DOCSLIB.ORG

Design of Priority Hudson River Estuary Biologically Important Barriers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Design of Priority Hudson River Estuary Biologically Important Barriers Owner Outreach and (Mitigation) Design of Priority Hudson River Estuary Biologically Important Barriers Photo credits: NYSDEC Hudson River Estuary Program December 21, 2016 This document was prepared for the Hudson River Estuary Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in cooperation with the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission. The viewpoints expressed here do not necessary represent those of NEIWPCC or NYS DEC, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or causes constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. ©2016 The Chazen Companies Owner Outreach and (Mitigation) Design of Priority Hudson River Estuary Biologically Important Barriers December 21, 2016 Prepared by: Chazen Engineering, Land Surveying & Landscape Architecture Co., D.P.C. 21 Fox Street Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 (845) 454-3980 Capital District Office North Country Office Central New York Office Nashville, TN Office (518) 273-0055 (518) 812-0513 (315) 251-1013 (615) 783-1628 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. COPY OR REPRODUCTION OF THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT, OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF CHAZEN ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CO., D.P.C. IS PROHIBITED. THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED TO BE SUITABLE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PROJECT, APPLICATION AND SITUATION FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED. ANY MODIFICATION OF THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT, OR ANY USE FOR ANY PROJECT, APPLICATION OR SITUATION OTHER THAN THAT FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED, WILL BE AT USER’S SOLE RISK AND WITHOUT LIABILITY TO CHAZEN ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CO., D.P.C. IT IS A VIOLATION OF NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW FOR ANY PERSON TO ALTER THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT IN ANY WAY, UNLESS HE OR SHE IS ACTING UNDER THE DIRECTION OF A LICENSED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL (PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, LAND SURVEYOR, ARCHITECT OR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT). IF THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT IS ALTERED, THE ALTERING DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SHALL AFFIX TO THE DRAWING OR DOCUMENT HIS OR HER SEAL, THE NOTATION “ALTERED BY” FOLLOWED BY HIS OR HER SIGNATURE, THE DATE OF SUCH ALTERATION, AND A SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERATION. Owner Outreach and (Mitigation) Design of Priority Hudson River Estuary Biologically Important Barriers Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. ii 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Outline/Organization/Content of Report ..................................................................................... 1 1.3 QAPP ............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. OUTREACH AND BARRIER IDENTIFICATION .......................................................................................... 2 2.1 Background Information Available to Chazen .............................................................................. 2 2.2 Public Outreach, Educational Mailings, Website Portal ............................................................... 2 2.3 Workshop Outreach Meetings ...................................................................................................... 3 3. DATA MANAGEMENT AND PRELIMINARY MITIGATION DESIGN SITE SELECTIONS .............................. 4 3.1 Data Management ........................................................................................................................ 4 3.2 Design Site Selection ..................................................................................................................... 4 4. PRELIMINARY DESIGNS ......................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Information Collected and Developed for Each Site ..................................................................... 6 4.2 Design Refinement ........................................................................................................................ 7 4.3 Project Close-Out .......................................................................................................................... 7 APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Handouts/Mailers/Presentation Appendix 2 – Brown’s Pond Dam, Town of Hamptonburgh, Orange County Appendix 3 – Bingham Mills Dam, Town of Livingston, Columbia County Appendix 4 – Mill Road Dam, Town of Red Hook, Dutchess County Appendix 5 – Annandale Dam, Annandale-on-Hudson, Dutchess County Appendix 6 – CR-15 Culvert, Rensselaer County Appendix 7 – CR-21 Culvert, Rensselaer County Appendix 8 – Riders Mill Road Culvert, Town of Chatham, Columbia County Appendix 9 – Lake Road Culvert, Town of Pine Plains, Dutchess County The Chazen Companies Project Number: 41544.00 December 21, 2016 Owner Outreach and (Mitigation) Design of Priority Hudson River Estuary Biologically Important Barriers Page ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission (NEIWPCC) and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (NYS DEC) Hudson River Estuary Program (HREP) retained The Chazen Companies (Chazen) and Dr. Stuart Findlay at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies to implement an outreach and education effort about impacts of artificial stream barriers (culverts and dams) on stream ecology and resiliency, as well as to provide preliminary designs on the replacement and removal of those barriers. Over six months, the team contacted approximately 250 owners of pre‐ identified priority dams and perched culverts or bridges, used print and radio media to educate and reach additional barrier owners, and conducted three public informational meetings. The outreach work identified a number of dam and culvert owners interested in preliminary barrier removal design assistance. Interest varied as owners considered potential loss of in‐stream ponds or considered alternative uses for their dams. The owners of seven dams and eight culverts submitted Letters of Interest from which eight biologically‐prioritized dams and culverts were selected by NYSDEC for pre‐mitigation assistance, based on criteria such as biological importance and landowner interests. The selected dams were Browns Pond dam on the Moodna Creek, Bingham Mills dam on the Roeliff Jansen Kill, and the Annandale and Mill Road dams on the Sawkill Creek. The selected culverts were on the Valatie Kill and on Tackawasick Creek in Rensselaer County, one on the Fishkill Creek in Dutchess County, and one on Green Brook in Columbia County. The Chazen team, HREP, and NEIWPCC worked over an additional six months to develop representative barrier mitigation plans for these four dams and four culverts as demonstration projects. Costs to remove these four dams and redesign the culverts/bridges include permitting expenses ranging between approximately $25,000 and $75,000 with an assumption of streamlined permitting and determinations that SHPO and full FEMA evaluations are not needed. Site surveys and biddable design drawings would average an additional $15,000 to $30,000 per site if required. Estimated budgets to remove the four dams range between $150,000 and $235,000 presuming accumulated sediments do not need additional characterization and can mostly be stabilized in place. Similarly, best‐case budgets to correct perched culverts range between $115,000 and $315,000 depending on the road service and stream size at individual locations. Worst‐case budgets were also examined recognizing the potential for more complicated permitting reviews, large budget requirements for management of sediment behind and upstream of dams, or extensive SEQRA, SHPO, or expanded FEMA evaluations. Sediment accumulation behind the dams was identified as the most‐significant potential additional cost along with FEMA and SHPO exposure. Up to approximately 125 stream miles would be interconnected as a result of design improvements at these eight locations. American eel would be a primary beneficiary, as well as benefits to fish and amphibian environments. This project was advanced to contribute to greater public understanding of the impacts of stream barriers on ecosystem health including New York State Species of Greatest Conservation Need and resiliency, and to advance pilot design work on a limited number of priority barrier dams and culverts. A majority of barrier owners have signed Letters of Commitment to continue to advance the concept of mitigating or removing their barriers, if funding and support were to become available. The next pages provide a table with additional information about the eight studied barriers and a location map. The Chazen Companies Project Number: 41544.00 December 21, 2016 Table 1 - Executive Summary Summary of Barrier Indicies December 21, 2016 Distance Upstream Opened with Barrier Removal Mainstem Distance Downstream Opinion of Probable Cost Barrier Name/ USACE Regulated NYSDEC Stream NYSDEC Wetlands Endangered Species Watershed Opened for Migration with Barrier Aquatic Historical Resources Next Downstream Artificial Mainstem Barrier Classification (Y/N) In Vicinity (tributary) Removal (Miles) Next Mainstem Upstream To Hudson River Resources (Y/N) (Miles) (ID #)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • REPORTS of the TIBOR T. POLGAR FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM, 2013 David J. Yozzo, Sarah H. Fernald and Helena Andreyko Editors a Joint
    REPORTS OF THE TIBOR T. POLGAR FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM, 2013 David J. Yozzo, Sarah H. Fernald and Helena Andreyko Editors A Joint Program of The Hudson River Foundation and The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation December 2015 ABSTRACT Eight studies were conducted within the Hudson River Estuary under the auspices of the Tibor T. Polgar Fellowship Program during 2013. Major objectives of these studies included: (1) reconstruction of past climate events through analysis of sedimentary microfossils, (2) determining past and future ability of New York City salt marshes to accommodate sea level rise through vertical accretion, (3) analysis of the effects of nutrient pollution on greenhouse gas production in Hudson River marshes, (4) detection and identification of pathogens in aerosols and surface waters of Newtown Creek, (5) detection of amphetamine type stimulants at wastewater outflow sites in the Hudson River, (6) investigating establishment limitations of new populations of Oriental bittersweet in Schodack Island State Park, (7) assessing macroinvertebrate tolerance to hypoxia in the presence of water chestnut and submerged aquatic species, and (8) examining the distribution and feeding ecology of larval sea lamprey in the Hudson River basin. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................................................................... iii Preface ................................................................................................................. vii Fellowship Reports Pelagic Tropical to Subtropical Foraminifera in the Hudson River: What is their Source? Kyle M. Monahan and Dallas Abbott .................................................................. I-1 Sea Level Rise and Sediment: Recent Salt Marsh Accretion in the Hudson River Estuary Troy D. Hill and Shimon C. Anisfeld .................................................................. II-1 Nutrient Pollution in Hudson River Marshes: Effects on Greenhouse Gas Production Angel Montero, Brian Brigham, and Gregory D.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications
    Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Waterbody Type Segment ID Waterbody Index Number (WIN) Streams 0202-0047 Pa-63-30 Streams 0202-0048 Pa-63-33 Streams 0801-0419 Ont 19- 94- 1-P922- Streams 0201-0034 Pa-53-21 Streams 0801-0422 Ont 19- 98 Streams 0801-0423 Ont 19- 99 Streams 0801-0424 Ont 19-103 Streams 0801-0429 Ont 19-104- 3 Streams 0801-0442 Ont 19-105 thru 112 Streams 0801-0445 Ont 19-114 Streams 0801-0447 Ont 19-119 Streams 0801-0452 Ont 19-P1007- Streams 1001-0017 C- 86 Streams 1001-0018 C- 5 thru 13 Streams 1001-0019 C- 14 Streams 1001-0022 C- 57 thru 95 (selected) Streams 1001-0023 C- 73 Streams 1001-0024 C- 80 Streams 1001-0025 C- 86-3 Streams 1001-0026 C- 86-5 Page 1 of 464 09/28/2021 Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Name Description Clear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Mud Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to Long Lake total length of all tribs to lake Little Valley Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Elkdale Kents Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Crystal Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Forestport Alder Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Bear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Minor Tribs to Kayuta Lake total length of select tribs to the lake Little Black Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Wheelertown Twin Lakes Stream and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to North Lake total length of all tribs to lake Mill Brook and minor tribs entire stream and selected tribs Riley Brook
    [Show full text]
  • Hillsdale, a History by Herbert S
    Hillsdale, A History by Herbert S. Parmet Hillsdale Town Historian At the time of the American Revolution, the Taconic hill country was still basically an “unbroken wilderness,” in the words of a standard history of New York State. Most of what is now the Town of Hillsdale belonged to the Van Rensselaer family, major beneficiaries of the Dutch patroon system, and much of the modern town was within the manor of Rensselaerwyck. Colonial maps show that “Renslaerwick” also included Nobletown and Spencertown. The present location of Route 23 follows the line separating Rensselaer lands from Livingston Manor. Baronial farmlands were leased to proprietors and rented to tenant farmers. Much of upstate New York, including the vast Upper Manor of the Livingstons on the west side of the Hudson, resembled the old European feudal system. With the Revolutionary War, that system was ready for change. The Hudson Valley was one of the chief cradles of American independence, especially with the major battles fought around Saratoga and Ticonderoga. Much closer to the present Hillsdale, it furnished a route for one of the more heroic achievements of the battle for independence. Colonel Henry Knox, then only 25 and a former bookseller from Boston, joined with his brother in volunteering to retrieve munitions and cannon that had been captured by Ethan Allen and, improbable as it now seems, transported them over the snowy countryside to provide vital assistance for General Washington’s troops near Boston. The junction of county road 21 and Route 22, the site of the original Nobletown (the former name of Hillsdale), is a good place from which to appreciate Col.
    [Show full text]
  • Designated Protected and Significant Areas of Dutchess County, NY
    Chapter 7: Designated Significant and Protected Areas of Dutchess County (DRAFT) Chapter 7: Designated Protected and Significant Areas of Dutchess County, NY ______________________________________________________________________________ Emily Vail, Neil Curri, Noela Hooper, and Allison Chatrchyan1 February 2012 (DRAFT ) Significant natural areas are valued for their environmental importance Chapter Contents and beauty, and include unusual geologic features such as scenic Protected Land Critical Environmental mountain ridges, steep ravines, and caves; hydrological features such Areas as rivers, lakes, springs, and wetlands; and areas that support Other Significant Areas threatened or endangered species or unusually diverse plant and Implications for Decision- Making animal communities. Both significant natural areas and scenic Resources resources enhance the environmental health and quality of life in Dutchess County. An area can be significant for several different reasons, including its habitat, scenic, cultural, economic, or historical values. Many areas are significant because they are unique in some way. 1 This chapter was written by Emily Vail (Cornell Cooperative Extension Environment & Energy Program), Neil Curri (Cornell Cooperative Extension Dutchess County Environment & Energy Program), Noela Hooper (Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development), and Allison Chatrchyan (Cornell Cooperative Extension Dutchess County Environment & Energy Program). The chapter is presented here in DRAFT form. Final version expected March 2012. The Natural Resource Inventory of Dutchess County, NY 1 Chapter 7: Designated Significant and Protected Areas of Dutchess County (DRAFT) Significant natural areas provide many ecosystem services, including wildlife habitat, water supply protection, recreational space, and opportunities for outdoor research. (For more information on ecosystem services, see Chapter 1: Introduction.) In order to sustain their value, it is import to protect these areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Roeliff Jansen Kill 2016
    COMMUNITY WATER QUALITY MONITORING RESULTS ROELIFF JANSEN KILL 2016 OVERVIEW WATERSHED SNAPSHOT Riverkeeper and our partners have been testing These results are for non‐tidal sites only. the Hudson River and its tributaries for the As measured against the Environmental Protection fecal-indicator bacteria Enterococcus (“Entero”) Agency’s recommended Beach Action Value for safe since 2006. Sources of fecal contamination may swimming: include sewage infrastructure failures, sewer overflows, inadequate sewage treatment, septic system failures, agricultural runoff, urban 12% runoff, and wildlife. of Roeliff Jansen Kill samples failed. As measured against the EPA’s recommended In 2016, we began working with the Roe Jan geometric mean (GM, a weighted long‐term average) Watershed Community criterion for safe swimming: (www.roejanwatershed.org) and the Bard Water Lab to conduct testing in the Roeliff Jansen Kill. EPA GM threshold Roe Jan GM Samples were collected monthly (May to October) at 14 watershed locations by Roe Jan 30 24.8 Watershed Community members and local cells/100 mL cells/100 mL residents, and processed by the Bard Water Lab. A total of 84 samples were analyzed in 2016. This water quality monitoring study is designed 3 Best Sites 3 Worst Sites to learn about broad patterns and trends. The Livingston‐ Ancram‐ Hall Hill data can help inform choices about recreation in Above/Below Road Bridge (#6) the creek, but cannot predict future water Bingham Mills (#8, 9) Copake‐ Noster Kill quality at any particular time and place. Germantown‐ trib at Route 7A (#4) Sportsmen’s Club Ancram‐ Wiltsie All results will be available at (#10) Road Bridge fishing www.riverkeeper.org/water-quality/citizen- Hillsdale‐ Collins St access (#5) data/roeliff-jansen-kill soon.
    [Show full text]
  • Before Albany
    Before Albany THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Regents of the University ROBERT M. BENNETT, Chancellor, B.A., M.S. ...................................................... Tonawanda MERRYL H. TISCH, Vice Chancellor, B.A., M.A. Ed.D. ........................................ New York SAUL B. COHEN, B.A., M.A., Ph.D. ................................................................... New Rochelle JAMES C. DAWSON, A.A., B.A., M.S., Ph.D. ....................................................... Peru ANTHONY S. BOTTAR, B.A., J.D. ......................................................................... Syracuse GERALDINE D. CHAPEY, B.A., M.A., Ed.D. ......................................................... Belle Harbor ARNOLD B. GARDNER, B.A., LL.B. ...................................................................... Buffalo HARRY PHILLIPS, 3rd, B.A., M.S.F.S. ................................................................... Hartsdale JOSEPH E. BOWMAN,JR., B.A., M.L.S., M.A., M.Ed., Ed.D. ................................ Albany JAMES R. TALLON,JR., B.A., M.A. ...................................................................... Binghamton MILTON L. COFIELD, B.S., M.B.A., Ph.D. ........................................................... Rochester ROGER B. TILLES, B.A., J.D. ............................................................................... Great Neck KAREN BROOKS HOPKINS, B.A., M.F.A. ............................................................... Brooklyn NATALIE M. GOMEZ-VELEZ, B.A., J.D. ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • This Article Was Originally Published in a Journal Published by Elsevier
    This article was originally published in a journal published by Elsevier, and the attached copy is provided by Elsevier for the author’s benefit and for the benefit of the author’s institution, for non-commercial research and educational use including without limitation use in instruction at your institution, sending it to specific colleagues that you know, and providing a copy to your institution’s administrator. All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without limitation commercial reprints, selling or licensing copies or access, or posting on open internet sites, your personal or institution’s website or repository, are prohibited. For exceptions, permission may be sought for such use through Elsevier’s permissions site at: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissionusematerial Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 71 (2007) 259e277 www.elsevier.com/locate/ecss Regional patterns and local variations of sediment distribution in the Hudson River Estuary F.O. Nitsche a,*, W.B.F. Ryan a, S.M. Carbotte a, R.E. Bell a, A. Slagle a, C. Bertinado a, R. Flood c, T. Kenna a, C. McHugh a,b a Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia Univeristy, Palisades, NY 10964, USA b Queens College, City University New York, Flushing, NY, USA c Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, USA Received 3 November 2005; accepted 27 July 2006 Available online 2 October 2006 Abstract The Hudson River Benthic Mapping Project, funded by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, resulted in a com- prehensive data set consisting of high-resolution multibeam bathymetry, sidescan sonar, and sub-bottom data, as well as over 400 sediment cores and 600 grab samples.
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of the Hudson River Basin in New York and Adjacent States −
    Water-quality Assessment Of The Hudson River Basin In New York And Adjacent States − Analysis of available nutrient, pesticide, volatile organic compound, and suspended-sediment data, 1970-90 By Patrick J. Phillips and Dorothea W. Hanchar _____________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4065 Troy, New York 1996 i U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon Eaton, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey District Chief Branch of Information Services U.S. Geological Survey, WRD Federal Center 425 Jordan Road Box 25425 Troy, N.Y. 12180 Denver, CO 80225-8286 ii FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the earth resources of the Nation and to provide information that will assist resource managers and policymakers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and trends is an important part of this overall mission. One of the greatest challenges faced by water-resources scientists is acquiring reliable information that will guide the use and protection of the Nation's water resources. That challenge is being addressed by Federal, State, interstate, and local water-resource agencies and by many academic institutions. These organizations are collecting water-quality data for a host of purposes that include: compliance with permits and water-supply standards; development of remediation plans for a specific contamination problem; operational decisions on industrial, wastewater, or water-supply facilities; and research on factors that affect water quality.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Hudson River Estuary Grantees
    TOTAL FOR 2017: $1,253,624 HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY PROGRAM GRANT AWARDS 2017 (ROUND 20) TOTAL: $595,233 AWARDS ANNOUNCED AUGUST 18, 2017 TRIBUTARY RESTORATION AND RESILIENCY ORGANIZATION COUNTY AWARD DESCRIPTION Riverkeeper will help restore natural stream habitat for fish such as American eel and river herring whose upstream migration is impacted by dams and artificial barriers that are no longer needed or are poorly maintained. Riverkeeper will partner with DEC to reach out to the owners of dams and other Riverkeeper, Inc. Multiple $245,233 stream barriers and educate the public on the benefits of converting waterbodies back to natural states. This grant supports community and stakeholder outreach meetings, final project permitting, and removal of the deteriorated Brown's Pond dam on the Otter Kill Creek in the town of Hamptonburgh. The grant also includes restoration of the former stream shoreline, a site information kiosk, and educational tours. Removing the dam will eliminate the hazard to road and residential property and will Orange County Soil & Water reconnect at least 14.5 miles of stream habitat for American eel and many other fish and wildlife Conservation District Orange $350,000 species. 1 HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY PROGRAM GRANT AWARDS 2017 (ROUND 21) TOTAL: $95,820 AWARDS ANNOUNCED OCTOBER 12, 2017 RIVER ACCESS FOR PEOPLE OF ALL ABILITIES ORGANIZATION COUNTY AWARD DESCRIPTION The City of Kingston will create accessible pathways to existing parking and improve amenities at Kingston Point Beach in Kingston Point Park. Plans for improvements include parking lot line painting, new signage and posts for accessible parking spaces, a removable beach access route to the water’s edge, beach wheelchairs, upgrades for accessible toilet rooms, and retrofits to an existing changing room stall to make it fully accessible.
    [Show full text]
  • Resilient NY Program
    1 Resilient NY Program October 29, 2019 Thomas R. Snow Jr. New York City Watershed and Flood Resiliency Programs 2 Resilient NY Program Flood/Ice Jam studies - • Includes 48 high-priority watersheds across NYS § Comprehensive hydrologic and hydraulic analysis (HEC-RAS) and ice jams (where applicable); § Fluvial geomorphic assessment; § Current and future flood flows due to climate change will be evaluated; and § Reports will include specific project recommendations to mitigate flooding and ice jams. 3 4 Hudson River Watershed - Wappinger Creek – Dutchess County Roeliff Jansen Kill – Dutchess/Columbia Main Street Brook – Ulster County Catskill Creek – Greene County Stockport Creek – Columbia/Rensselaer 5 How where these watersheds chosen? • # of Repetitive Losses/community (FEMA information). • # Repetitive Losses/stream (FEMA/DEC information); • Total $ flood insurance payment (FEMA information); • DEC technical staff; • Consultation with Departments of Homeland Security and EmerGency Services and State; and • County Soil and Water Conservation District staff. 6 Flooding - • An unfortunate reality in and near riverine areas across NYS • Most recent catastrophic floods 2006, 2011, 2012 and 2013 • Isolated storms § July 2017 – Town of Whitestown/Village of Whitesboro, Hoosick Falls • Ice jam flooding is also a common occurrence 7 Mohawk River Watershed Flooding • In 2013/14, completed 13 state-of- the-art flood studies completed in high priority watersheds § 4 - Oneida County § 8 – Herkimer § 1 – Montgomery • Schoharie Creek – initiated
    [Show full text]
  • Roeliff Jansen Kill
    Roeliff Jansen Kill Community Enterococcus Monitoring Results, 2016‐17 Who Is Testing the Water? Riverkeeper and our partners have tested the water at over 450 locations throughout the Hudson River Estuary and its watershed. Riverkeeper, the Roe Jan Watershed Community, watershed residents, and Bard Water Lab have monitored water quality in the Roeliff Jansen Kill since 2016. This work is made possible by Trout Unlimited and its members, Bard Water Lab and the NYS Environmental Protection Fund through the Hudson River Estuary Program of NYSDEC. Why Test for Fecal Contamination? People should be able to get into the water for swimming, boating, playing and wading, and they need to know if it is safe to do so. If untreated waste is present in the water, there is a greater chance that pathogens may be present, and a greater chance that contact with the water will make us sick. Sources of fecal contamination may include sewage infrastructure failures, inadequate sewage treatment, street runoff, septic system failures, agricultural runoff, and wildlife. What Is Enterococcus? Enterococcus (“Entero”) is a type of bacteria that lives in the guts of humans and other animals. The Entero commonly found in the environment usually does not make people sick. It is an indicator of fecal contamination, similar to coliforms and E. coli. To reduce risk of illness from exposure to fecal contamination, the EPA’s Recreational Water Quality Criteria include three thresholds for the concentration of Entero in water that should not be exceeded. Two thresholds are presented here: the Beach Action Value (BAV), a threshold for each sample of water; and the Geometric Mean (GM), a threshold for the weighted average of many samples.
    [Show full text]