Housatonic River Basin Final Natural Resources Restoration Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Environmental Impact Evaluation for Connecticut July 2009 State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection United States Fish and Wildlife Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Photo Credits: Todd Richards, MA Division of Fish and Game (Housatonic River) Paul Fusco, CT DEP (frog and kingfisher) Neal Hagstrom, CT DEP (brook trout) Harold McMillan, Housatonic River Outfitters (flyfisher) Laurie Gaboardi, Litchfield County Times/Housatonic Publications (kayak on river) Trustee Representatives to the Trustee SubCouncil for Geographic Area of Connecticut Mr. Richard A. Jacobson Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (Lead Administrative Trustee) 79 Elm Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Mr. Thomas R. Chapman (Ms. Veronica Varela – alternate) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New England Field Office 70 Commercial Street, Suite 300 Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Dr. Kenneth Finkelstein National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration c/o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1 Mail Code HIO 1 Congress Street Boston, MA 02114-2023 Lead Federal Agency for Environmental Assessment: United States Fish & Wildlife Service Lead Agency for Environmental Impact Evaluation Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Contents 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE RESTORATION PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Summary of Site Injuries and Public Losses 2 1.3 Trustee Responsibilities under Federal and State Law Regarding Restoration Planning 3 1.4 Restoration Goals/Purpose of Restoration 3 1.5 Development of the Natural Resources Restoration Plan 4 1.6 Coordination and Scoping 5 1.6.1 Public Notification 5 1.6.2 Scoping 5 1.6.3 Summary of Public Involvement 5 1.6.4 Administrative Record 6 2. RESTORATION PROJECT EVALUATION 7 2.1. Overview 7 2.2. Project Eligibility and Evaluation Criteria 7 2.3. Request for Proposals 9 2.3.1. Eligibility Criteria Screening Results 9 2.3.2. Public Comments/ Response 10 2.4. Request for Supplemental Information 10 2.4.1. Evaluation Criteria Analysis 16 2.4.2. Public Comment/ Response 17 2.4.3. Detailed Analysis 17 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 20 3.1. Housatonic River Watershed 20 3.2. Socioeconomic Environment 22 3.3. Land Use Policy 22 3.4. Recreation 26 3.4.1. Open Space Lands 26 3.4.2. Boat Launches 27 3.5. Geology of the Housatonic River Watershed 29 3.6. Topography 29 3.7. Flora and Fauna 29 3.7.1. Natural Diversity Database Areas of Concern 31 3.7.2. Fishery Resources 32 3.8. Coastal Area Resources 32 3.9. Flood Zones 33 3.10. Dams 34 3.11. Surface Water Quality Classifications 36 3.12. Permitted and Registered Diversions of Water 40 i 3.13. Water Supply Watersheds 41 3.14. Aquifer Protection Areas 41 3.15. Sewage Treatment Plants/Sewer Service Areas 41 4. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 43 4.1. No Action Alternative 48 4.2. Proposed Preferred Alternative 49 4.2.1. Aquatic Natural Resources 49 4.2.1.1. P-05 Restoration of Coarse Woody Habitat in Housatonic River Mainstem Impoundments 49 4.2.1.2. P-06b Streambank Improvements, Riparian Improvements, and Trout Restoration in the Housatonic Basin: Jack’s Brook Stream Embankment and Riparian Restoration 51 4.2.1.3. P-08 Blackberry River Fish Passage Restoration 53 4.2.1.4. P-9 Increased Law Enforcement Patrols at Bull’s Bridge Trout and Bass Management Area, and Other Problem Areas 57 4.2.1.5. P-21 Ballentine Park Streambank Restoration/Stabilization Project 59 4.2.1.6. P-22 Transylvania Brook Culvert Crossing 61 4.2.1.7. P-24 Trout Unlimited Salmon Kill Restoration and Enhancement 63 4.2.1.8. P-56 Fishway Repair and Riparian Vegetation Restoration 66 4.2.2. Riparian and Floodplain Natural Resources 68 4.2.2.1. P-16 Schaghticoke Indian Reservation Waterfowl and Migratory Bird Study for Habitat Creation 68 4.2.2.2. P-30 Young’s Field Park Riverwalk and Greenway 70 4.2.2.3. P-33 Wetland Restoration on the Lower Housatonic River 73 4.2.2.4. P-38 Audubon Carse Brook Wetland Restoration 75 4.2.2.5. P-44 Indian Fields Wildlife Preserve 77 4.2.2.6. P-57 Conservation of the Frost and CL&P Riverfront Properties in Sharon, CT 79 4.2.2.7. P-65 Salmon Creek/Housatonic River Land Protection Project 82 4.2.3. Recreational Uses of Natural Resources 84 4.2.3.1. P-04 Ball Pond and Short Woods Brooks Water Quality Improvement and Pedestrian Access 84 4.2.3.2. P-07 Car Top Boat Launch at North Kent Rd 86 4.2.3.3. P-12 Wimisink Preserve Restoration and Access 90 4.2.3.4. P-13 Schaghticoke Indian Reservation Car Top Boat, Canoe, Kayak Access Ramp 92 4.2.3.5. P-18 Campville Fishing Access 94 4.2.3.6. P-31 Sega Meadows Park River Enhancement Project 96 4.2.3.7. P-37 Recreational and Conservation Easement for Housatonic Basin Streams 98 4.2.3.8. P-40 Housatonic Valley River Trail 100 4.2.3.9. P-54 “The Bend” (aka Garbage Hole) Riparian Vegetation, Shoreline and Recreational Access Improvements 103 4.2.3.10. P-70 Halfway River Fishery Access 105 4.2.3.11. P-76 Beacon Falls Riverfront Park System 108 4.2.3.12. P-91 O’Sullivan’s Island Peninsula Fishing and Habitat Enhancement and Restoration 111 4.3. Other Projects Considered but Not Funded 114 4.3.1. Riparian and Floodplain Natural Resources 114 4.3.1.1. P-67 Mitchell Farm Preservation Project: “Pootatuck Hill” 114 4.3.2. Recreational Uses of Natural Resources 116 4.3.2.1. P-28 Pickett District Park Pedestrian Link 116 ii 4.3.2.2. P-52 Creating a “Restoration/Rehabilitation” Greenway on the Still River Corridor to the Housatonic River 119 4.3.2.3. P-86 Hunter Haven Waterfront Reclamation Project 121 5. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES 124 5.1. Environmental 125 5.1.1. Consistency with Land Use Policies 125 5.1.2. Surface Water Resources 127 5.1.3. Groundwater Resources 128 5.1.4. Flood Hazards 129 5.1.5. Biological Resources 131 5.1.6. Landscape 137 5.1.7. Air Quality 138 5.1.8. Noise 139 5.1.9. Solid Waste and Hazardous Materials 140 5.2. Socio-Economic 141 5.2.1. Evaluation of Potential Socio-Economic Impacts 141 5.2.2. Environmental Justice 142 5.2.3. Community Facilities and Services 143 5.2.4. Aesthetic/Visual Resource Impacts 144 5.2.5. Public Utilities and Services 148 5.2.6. Cultural Resources 148 5.2.7. Traffic and Parking 150 5.3. Cumulative Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 151 6. FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL REVIEW, PERMITTING AND POLICY REQUIREMENTS 152 6.1. Local 152 6.2. State 152 6.3. Federal 153 6.3.1. Review and Permitting Requirements 153 6.3.2. Policies and Directives 156 7. DOCUMENT PREPARERS 158 8. AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PARTIES CONSULTED FOR INFORMATION 159 9. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND TRUSTEE RESPONSES 161 9.1. General and Multi-Project Comments 161 9.2. Project-Specific Comments 162 9.3. Other Revisions of the Draft Restoration Plan 165 10. REFERENCES 166 iii Tables Table 2-1: RFP Eligibility Criteria .................................................................................................................. 8 Table 2-2: Evaluation Criteria - Scoring System Summary .......................................................................... 9 Table 2-3: Eligibility Screening Summary of Projects Received in Response to RFP ................................ 11 Table 2-4: Proposals for Detailed Analysis Sorted by Restoration Category ............................................. 19 Table 3-1: Projects Located Within Conservation Areas ............................................................................ 24 Table 3-2: Projects Located within Preservation Areas .............................................................................. 24 Table 3-3: Projects Located Within Existing Preserved Open Space Areas .............................................. 25 Table 3-4: Projects Located Within Rural Lands......................................................................................... 25 Table 3-5: Ownership of Open Space Within the Housatonic River Watershed ........................................ 26 Table 3-6: State Parks Consisting of More Than 1,000 Acres of Land Within the Housatonic River Watershed ............................................................................................................................... 27 Table 3-7: State Owned Boat Launches ..................................................................................................... 27 Table 3-8: Projects Located Within a Natural Diversity Database Polygon ................................................ 31 Table 3-9: 2009 Fish Consumption Advisories ........................................................................................... 33 Table 3-10: Projects Located in FEMA Designated Zones ......................................................................... 34 Table 3-11: Housatonic River Dam Locations ............................................................................................ 35 Table 3-12: List of Surface Water Classes in Housatonic River Watershed .............................................. 36 Table 3-13: 2006 List of Impaired Waterbodies .......................................................................................... 37 Table 3-14: Highest Volume Water Diversions in the Housatonic River Mainstem .................................... 41 Table 3-15: Sewage Treatment Plants Within the Housatonic River Watershed ....................................... 42 Table 3-16: Permitted Industrial Wastewater Discharges Within the Housatonic River Watershed ......... 42 Table 4-1: Alternatives Analysis Summary