Harbor Management Plan 2016 Revised 10/28/19

    Town of Westerly Harbor Management Plan 2016 Revised 10/28/19

    Town of Westerly Harbor Management Plan 2016 Revised 10/28/19 As Adopted by the Westerly Town Council, October 28, 2019 1 Contents INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 3 WESTERLY HMC MISSION STATEMENT ................................................................... 4 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 5 HISTORY ......................................................................................................................... 18 WATER QUALITY.......................................................................................................... 20 NATURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................... 30 THE BEACHES................................................................................................................ 36 SHORELINE PUBLIC ACCESS ................................................................................... 41 HARBOR FACILITIES AND BOAT RAMPS ............................................................... 53 MOORING MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................... 60 STORM PREPAREDNESS.............................................................................................. 75 WESTERLY HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN-ORDINANCE ................................. 81 2 INTRODUCTION The Westerly Harbor Plan is formulated in order to
  • W R Wash Rhod Hingt De Isl Ton C Land Coun D Nty

    W R Wash Rhod Hingt De Isl Ton C Land Coun D Nty

    WASHINGTON COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND (ALL JURISDICTIONS) VOLUME 1 OF 2 COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER CHARLESTOWN, TOWN OF 445395 EXETER, TOWN OF 440032 HOPKINTON, TOWN OF 440028 NARRAGANSETT INDIAN TRIBE 445414 NARRAGANSETT, TOWN OF 445402 NEW SHOREHAM, TOWN OF 440036 NORTH KINGSTOWN, TOWN OF 445404 RICHMOND, TOWN OF 440031 SOUTH KINGSTOWN, TOWN OF 445407 Washingtton County WESTERLY, TOWN OF 445410 Revised: October 16, 2013 Federal Emergency Management Ageency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 44009CV001B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: October 19, 2010 Revised Countywide FIS Date: October 16, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS – Volume 1 – October 16, 2013 Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose of Study 1 1.2 Authority and Acknowledgments 1 1.3 Coordination 4 2.0
  • Tri‐Lakes Sedimentation Studies Area‐Capacity Report Revised: July 2011

    Tri‐Lakes Sedimentation Studies Area‐Capacity Report Revised: July 2011

    Tri‐Lakes Sedimentation Studies Area‐Capacity Report Revised: July 2011 Tri‐Lakes Report for Bear Creek, Chatfield, and Cherry Creek Lakes near Denver, Colorado Chatfield Dam ‐ July 2010 Prepared by: Engineering Division Hydrologic Engineering Branch Sedimentation and Channel Stabilization Section M.R.B. Sediment Memorandum 23a U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS NORTHWESTERN DIVISION OMAHA – KANSAS CITY – PORTLAND – SEATTLE – WALLA WALLA DISTRICTS The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Missouri River Basin (M.R.B.) Sediment Memoranda Program was established for the development of practical sediment engineering for rational evaluation, regulation, and utilization of fluvial sediment phenomena. It was implemented as a comprehensive, Missouri River basin‐wide program for coordination of studies of sediment problems in the overall basin program for flood control and allied purposes as well as for continuity and perspective in the planning and design of individual projects. The program includes both investigations for the development of sediment transport theory and observation of existent and occurring phenomena for the purpose of developing the applications of theory to practical problems, developing empirical relationships and providing aids to judgment. i M.R.B. Sediment Memorandum 23a ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS M.R.B. 23a, Tri‐Lakes Sedimentation Studies Area‐Capacity Report Revised July 2011, was prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District. The Project Technician for this study is: Mr. Larry Morong Sedimentation & Channel Stabilization Section, CENWO‐ED‐HF 402‐995‐2353 The Project Engineer for this study is: Ms. Jennifer Gitt Sedimentation & Channel Stabilization Section, CENWO‐ED‐HF 402‐995‐2356 Under the guidance and supervision of: Mr.
  • Numerical Simulation of Coastal Erosion and Its Mitigation by Living Shoreline Methods: a Case Study in Southern Rhode Island By

    Numerical Simulation of Coastal Erosion and Its Mitigation by Living Shoreline Methods: a Case Study in Southern Rhode Island By

    Numerical simulation of coastal erosion and its mitigation by living shoreline methods: A case study in southern Rhode Island By Scott Hayward1, M. Reza Hashemi2*, Marissa Torres2, Annette Grilli2, Stephan Grilli2, John King3, Chris Baxter2, and Malcolm Spaulding2 1) Ransom Consulting Inc., 400 Commercial Street, Portland, ME 04101; 2) Department of Ocean Engineering, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA; 3) Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA; * Corresponding author: Email [email protected] ABSTRACT Accelerated shoreline retreat due to sea level rise is a major chal- nested within this regional grid to simulate nearshore sediment lenge for coastal communities in many regions of the U.S. and transport processes and shoreline erosion. After validating the around the world. While many methods of erosion mitigation regional modeling system for a historical storm (Hurricane have been empirically tested, and applied in various regions, Sandy), Hurricane Irene (2011) was used to validate XBeach, on more research is necessary to understand the performance the basis of a unique dataset of pre- and post-storm beach pro- of these mitigation measures using process-based numerical files that was collected in our study area for this event. XBeach models. These models can potentially predict the response of showed a relatively good performance, being able to estimate a beach to these measures and help identify the best method. eroded volumes along three beach transects within 8% to 39%, Further, because nearshore sediment transport processes are with a mean error of 23%. The validated model was then used still poorly understood, there are many uncertainties in assess- to analyze the effectiveness of three living shoreline erosion ment of coastal erosion and mitigation measures.
  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Replacing Dams at Popular

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Replacing Dams at Popular

    Replacing dams How the Corps of Engineers Discovering a at popular Air Force used creativity to maximize steamboat relic of Academy recreation area flood risk reduction Missouri River trade Icy spillway tests workers at Gavins Point Dam U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District March 2013 – Vol. 18, Issue 1 IN THIS ISSUE. Civil Works 2 A frosty proposition - $3 million will get you the largest assessment and repair job ever at Gavins Point Dam, and some chilled marrow to boot Construction 4 Experience Rules - USAF selects Corps to replace Leo and Grace Lake Dams at Farish Recreation area in Colorado Military Construction 6 Effective partnerships - are the Omaha District’s specialty. Thus our involvement in rebuilding Butts Army Airfield. Maj. Eli Adams contributed this article Sustainable Solutions 8 Corps Creativity - is the district calling card, and brought about groundbreaking results in post-flood levee repair work Special Projects 10 A thorough look - at the upcoming Cherry Creek Dam safety modification study is offered by guest writer Ryan Larsen Spotlight 12 Quite a history - of formulating superb relationships and working long, grinding hours gain Hard Hat of the Year award for Larry Kempton Cultural Resources 14 A river of debris - brings Omaha District into the steamboat shipwreck arena. Changes in meandering Missouri River covered up ghostly timber until… On the cover: Gavins Point spillway. Photo by Harry Weddington U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Omaha Outlook is a quarterly publication produced by the Public Affairs Office 1616 Capitol Ave., Suite 9000 for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, in accordance with Omaha Neb.
  • Inventory of Habitat Modifications to Sandy Beaches ME-NY Rice 2015

    Inventory of Habitat Modifications to Sandy Beaches ME-NY Rice 2015

    Inventory of Habitat Modifications to Sandy Beaches in the U.S. Atlantic Coast Breeding Range of the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) prior to Hurricane Sandy: Maine to the North Shore and Peconic Estuary of New York1 Tracy Monegan Rice Terwilliger Consulting, Inc. June 2015 Recovery Task 1.2 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Recovery Plan for the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) prioritizes the maintenance of “natural coastal formation processes that perpetuate high quality breeding habitat,” specifically discouraging the “construction of structures or other developments that will destroy or degrade plover habitat” (Task 1.21), “interference with natural processes of inlet formation, migration, and closure” (Task 1.22), and “beach stabilization projects including snowfencing and planting of vegetation at current or potential plover breeding sites” (Task 1.23) (USFWS 1996, pp. 65-67). This assessment fills a data need to identify such habitat modifications that have altered natural coastal processes and the resulting abundance, distribution, and condition of currently existing habitat in the breeding range. Four previous studies provided these data for the United States (U.S.) continental migration and overwintering range of the piping plover (Rice 2012a, 2012b) and the southern portion of the U.S. Atlantic Coast breeding range (Rice 2014, 2015a). This assessment provides these data for one habitat type – namely sandy beaches within the northern portion of the breeding range along the Atlantic coast of the U.S. prior to Hurricane Sandy. A separate report assessed tidal inlet habitat in the same geographic range prior to Hurricane Sandy (Rice 2015b). Separate reports will assess the status of these two habitats in the northern and southern portions of the U.S.
  • Proposed Changes to the Coastal Resources

    Proposed Changes to the Coastal Resources

    650-RICR-20-00-1 TITLE 650 – COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT COUNCIL CHAPTER 20 – COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SUBCHAPTER 00 – N/A PART 1 – Red Book Table of Contents 1.1 Authorities and Purpose, Definitions and Procedures 1.1.1 Authority and Purpose 1.1.2 Definitions 1.1.3 Requirements for Applicants 1.1.4 Alterations and Activities That Require an Assent from the Coastal Resources Management Council 1.1.5 Review Categories and Prohibited Activities in Tidal Waters and on Adjacent Shoreline Features 1.1.6 Applications for Category A and Category B Council Assents 1.1.7 Variances 1.1.8 Special Exceptions 1.1.9 Setbacks 1.1.10 Climate Change and Sea Level Rise 1.1.11 Coastal Buffer Zones 1.1.12 Fees 1.1.13 Violations and Enforcement Actions 1.1.14 Emergency Assents 1.2 Areas Under Council Jurisdiction 1.2.1 Tidal and Coastal Pond Waters 1.2.2 Shoreline Features 1.2.3 Areas of Historic and Archaeological Significance 1.3 Activities Under Council Jurisdiction 1.3.1 In Tidal and Coastal Pond Waters, on Shoreline Features and Their Contiguous Areas 1.3.2 Alterations to Freshwater Flows to Tidal Waters and Water Bodies and Coastal Ponds 1.3.3 Inland activities and alterations that are subject to Council permitting 1.3.4 Activities located within critical coastal areas 1.3.5 Policies for the protection and enhancement of the scenic value of the coastal region 1.3.6 Protection and enhancement of public access to the shore 1.4 Federal Consistency 1.5 Public and Governmental Participation 1.6 Maps of Water Use Categories - Watch Hill to Little Compton and Block Island 1.7 Shoreline Change Maps - Watch Hill to Little Compton 1.8 Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) Maps 1.1 Authorities and Purpose, Definitions and Procedures 1.1.1 Authority and Purpose A.
  • Planning the Urban Waterfront Transformation, From

    Planning the Urban Waterfront Transformation, From

    water Article Planning the Urban Waterfront Transformation, from Infrastructures to Public Space Design in a Sea-Level Rise Scenario: The European Union Prize for Contemporary Architecture Case Francesca Dal Cin 1,* , Fransje Hooimeijer 2 and Maria Matos Silva 3 1 Formaurbis LAB, CIAUD—Research Centre of Architecture Urbanism and Design, Lisbon School of Architecture, Universidade de Lisboa, 1349-063 Lisboa, Portugal 2 Department Urbanism, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, TU Delft, 2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands; [email protected] 3 URBinLAB, CIAUD—Research Centre of Architecture Urbanism and Design, Lisbon School of Architecture, Universidade de Lisboa, 1349-063 Lisboa, Portugal; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Future sea-level rises on the urban waterfront of coastal and riverbanks cities will not be uniform. The impact of floods is exacerbated by population density in nearshore urban areas, and combined with land conversion and urbanization, the vulnerability of coastal towns and pub- lic spaces in particular is significantly increased. The empirical analysis of a selected number of waterfront projects, namely the winners of the Mies Van Der Rohe Prize, highlighted the different morphological characteristics of public spaces, in relation to the approximation to the water body: near the shoreline, in and on water. The critical reading of selected architectures related to water is open to multiple insights, allowing to shift the design attention from the building to the public Citation: Dal Cin, F.; Hooimeijer, F.; space on the waterfronts. The survey makes it possible to delineate contemporary features and lay Matos Silva, M. Planning the Urban the framework for urban development in coastal or riverside areas.