DOCSLIB.ORG

Shore Protection Fund Projects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shore Protection Fund Projects APPENDIX: SHORE PROTECTION FUND PROJECTS CLIMATE CHANGE NEW JERSEY STATE OF OF STATE RESILIENCE STRATEGY DRAFT APRIL 2021 Introduction The protection of New Jersey’s coastal zone has, to-date, been based in part on the 1981 Shore Protection Master Plan. The implementation of shore protection projects by the state is possible through the Shore Protection Fund which receives monies from annual state appropriations and realty transfer fees. This fund is administered by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to implement beach nourishment and shore protection projects throughout the state. The fund is used by DEP to leverage funding from federal agencies, mainly the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers (USACE), to satisfy the non-federal cost-share requirement of projects constructed by USACE in partnership with the state, as well as to provide funding to Local municipalities for the construction of shore protection projects completed in partnership between the state and Local jurisdiction. This appendix includes a list of all shore protection projects undertaken in New Jersey since the creation of the Shore Protection Fund in 1993, a list of project requests made to the DEP from Local jurisdictions but are not yet funded, and a capital plan for how the DEP will utilize the Shore Protection Fund over the next five years. Acronyms: CAP Project – Continuing Authorities Program DCE – Division of Coastal Engineering (NJDEP) FCCE – Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency F&W – Division of Fish and Wildlife (NJDEP) IBSP – Island Beach State Park LBI – Long Beach Island NJDEP – New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection SPF – Shore Protection Fund USACE – U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers Shore Protection Projects Undertaken in New Jersey Since the Creation of the Shore Protection Fund (1993-present) Main Federal Non-Federal Year Sponsor Project Name County Municipality Project Type Total Cost Cost Cost Status Complete Absecon Shore Atlantic Absecon Bulkhead $791,700 $395,850 $395,850 Complete 2007 State/ Protection Project Local State/ Absecon Inlet Jetty Atlantic Atlantic City Jetty $2,824,950 $2,542,455 $282,495 Complete 2020 Local Repair Project Caspian Ave - State/ Gardeners Basin Atlantic Atlantic City Bulkhead $3,753,075 $3,753,075 Complete 2020 Local Bulkhead and Bike Path Atlantic City North End Atlantic Atlantic City Groin $9,400,640 $9,400,640 Complete 2013 State/ Shore Protection Project Local Farley State Marina State/ Atlantic Atlantic City Bulkhead $1,167,676 $1,167,676 Complete 1998 Local Bulkhead State/ Atlantic City Bulkhead Atlantic Atlantic City Bulkhead $1,544,438 $1,544,437 Complete 1997 Local Beachfill- State/ Brigantine Beachfill Atlantic Brigantine $6,256,300 $566,663 $5,689,637 Complete 2002 Local Hydraulic State/ Bulkhead, Brigantine Bulkhead Atlantic Brigantine $2,585,454 $2,585,454 Complete 1996 Local Revetment Gabion West Atlantic City Baskets, Dune Stabilization Atlantic Egg Harbor $266,667 $266,667 Complete 2011 State/ Beachfill- Gabion Project Local Truckfill State/ Nacote Creek Bulkhead Atlantic Galloway Bulkhead $125,035 $125,035 Complete 1997 Local i DRAFT Shore Protection Projects Undertaken in New Jersey Since the Creation of the Shore Protection Fund (1993-present) Main Federal Non-Federal Year Sponsor Project Name County Municipality Project Type Total Cost Cost Cost Status Complete State/ Revetment Atlantic Longport Revetment $3,082,160 $3,082,160 Complete 2017 Local Reconstruction Project Longport Stone State/ Atlantic Longport Revetment $1,199,000 $1,199,000 Complete 2008 Local Revetment Longport Stone Atlantic Longport Revetment $405,000 $405,000 Complete 1993 State/ Revetment Local Pleasantville Tuins Avenue Bulkhead and Atlantic Pleasantville Bulkhead $2,266,000 $2,266,000 Complete 2002 State/ Yacht Basin Bulkhead Local Extension Projects Port Republic Emergency Bulkhead Atlantic Port Republic Bulkhead $145,150 $76,866 $68,284 Complete 2010 State/ Repair and Scour Local Protection Project State/ Nacote Creek Bulkhead Atlantic Port Republic Bulkhead $172,170 $172,170 Complete 2003 Local State/ Port Republic Bulkhead Atlantic Port Republic Bulkhead $206,466 Complete 1997 Local Green Bank Park Washington State/ Burlington Bulkhead $241,575 $241,575 Complete 1998 Local Bulkhead Twp State/ Brooklawn Stabilization Camden Brooklawn Revetment $367,746 $367,746 Complete 2011 Local Harrison Avenue Shoreline State/ Landfill Closure and Camden Camden City $33,888,017 $33,888,017 Construction 2021 Stabilization Local Shoreline Restoration Borough of Avalon Beachfill- State/ Beach Nourishment 8th Cape May Avalon $2,400,000 $2,400,000 Complete 2009 Hydraulic Local to 19th Street State/ Avalon 8th Ave Groin Cape May Avalon Jetty $3,445,250 $3,445,250 Complete 2003 Local Rehab Beachfill- State/ Avalon Beachfill Cape May Avalon $1,269,576 $1,269,576 Complete 1993 Local Hydraulic Avalon 9th to 26th Beachfill- State/ Street Beach Cape May Avalon $5,203,000 $5,203,000 Complete 2010 Hydraulic Local Renourishment Project Emergency Sand for Cape May Beachfill- State/ Cape May $8,691 $8,692 Complete 2016 Local Dune Construction Point Truckfill Cape May State Park Cape May Beachfill- State/ Sand Dunes & Cape May $704,517 $704,517 Complete 1998 Point Truckfill Local Revetment Cape May State Park Cape May Beachfill- Cape May $421,805 $421,805 Complete 1996 State/ Dunes Point Truckfill Local State/ Cape May Pt. Pilot Reef Cape May Cape May Breakwater $685,000 $305,000 $380,000 Complete 1994 Local Beaches Point Higbee Beach Wetland Cape May Lower TBD Design TBD State/ Restoration Project Restoration Local Spicers Creek Gabion Gabion State/ Cape May Lower Twp $879,220 $879,220 Construction 2021 Local Construction Baskets State/ Bidwells Creek Jetty Cape May Middle Twp Jetty $945,315 $945,315 Complete 2000 Local State/ North Wildwood North Cape May Revetment $1,216,475 $1,216,475 Complete 1998 Local Seawall Reconstruction Wildwood Emergency Sand for North Beachfill- State/ Dune Construction Cape May Wildwood $133,450 $133,450 Complete 2016 Truckfill Local North Wildwood City Emergency Beach and Beachfill- State/ Cape May Ocean City $73,202 $73,201 Complete 2013 Local Dune Sand Importation Truckfill DRAFT ii Shore Protection Projects Undertaken in New Jersey Since the Creation of the Shore Protection Fund (1993-present) Main Federal Non-Federal Year Sponsor Project Name County Municipality Project Type Total Cost Cost Cost Status Complete Beach Nourishment Beachfill- Great Egg Harbor to Cape May Ocean City $7,544,926 $7,544,926 Complete 2008 State/ Hydraulic Local Peck Beach Sea Isle City 73rd to Beachfill- 94th Street Beach Cape May Sea Isle City $6,760,300 $6,760,300 Complete 2010 State/ Hydraulic Local Renourishment Project Sea Isle City Terminal State/ Cape May Sea Isle City Groin $4,000,000 $4,000,000 Complete 2001 Local Groin Sea Isle City State/ Emergency Core Cape May Sea Isle City Geotube $163,398 $163,398 Complete 1998 Local Stabilization Beachfill- State/ Emergency dune project Cape May Sea Isle City $242,280 $58,178 $184,102 Complete 1995 Local Truckfill Beachfill- Sea Isle City Beachfill State/ Cape May Sea Isle City Hydraulic, $2,243,005 $2,243,005 Complete 1993 & Groins Local Groin State/ Stone Harbor Bulkhead Cape May Stone Harbor Bulkhead $839,977 $839,977 Complete 2006 Local Beach Nourishment Great Egg Inlet to Beachfill- Cape May Upper $155,000 $155,000 Complete 2008 State/ Townsends Inlet, Truckfill Local Strathmere Section Ocean Drive Revetment State/ Cape May Upper Twp Revetment $1,127,793 $1,127,793 Complete 2011 Local Shore Protection Project Beachfill- State/ Strathmere Beachfill Cape May Upper Twp $1,579,867 $1,579,867 Complete 2002 Local Hydraulic Strathmere & Sea Isle Upper Twp, Beachfill- Cape May $12,835,776 $8,151,271 $4,684,505 Complete 2012 State/ City Beachfill Sea Isle City Hydraulic Local West Wildwood 26th St West Cape May Bulkhead $1,016,513 $1,016,513 Complete 2010 State/ Bulkhead Wildwood Local State/ Wildwood Bulkhead Cape May Wildwood Bulkhead $802,780 $802,780 Complete 2008 Local Wildwood North Wildwood City, North Cape May Seawall $9,000,000 $9,000,000 Design TBD State/ Seawall Extension Wildwood Local City Cape May Point Dune Cape May Gabion State/ Cape May $600,000 $600,000 Complete 2002 Local Protection Point Baskets Upper Twp, 2009 Strathmere, Sea Sea Isle City, Isle City, Stone Harbor, Beachfill- Cape May Stone Harbor, $26,963,997 $2,662,496 $24,301,501 Complete 2010 and North Wildwood Hydraulic State/ North Beachfill Local Wildwood Wildwood Crest Sunset Wildwood State/ Cape May Revetment $1,866,667 $1,866,667 Complete 2007 Local Lake Revetment Crest New Jersey Marine State/ Police Station Bulkhead Cumberland Commercial Bulkhead $247,941 $247,941 Complete 2007 Local Replacement State/ Fortescue State Marina Cumberland Downe Bulkhead $1,465,158 $1,465,158 Complete 2010 Local Bulkhead Downe Township State/ Money Island Bulkhead Cumberland Downe Twp Bulkhead $582,293 $582,293 Complete 2016 Local Project State/ Fortescue Phase II Cumberland Downe Twp Bulkhead $90,800 $90,800 Complete 2007 Local Bulkhead Seabreeze Shore Demolition/Re Cumberland Fairfield Twp $483,000 $483,000 Complete 2021 State/ Remediation Project moval Local Seabreeze Upland Demolition/Re State/ Cumberland Fairfield Twp $299,600 $299,600 Complete 2012 Local Structure Demo moval iii DRAFT Shore Protection Projects Undertaken in New Jersey Since the Creation of the Shore Protection Fund (1993-present) Main Federal Non-Federal Year Sponsor Project Name
Load more

Recommended publications
  • URBAN COASTAL FLOOD MITIGATION STRATEGIES for the CITY of HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY by Eleni Athanasopoulou
    ©[2017] Eleni Athanasopoulou ALL RIGHTS RESERVED URBAN COASTAL FLOOD MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR THE CITY OF HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY By Eleni Athanasopoulou A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School- New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey In partial fulfillment of requirements For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Civil and Environmental Engineering Written under the direction of Dr. Qizhong Guo And approved by New Jersey, New Brunswick January 2017 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION URBAN COASTAL FLOOD MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR THE CITY OF HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY by ELENI ATHANASOPOULOU Dissertation Director: Dr. Qizhong Guo Coastal cities are undeniably vulnerable to climate change. Coastal storms combining with sea level rise have increased the risk of flooding and storm surge damage in coastal communities. The communities of the City of Hoboken and Jersey City are low-lying areas along the Hudson River waterfront and the Newark Bay/Hackensack River with little or no relief. Flooding in these areas is a result of intense precipitation and runoff, tides and/or storm surges, or a combination of all of them. During Super-storm Sandy these communities experienced severe flooding and flood-related damage as a result of the storm surge. ii Following the damage that was created on these communities by flooding from Sandy, this research was initiated in order to develop comprehensive strategies to make Hoboken and Jersey City more resilient to flooding. Commonly used flood measures like storage, surge barrier, conveyance, diversion, pumping, rainfall interception, etc. are examined, and the research is focused on their different combination to address different levels of flood risk at different scales.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTROL of .ALLUVIAL RIVERS by STEEL JETTIES By
    CONTROL OF .ALLUVIAL RIVERS BY STEEL JETTIES by E. 1. Carlson and R. A. Dodge, Jr. A paper to be presented at The First Water Resources Engineering Conference of The American Society of Civil Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, May 14-18, 1962 CONTROL OF ALLUVIAL RIVERS BY STEEL JETTIES by E. J. Carlsonl / and R. A. Dodge, Jr. 2 / SYNOPSIS Both field and laboratory studies were conducted to refine the methods used in the design of steel jetty fields for river aline- ment. A set of dimensionless friction head-loss curves, verified by model studies are developed and described. Using the developed curves and reconnaissance field data, a method is given for predict- ing the changes in a riverbed after the designed jetty field is installed. /Head, Sediment Investigations Unit, Hydraulics Branch, Division of Engineering Laboratories, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado. 2 /Hydraulic Engineer, Hydraulics Branch, Division of Engineering Laboratories, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado. INTRODUCTION Steel jacks and jetties have been used successfully by the Corps of Engineers, highway departments, railway companies, and others to prevent damage to riverbanks, levees, bridge abutments, and other structures. The Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers are using them to stabilize the channel of the Rio Grande within the floodway in the Middle Rio Grande Valley. (1)1 / The individual jack unit consists of three angle irons, 12 or 16 feet in length placed at 90° angles in three planes and joined at their cen- ters, Figure 1. Wire is laced through the angle irons in a standard pattern to tie them together.
    [Show full text]
  • Dealing with Erosion: the Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods
    2ND ANNUAL CAPE COASTAL CONFERENCE Linking Science with Local Solutions and Decision-Making Dealing With Erosion: The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods Greg Berman (Woods Hole Sea Grant & Cape Cod Cooperative Extension) Photo Credit: Ted Keon Climate Change Impacts In Coastal Environments 34 5 12 Coastal Adaptation On Cape Cod we manage at parcel scale http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/regional/index.php?idp=223 The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods Why protect properties……..? Town of Brewster example The Facts The Implications Value = $333,000,000 (don’t want takings) Only ~1% of properties To keep the same revenue, ~3% of town area the tax rate would go from 8.18 to 9.06 but they make ~10% of the real estate taxes or ~$300 per household The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods • Do nothing 1. Will system recover by itself? 2. How far is the structure from the water? 3. Grandfathering protects structures (not lawn) before August 10, 1978 Photo Credit: Ann McNichol The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods • Do nothing • Vegetation Plant Natives: Root systems stabilize. Take up water. Break the impact of raindrops or wave-splash. Slow down runoff Remove Invasive The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods • Do nothing • Vegetation • Re-grade The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods • Do nothing Horizontal • Vegetation • Re-grade • Managed retreat V E R T I C A L The Spectrum of Coastal Erosion Control Methods • Do nothing Photo Credit: Ted Keon • Vegetation • Re-grade • Managed retreat • Beach
    [Show full text]
  • The Assessment and Management of Floodgates on the Nsw South Coast
    THE ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FLOODGATES ON THE NSW SOUTH COAST REPORT TO THE NATURAL HERITAGE TRUST Published by NSW Department of Primary Industries. © State of New South Wales 2007. This publication is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in an unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal use or for non-commercial use within your organisation provided due credit is given to the author and publisher. To copy, adapt, publish, distribute or commercialise any of this publication you will need to seek permission from the Manager Publishing, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange, NSW. DISCLAIMER The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (March 2007). However, because of advances in knowledge, users are reminded of the need to ensure that information upon which they rely is up to date and to check the currency of the information with the appropriate officer of NSW Department of Primary Industries or the user‘s independent adviser. This report should be cited as: NSW Department of Primary Industries (2007). The Assessment and Management of Floodgates on the NSW South Coast. Report to the National Heritage Trust. NSW Department of Primary Industries, Sydney. ISBN 978 0 7347 1803 7 Cover photo: Hinged flap floodgate structure (MANN043F) located on Croakers Creek in the Lower North Coast subregion of the Hunter/Central Rivers CMA. i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Stream connectivity and habitat diversity are critical components of healthy rivers. Many fish have evolved to be reliant on a variety of different habitat types throughout their life cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Resilience
    RHODE ISLAND'S OCEAN AND COASTAL MAGAZINE • VOL 11 NO 3 FALL 2019 41°N BUILDING RESILIENCE A PUBLICATION OF RHODE ISLAND SEA GRANT & THE COASTAL INSTITUTE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND • A41˚ SEA NGRANT fall INSTITUTION 2019 FC FROM THE EDITOR 41°N EDITORIAL STAFF Monica Allard Cox, Editor Judith Swift Alan Desbonnet Meredith Haas Amber Neville ART DIRECTOR Ernesto Aparicio PROOFREADER Lesley Squillante RAISING HOPE COVER “you’ve got to find things that give you joy.” Portrait of Cyndi Murray by Stephanie Craig Those words from Cyndi Murray, in our cover story, express her resilience ABOUT 41°N in the face of her decades-long struggle with Lyme disease. 41°N is published twice per year by the Rhode Island Sea Grant College Program and the Months ago, as we gathered in an office in the uri Coastal Institute to plan Coastal Institute at the University of Rhode this issue, the editorial team of 41°N decided we wanted to tell stories like Island (URI). The name refers to the latitude at this—stories of resilience, focusing on hope, in the face of climate change. which Rhode Island lies. Our writers found planners in cities, towns, and the state who are ensur- Rhode Island Sea Grant is a part of the National ing that infrastructure and development are taking future sea level rise and Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and storms into account. Health officials are helping people affected by rising was established to promote the conservation temperatures. Medical students are learning about how climate change will and sustainable development of marine re- impact their patients.
    [Show full text]
  • Beach Nourishment Effects Østerstrand Fredericia - Denmark 2017
    Beach Nourishment Effects Østerstrand Fredericia - Denmark 2017 Juni 2020 Project Building with Nature (EU-InterReg) Start date 01.11.2016 End date 01.07.2020 Project manager (PM) Ane Høiberg Nielsen Project leader (PL) Per Sørensen Project staff (PS) Henrik Vinge Karlsson Time registering 402412 Approved date 26.06.2020 Signature Report Beach nourishment effects – Østerstrand, Frederica, Denmark Author Henrik Vinge Karlsson and Per Sørensen Keyword Beach nourishment, Nourishment design, Coastal protection, Building with nature, BWN, Fredericia, Østerstrand. Distribution www.kyst.dk, www.northsearegion.eu/building-with-nature Referred to as Kystdirektoratet (2020), Beach nourishment effects – Østerstrand, Frederica; Lemvig. 2 Beach Nourishment Effects Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Description of Study site .............................................................................................................................5 1.2 Division of study stretch..............................................................................................................................7 1.3 Description of Nourishment ......................................................................................................................7 1.4 Research design ..............................................................................................................................................8 1.4.1 Research questions..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Tender and Contracting Documents for the Flood Prevention Project of East Side of the Pasak River in Ayutthaya
    KINGDOM OF THAILAND ROYAL IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF AGLICULTURE AND COOPERATIVES TENDER AND CONTRACTING DOCUMENTS FOR THE FLOOD PREVENTION PROJECT OF EAST SIDE OF THE PASAK RIVER IN AYUTTHAYA VOLUME II TENDER DRAWINGS OCTOBER 2012 CTI ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD. TOKYO, JAPAN THE FLOOD PREVENTION PROJECT OF EAST SIDE OF THE PASAK RIVER IN AYUTTHAYA LIST OF DRAWINGS TITLE DWG NO. TITLE DWG NO. GENERAL PLAN BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL LEFT 1/4) KM-FG-049 GENERAL MAP GP-001 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL LEFT 2/4) KM-FG-050 GENERAL NOTE GP-002 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL LEFT 3/4) KM-FG-051 KRA MANG FLOODGATE BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL LEFT 4/4) KM-FG-052 OVERALL LAYOUT (1/2) KM-FG-001 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL RIGHT 1/4) KM-FG-053 OVERALL LAYOUT (2/2) KM-FG-002 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL RIGHT 2/4) KM-FG-054 PLAN KM-FG-003 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL RIGHT 3/4) KM-FG-055 FRONT VIEW AT PASAK RIVER SIDE (1/3) KM-FG-004 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - U-SHAPED FLOODWALL RIGHT 4/4) KM-FG-056 FRONT VIEW AT PASAK RIVER SIDE (2/3) KM-FG-005 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - DRAINAGE GATE 1/3) KM-FG-057 FRONT VIEW AT PASAK RIVER SIDE (3/3) KM-FG-006 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - DRAINAGE GATE 2/3) KM-FG-058 FRONT VIEW AT KRA MANG CANAL SIDE (1/2) KM-FG-007 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - DRAINAGE GATE 3/3) KM-FG-059 FRONT VIEW AT KRA MANG CANAL SIDE (2/2) KM-FG-008 BAR ARRANGEMENT (PART - WING WALL LEFT) KM-FG-060 LONGITUDINAL SECTION (1/2) KM-FG-009 BAR ARRANGEMENT
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Protection & Restoration Authority
    Coastal Protection & Restoration Authority Quarterly Progress Report July 2014 Committed to our Coast Focus On... Bayou Dupont Marsh and Ridge Creation The Bayou Dupont Marsh and Ridge Creation project (BA-48) will use sand from the Mississippi River to create marsh, re-establish the Barataria Landbridge, and create approximately 2.1 miles of ridge along Bayou Dupont. The project area, south of Bayou Dupont and southeast of The Pen, has been particularly vulnerable to rapid land loss due to altered hydrology, wind erosion, and subsidence. In total, this project will create 277 acres of marsh, nourish another 93 acres, and create 20 acres of ridge at a total estimated cost of $37.6 million. The anticipated completion date for this project is December 2015. 2 QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT - JULY 2014 3 PROJECTS IN ENGINEERING & DESIGN Project 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q Federal Acres / Miles Project Name Tier Parish ID 2014 2014 2015 2015 Sponsor Benefited CDBG BA-82 Lafitte Area Levee Repair 1 D C C C HUD Jefferson 4 Miles BA-83 Rosethorne Wetland Assimilation Project 1 D C C C HUD Jefferson 334 Acres TE-78 Cut-Off/Pointe Aux Chene Levee 1 D C C C HUD Lafourche 8 Miles TV-60 Front Ridge Chenier Terracing / Protection 1 D C C C HUD Vermilion 40 Acres TV-67 Bayou Tigre Flood Control Project 1 D D C C HUD Vermilion N/A CIAP Mississippi River Water Reintroduction into Assumption, BA-161 1 D D D D USFWS Not Avail. Bayou Lafourche - BLFWD Lafourche MR-16- Mississippi River Delta Strategic Planning - 1 D C C C USFWS East Baton Rouge N/A SSPM SSPM Expansion Orleans,
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Protection and Drainage Bylaws 2020
    Flood Protection and Drainage Bylaws 2020 Bay of Plenty Regional Council Flood Protection and Drainage Bylaws 2020 Made by the Governing Body of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council by resolution of Council on 17 December 2020 The Common Seal of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council was hereunto affixed to this Certified True Copy of the Bylaw Witnessed by: ………………………………………………………………………………………………. Bay of Plenty Regional Council elected member of Council Chairman Douglas Leeder ………………………………………………………………………………………………. Bay of Plenty Regional Council elected member of Council Councillor Andrew von Dadelszen These Bylaws came into force on 1 February 2021 1. Introduction This Bylaw document has been developed to protect and control drains and assets, including pumping stations, defences against water, river edge protection works and floodways managed by, or under the control of, the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. The region’s drains and assets have been constructed to increase productivity of land, and prevent damage, danger, and distress to the community from river flooding, and problems associated with a lack of drainage. It is crucial that these assets are functioning properly when needed. These Bylaws apply to all flood protection and drainage assets managed by, or under the control of, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, whether they are in a rural or urban environment. These Bylaws do not apply to any privately owned/managed drainage or flood protection systems, or those that are managed by other local authorities. This Bylaw document consists of three parts. Part I applies to all river and drainage schemes in the region (that are managed by, or under the control of, Bay of Plenty Regional Council).
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Clifton: • Erosion at Camp up to 1.0M/Yr • HDC Rock Revetment Wall
    7. Marine Parade: • Gravel Extraction for Westshore nourishment – 12-15000 m3 pa up to 2014 • Gravel barrier critical to security of Napier 6. Awatoto: • Gravel Extraction – 30,000 m3 pa • Consent expires 2017 – considered unsustainable by Komar report 5. East Clive: • Inundation protection • HDC sewage treatment plant • Hastings Sewer Outfall (c.1979) • Existing East Clive Groynes (c. 1988-1991) 4. Haumoana: • Inundation protection • Lagoons • Existing Groyne at mouth of the Tukituki (c.1999) 3. Haumoana: • Erosion + inundation of houses on Clifton Road • Residential Development proposals (East Road) • Groyne proposal led by Walking on Water (WOW) group. 2. Te Awanga: • Not eroding as quickly 1. Clifton: as Haumoana ~ 0.30m / • Erosion at camp up yr to 1.0m/yr • Development • HDC rock pressures/proposals revetment wall (2013) • Consent expires August 2018, wall must be removed. • Lease will not be renewed once access is lost. 9. Whirinaki: • Land development pressures. • Tsunami evacuation planning 8. Westshore: • Whakarire Ave. • Renourishment 1. Clifton Rock revetment wall - 2013 Motor camp, Clifton Marine Club & boat ramp 2. Te Awanga 3. Haumoana ‘H21’ row of affected houses on seaward side of Clifton Road 4. Haumoana Lagoons Haumoana Pumping Tukituki Station Groyne Stopbanks Culvert/Floodgate 5. East Clive EastEast CliveClive groynesgroynes Inundation protection Sewer outfall and groynes HDC East Clive sewage treatment plant 6. Awatoto Napier Winstone Aggregates Wastewater 3 Treatment Plant extraction – 30,000 m per (not shown on annum map) Consent expires in May 2017 – extraction considered unsustainable Beach crest lower than Napier CBD crest = higher risk of overtopping 7. Marine Parade Source of material for Westshore renourishment 12-15,000 m3 per annum Consent expires in 2017 – extraction unsustainable Extraction ceased 2014 Gravel barrier critical to security of Napier 8.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Overview of Damage
    The Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami 2. Overview of Damage (1) Inundation and Land Subsidence Tsunamis caused by the 2011 Earthquake Off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku devastated Pacific coastal areas in eastern Japan. According to a report by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan, the total inundated area for 64 municipalities in six prefectures (Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, Fukushima, Ibaraki, and Chiba Prefecture) was 561 km2. When classified by prefecture, Miyagi had a largest inundated area of 327 km2, followed by Fukushima with 112 km2. Iwate Prefecture stands at 58 km2. With the Sendai Plain accounting for a significant part of land, Miyagi Prefecture had the largest inundated area by far. The coastal area of Iwate Prefecture was higher in inundation height but lower in inundated area as it is a Rias coast with little lowlands. In Miyako City, an area of 10 km2 out of the total area of 1,260 km2 was submerged (Fig. 10). Ground subsidence and liquefaction also occurred in various places with liquefaction causing serious damage in eight prefectures (Iwate, Miyagi, Fukushima, Ibaraki, Gunma, Saitama, Chiba, and Kanagawa Prefecute) and Tokyo Metropolis. Analysis results of electronic reference points by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan revealed significant ground subsidence in the Pacific coast of the Tohoku region (Fig. 11). Among Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima prefectures, the largest subsidence of -84 cm was observed in Otomo-cho, Rikuzentakata City. In Miyako City, the largest subsidence of -50 cm was observed in Fujiwara Pier, Sokei, followed by -44 cm in Motomachi, -42 cm in Chiwari 11, Tsugaruishi (Komagata-dori), and -33 cm in Chiwari 9, Tsugaruishi (Shin- machi).
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of the Mississippi River & Tributaries (Mr&T)
    1 OVERVIEW OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER & TRIBUTARIES (MR&T) - ATCHAFALAYA BASIN PROJECT 237 217 200 80 252 237 217 200 119 174 237 217 200 27 .59 255 0 163 131 239 110 112 62 102 130 Port255 Of0 Morgan163 City132 –65 Stakeholder135 92 Meeting102 56 120 255 0 163 122 53 120 56 130 48 111 Durund Elzey Assistance Deputy District Engineer (ADPM) US Army Corps of Engineers New Orleans District 11 February 2019 2 TOPICS OF DISCUSSION • Passing the MR&T Project Design Flood • The Jadwin Plan • The Morganza Floodway • The Old River Control Complex • MR&T Atchafalaya Basin Flood Control Project • Atchafalaya Basin Levee Construction • Atchafalaya Basin O&M • Atchafalaya River Dredging • The Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System (ABFS) Project • Sedimentation Issues • Path Forward 3 THE FLOOD OF 1927 Flood Control Act of 1928 4 and the Jadwin Plan The Morganza Floodway 5 6 Old River Control Structures Authorized 1973 Flood . The Low Sill Control Structure was undermined and the Wing Wall failed . The Old River Overbank Control Structure and the Morganza Control Structure were opened to relieve stress on the Low Sill Control Structure . Due to severe damage to the Low Sill Control Structure, USACE recommended construction of the Auxiliary Control Structure, which was completed in 1986 Morganza Control Structure Operated for First Time View of Old River Control Complex Old River Lock Auxiliary Control Structure Low Sill Control Structure Overbank Control Structure S.A. Murray Hydro 9 The Flood of 2011 10 Extent of 1927 Flood (in Blue) Versus 2011 Flood (in Green) Passing the Project Design Flood 11 The MR&T Atchafalaya Basin Project The MR&T Atchafalaya Basin Project Major Components • 451 Miles of Levees and Floodwalls • 4 Navigation Locks .
    [Show full text]