Flood & Erosion Board Flood Mitigation Plan

(1)

Flood Mitigation Plan

Flood & Erosion Board

Presentation to Board of Selectman January 8, 2015 Fairfield Hurricane Inundation Map Yellow – Cat I, lowest elevations Orange – Cat II, slightly higher ground Blue – Cat III, even higher (Post Road, Trains) Purple – Cat IV highest

(2)

Fairfield Hurricane Inundation Map

Yellow – Cat I, lowest elevations Orange – Cat II, slightly higher ground

Blue – Cat III, even higher (Post Road, Trains) Purple – Cat IV highest

Connecticut Hurricane Evacuation Study Hurricane Surge Inundation Mapping

August 2012 Fairfield US Army Corps of Engineers

(3)

How Long Island Sound Affects Fairfield

Existing Conditions:

Fairfield Tide Gate System An outstanding example of healthy Salt Water Marshes in a developed community

Allows twice daily high tides to penetrate salt marshes to keep them viable.

Provides:

Protection of habitats Mosquito Control Limits invasive species (Phragmities) Flushing of Sediments Regulates entering waters Light Blues = Salt Marches Blue Triangles = Tide Gates Town of Fairfield GIS

(4)

Fairfield is usually protected from tide surges by : Barrier Beach & Dikes & Tide Gates (multiple locations along Ash Creek and Pine Creek) Barrier Beach

How does Fairfield Flood

(5)

Fairfield Hurricane Inundation Map Into Pine Creek Height of LI Sound gets through & over tide gates Into Ash Creek Height of LI Sound Gets through & over tide gates Fairfield Hurricane Inundation Map Yellow – Cat I, lowest elevations Orange – Cat II, slightly higher ground Blue – Cat III, even higher (Rt. 1, Trains) Purple – Cat IV highest (I‐95) Wave heights crash over barrier beach, between

(6)

MHW

MLW

MHW

(7)

(8)

Barrier Beach & Dikes /Tide Gates cause flood water to be trapped Creates “salt water pond” Hartford Courant Photo Hartford Courant Photo Connecticut Post Photo

(9)

MHW

MLW

MHW

(10)

Resident ½ mile from LIS was trying to find a photo

to illustrate how high water was;

No need to;

Salt water rust

on nails tells

the story.

Submitted photo

(11)

Fairfield Response to Sandy:

Step I ‐ First several months‐ $5 Million

• Secure area, search for victims (P.D. & Fire) • Set up shelters (Health) • Clear roads of trees, work with UI to restore power. • Work with UI to “reboot” private meters. • Pump water via multiple 12” pumps over dikes & barrier beach. • Sweep roads from sand & debris, vacuum out storm drains • Provide bulky waste collection to beach area – most homes had salt water damaged furnace, hot water heater, washer dryer, oil tanks. Some had fridges, stoves, etc. • Hazwaste collection and woody debris removal for entire Town. • Keep documentation for FEMA reimbursements

CLEAN-UP

Fairfield Response to Sandy: Step II ‐ Spring 2013 to present (5 Million) • Assess Damage to Individual Facilities & Design repairs • Rebuilding Fishing Pier, multiple groins & jetties • Dredging of navigational channels • Re‐nourishment of Beaches • Re‐building bath houses, life guard stations, concession stands Roadways • Tide Gates & Dikes, bulkheads, seawalls • Penfield Beach Pavilion

FIX-UP

(12)

Fairfield Response to Sandy: Step III ‐ Into the Future……. • Continue to promote home elevation above base flood elevation through HMGP • Change the equations – Make Fairfield more resilient to storms by executing a a master plan for flood mitigation measures.  Protect WPCF complex with a dike system, provide micro grid  Increase capacity of tide gate outlets  Construct new physical barrier  Install storm water pump station  Raise existing dikes If a similar storm hits Fairfield tomorrow, largely the same type flooding will occur

TOUGHEN-UP

Fairfield Response to Sandy: Step III ‐ Into the Future……. Create physical Flood Control Barrier a to a set height ( elev. 10, 11, 12, 13, …..?) to prevent Long Island Sound from entering Fairfield Other measures may help (Beach Sand Replenishment, Sand Pumping, Wave Breakers, ect.); nothing else will address this specific problem Seek FEMA, HUD (CDBG‐DR), ACOE, NFWS, CWF, funding for majority of funding Gain Local support, begin accomplishing projects, start a track record of success, gain momentum, get to the eventual goal

HARDENING

(13)

Elev. 13 Elev. 17

What elevation should a barrier be?

Long Island Sound

Beach Neighborhood

Elev. 13 Elev. 17

What elevation should a barrier be?

Long Island Sound

(14)

Elev. 13 Elev. 17

What elevation should a barrier be?

Long Island Sound

Beach Neighborhood

Elev. 13 Elev. 17

What elevation should a barrier be?

Long Island Sound

(15)

Flood Control Barrier (concrete wall or earth embankment)

To be determined………. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 8

Flood Prevention Measures 12

(16)

1

2

Flood Prevention Measures Fairfield Flood & Erosion

Control Board January 8, 2015

3

4

(17)

5

Control Board January 8, 2015 6 7 8 9

Control Board January 8, 2015

(18)

10

11

Control Board January 8, 2015 12

(19)

FAIRFIELD FLOOD MITIGATION

STATUS AND PLANS

(20)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Flood and Erosion Control Board is responsible for both inland and coastal flooding

and erosion, we limit this report to coastal flooding in our primary beach area which was

most heavily effected by Storm Sandy.

Portions of the town’s flood control in this area are handled by the Department of Public

Works which is responsible for the existing Dike System as well as the storm water drains

and their outfalls, which are dependent on tides to function and provide needed

drainage. Additionally, the Conservation Department helps prevent flooding through the

operation of their Self Regulating Tide gates (SRTs) which open to allow daily tides to

enter and leave our salt marsh areas, keeping them healthy but close off during higher

than normal tides.

Fairfield’s coastal flooding results from both severe rain events and coastal storms. While

our inland areas are impacted by heavy rains, the flat coastal areas that house the outfalls

from the town storm drains

are impacted by both. Most of the flooding takes place in the

Primary Beach Area, which also has the highest concentration of residences.

Coastal erosion is a battle against nature related to storm flooding because of the vast

amounts of energy discharged to the shoreline during storms. If not controlled, erosion

can play a big part in both immediate and future flooding.

This report describes Storm Mitigation Measures that have been completed, those that

are in progress and some future projects that are judged to improve our Town’s resilience

to storm surge damage and flooding. Implementation Costs are included to provide a

sense of the magnitude of work necessary to keep nature at bay. Because of these large

expenditures, our town’s ability to do much of the work will depend on success in

obtaining State and Federal Grants for portions of the cost.

The goal of the Master Plan presented here is to mitigate flooding in the beach area from

the 1% or 100 year storm and answer a question asked by Beach Area residents, post

(21)

FAIRFIELD FLOOD MITIGATION – STATUS AND PLANS

REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN

JANUARY 8, 2015

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the First Selectman, the Flood & Erosion Control Board (FECB) and Public Works Department (DPW) submit this status report on flood control measures for the Town that have been completed or under construction, are awaiting funding or are under consideration and study.

While the FECB is responsible for both inland and coastal flooding and erosion, we will limit this reportto coastal flooding in the area most heavily effected by Storm Sandy. Portions of the towns flood control infrastructure are handled by the DPW which is

responsible for the existing dikes and operates and maintains the storm water drains and their outfalls which are dependent on tides to function and provide needed drainage. Additionally, the Conservation Department helps prevent flooding through the operation of their Self Regulating Tide gates (SRTs) which allow daily tides to enter and leave our salt marsh areas keeping them healthy but close off during higher than normal tides to keep the marshes from exceeding their natural limits and flooding adjacent neighborhoods as well as allowing the marshes to accept storm water runoff from our relatively flat storm drains.

Fairfield’s flooding exposure results from both severe rain events and coastal storms. Our inland areas are impacted by heavy rains while the flat coastal areas that house the outfalls from the town storm drainsare impacted by both. We include a Hurricane Surge Inundation Map of the town for reference. You can see by the color coding on the map that our entire coast is impacted by coastal flood events. Most of the flooding takes place in the Primary Beach Area, which also has the highest concentration of residences - this report will focus there. We have also included aerial photos to remind everyone of what to expect if no action is taken to better prevent flooding.

Super Storm Sandy hit the east coast with a vengeance causing massive destruction in NJ/NY totaling over a billion dollars in damage. Luckily, the CT shoreline was "spared" only causing damage in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The Town of Fairfield was one of the coastal communities receiving damage in the tens of millions of dollars. Spared? Not for the affected residents, but globally, yes, spared. Sandy was considered only a 2% - or once in 50 years - storm. Should the storm have hit when and at the surge levels predicted, Fairfield, would have looked much like the shoreline of NJ. Being "spared" has provided our town, a shoreline community with 4 square miles in the coastal floodplain and vulnerable to the wrath of future storms like Sandy, much needed time to improve our coastal resiliency needed to prevent future devastating damage.

Coastal erosion is a battle against nature related to storm flooding because of the vast amounts of energy discharged to the shoreline during storms. If not controlled, erosion

(22)

can play a big part in future flooding. Fairfield has hardened various sections of coastline to mitigate loss or damage to homes, town facilities,roadways and other infrastructure but, as we have seen firsthand, these hardenings are insufficient to protect the town from storms like Sandy and Irene.

HOW DOES FLOODING OCCURE?

The Primary Beach Area floods to different degrees because of the following:

1) Storm surges from Long Island Sound enter the area through Ash Creek or Pine Creek, flanking neighborhoods and marshes that lie between. These same storm surges also top our barrier beaches making us vulnerable on three fronts. The existing Dike & Tidegate system is intended to allow normal tidal flows to the marshes but close them off when coastal water levels rise above normal levels to prevent flooding. For additional commentary on the use of SRTs which help in draining storm waters and the value of healthy marshes, see the attached Conservation Department Discussion of Marsh Health. Additionally, should storm waters get trapped in low lying areas, the dike system needs to return those waters to the L.I. Sound quickly; the ideal case would be one tide cycle.

2) Severe rain events challenge the portion of the town’s storm drainage system which services the Beach Neighborhood and Downtown areas to the north. This system discharges into the tidal watercourses of Pine Creek and Ash Creek.Due to the relatively low elevation and flat topography of the Beach Area, the storm drains have very little pitch, or slope. As the tide rises, it covers the check valves at the end of the storm sewers so no salt water will flow back onto our streets. The storm drains cannot discharge more water until the tide recedes. Concurrent heavy rains are thus unable to drain into L.I. Sound during high tides leaving the drainage pipes, catch basins and road surfaces filled with rain water until a tide change allows it to gravity flow to the tidal creeksand marshes.

3) Fairfield has a typical barrier beach which runs from the South Benson Marina to the western tip of the Fairfield Beach Road peninsula. This barrier beach is a thin strip of land which is generally higher than the land immediately behind it to the North. This beach is fully developed with homes with the exception of Jennings Beach, The Fairfield Beach Club, Rickard’s Beach Open Space and Penfield Beach. Tidal surges from Long Island Sound can overtop the barrier beach. Once the water gets over the beach, the only natural method of returning it to the Sound are through Ash Creek to the east and Pine Creek to the west.

(23)

MITIGATING FLOODS and the GOAL OF THE FECB

The goal of our plan is to mitigate flooding in the beach area from the 1% or 100 year storm and answer an immediate question asked by Beach Area residents, post Storm Sandy – “How can we keep this from ever happening again?”

What we can do immediately is take prudent steps to reduce the severity of flooding where we can, while we work toward total flood protection. We must also improve our ability to quickly remove those flood waters that penetrate our defenses, preferably in one tide cycle, to afford our emergency services access to the affected areas – we do not want a ‘Breezy Point’ scenario in Fairfield.

In November, 2013, Mr. Michelangelo’s team prepared and submitted a Grant Request for $27 million to execute a Master Plan to mitigate flooding in our Primary Beach Area. That plan is depicted on the attached map of the shore line. This plan compliments and

contains many of the Action Matrix items contained in the Fairfield Strategic Actions

section of the Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) update published by the Greater

Bridgeport Regional Council and adopted by the Fairfield RTM 6/23/14. An Executive

Summary of the NHMP and selected detail pages are attached for reference. Although we were not awarded the $27 million grant, it did set the stage for several subsequent grant requests submitted for component portions of that master plan.

In August of 2014, the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) commented on the Master

Plan and found that:

“The area that would be protected by this alternative is loosely bounded to the north by Route 1, to the east by Ash Creek, and to the west by South Pine Creek Road. The southern limit of this area is Long Island Sound. This is an historically flood prone 880 acre area that includes, 2,771 residences, 212 residential condominiums, 264 commercial buildings, a senior center, public elementary school, Town Hall, police station, fire station, public works operations, water pollution control facility, town beach facilities and their associated infrastructure. These areas are almost all located in Special Flood Hazard Areas ("SFHA") as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA").

The proposed project would elevate existing dikes within that area as well as install new dikes and a flood wall in order to create a physical barrier capable of protecting against a 1% chance return storm. The town estimated that the project would cost approximately $27 million. Given the amount of property and

infrastructure protected by this project there is reason to believe the benefits of such a project would be significant.”

(24)

FLOOD PREVENTION MEASURES

There are several distinct elements of that Master Plan which either improve existing measures or propose new ones. Taken individually, none of these measures will eliminate flooding since the flood plain would be flanked or overtopped in areas not yet improved. Each element that is implemented, however, will reduce the length of our shoreline that is topped by the Storm Surge and thus, the volume of water that will flood behind the barrier beach during any given time period. When executed in its totality, the Master Plan will protect our Primary Beach Area from the 100 year coastal storm.

Following is a brief commentary on each of the elements:

1 - Ash Creek to Jennings Beach Coastal Resiliency Project

Cost Structure

Total Project cost - $5,000,000 NFWF Grant Request - $4,875,000 Town contribution, in-kind - $125,000

Grant Request

This Grant request was made to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation under their program titled Hurricane Sandy Coastal Resiliency Competitive Grants. An interesting facet of this project is that it highlights the interrelationship of flood mitigation, ecological improvement and L.I. Sound water quality improvements.

Project Description

This proposal provides protection for 0.5 square miles of the coastal flood plain populated with approximately 600 single family homes. The town has taken measures in the past to provide protection from coastal flooding by constructing approximately 3.5 miles of earthen dikes, Storm Sandy revealed the vulnerability of our existing system. This proposal would improve 6,700 linear feet of dike to provide for increased coastal flood protection. It would also improve culverts and tide gates for tidal habitat improvements and better flood water relief.

Increased resistance to coastal storms and forecasted sea level rise will be achieved by constructing new earthen berms and flood walls where none currently exist. These areas currently rely on the natural elevation of the land, however sea level rise has shown that additional protection is required. Existing earthen berms would be retrofitted and improved by elevating their heights to resist storm surge and placing armor stone on the water-ward side of berms to resist the erosive nature of a 100-year storm event. The increase in height will provide protection from the tidal surge that caused massive flooding of our community thereby reducing the amount of damage if not eliminating it entirely.

(25)

Culverts and tide gates will be improved along the earthen berms to allow for properly controlled tidal waters to flow back into the existing marshes that currently receive some tidal waters but not a sufficient amount to control mosquitoes, and improve the habitats for shellfish, finfish and waterfowl. A total of 7 new tide gates of various sizes will be installed as well as replacement of existing metal culverts. These improvements will allow an increase in tidal flows to 10-15 acres of salt water starved marshes which will restore their habitat. Self-regulating and conventional tide gates will be placed on the culverts that will admit the correct amount of salt water needed for tidal marsh restoration while providing the needed flood protection from high tides. These newly created tidal marshes will also provide for improvements to storm water quality as these tidal basins receive storm water runoff from local drainage systems. The storm water runoff contains suspended solids and chemicals leached from asphalt. Here, the natural soils will provide bio-filtration and break down chemicals and pollutants prior to the runoff entering the waters of Long Island Sound.

Although most of the land required for this project is Town Property, some minor land acquisition would be required to construct a berm along Turney Creek and Riverside Drive. Additionally, easements would be required through 4 private properties to construct a concrete flood wall.

Community Impact

The local residents of this area will see a direct benefit from this project, as the earthen berms and floodwalls will prevent the tidal surge from inundating their neighborhood and homes and thus greatly reduce, if not eliminate entirely, the damage that these residents incurred during Storm Sandy. This project will surely strengthen the natural ecosystem of the tidal marshes by restoring them back to their original condition.

This project plan incorporated a unique feature wherein volunteer organizations would complete low skilled tasks, thus offsetting some cost. For instance, local Boy Scouts could utilize this opportunity to perform their Eagle Scout Honor Project by planting American Beach Grass on the earthen berms. The two local universities, Fairfield and Sacred Heart would be called upon to provide volunteers to construct the wooden boardwalks that cross over the newly elevated earthen berms.

Status

Grant Request denied

2 - South Benson Storm Water Pump Station

Cost Structure

Total estimated cost - $5,000,000 CDBG-DR Grant Request - $3,750,000 Town Portion - $1,250,000

(26)

Description of Project

The plan is to create a deep sump pump pit and pumping station for storm drains to drain into and then be pumped out. The topography of the Southern portion of the town being relatively flat inhibits the current storm drains from draining during high tides. The now lower sump pit would let the rain and storm waters flow freely and then be pumped out ‘over’ the high tide level. The structure would be located near the Sand Castle playground at Jennings Beach.

This project will have positive effects on an elementary school, town hall complex,

churches, Fairfield museum and Historic Center and over 1,000 homes in the area. Rapid evacuation of rain and storm waters will prevent surface flooding and lessen the intrusion into the sanitary system which gets over worked during major storms. Most of the area affected is in the FEMA AE 11 zone.

Status

Grant Request was submitted August, 2014 and was denied on December 19, 2014. We will reapply at the next opportunity.

3 - Floodwall at Fairfield Beach Club

Cost Structure

Total estimated cost - $3,000,000 This is a conceptual estimate only

Project description

The shoreline at the Fairfield Beach Club (FBC) has no berm structure nor elevated natural dune as exists at other stretches of our shorefront. When storms such as Irene and Sandy surge onto our shore, there is minimal resistance to their flood waters

continuing on to the neighborhoods beyond. Informal conversations over time suggest that the FBC has no interest in providing a substantial flood barrier between their properties and L.I. Sound. In fact, they recently received permission from the Zoning Board of

Appeals to rebuild their boathouse in a manner not fully compliant with our existing Zoning Regulations (Section 32.5 (c)) pertaining to construction in a Flood Zone. The highest elevation of the FBC property is perhaps +9 to +10 (no survey available) and it is in the same VE-13 FEMA zone as the Penfield I Pavilion.

Generally, a concrete floodwall would be constructed on Town property along the south side of Fairfield Beach Road. Two wings could turn and extend towards the L.I. Sound at each end of the main floodwall and join with the existing barrier dunes. The total length of the wall would be approximately 1,050 ft.The proposed wall would achieve an elevation of +13 ft. Relative to the existing land, it would extend 7 ft. – less tall than the existing

(27)

mitigate flooding along some 800 ft. of our shoreline and bring it to the FEMA 100 year Base Flood Elevation.

The neighborhoods in the floodplain beyond the beach would have the volume of floodwaters reduced.

4 - Shoreline Resiliency Improvements at Penfield Beach

Cost Structure

Total estimated cost - $300,000 CDBG-DR Grant Request - $225,000 Town Portion - $75,000

Description of project

The town installed a timber bulkhead in front of Penfield One in 2012 to elevation +12 ft. The sand in front of the bulkhead was eroded during Sandy. The beach elevation after Sandy was replenished and raised to a higher than pre Sandy almost to the top of the bulkhead or elevation +12 using the sand that was dredged from Pine Creek and Southport Harbor. This project calls for installing stone rip rap on the water side of the bulkhead to act as a scour protection. It will not add any additional flood elevation or toping protection as the elevation of the bulkhead will not change to meet the new FEMA standards of a V-13 zone. The project also calls for the addition of bulkhead to the West to establish a contiguous flood control structure between the existing timber bulkhead and the existing earthen/stone dike on the West side of the pavilion damaged from Sandy. The project also includes the reconfiguration of the porous pavers in the East section of the parking lot, the addition of sand or other fill between the existing timber bulkhead and parking lot to absorb and dissipate wave energy that has topped the bulkhead as well as a low timber retaining wall along the existing parking lot to contain the sand placed

shoreside of the bulkhead. All of these measures are part of the overall plan to restore the Penfield Pavilion to full service as proposed by the Penfield Building Committee (PBC).

The increased hardening of the timber bulkhead’s face and improvements to its east and west sides will better resist the next storm and mitigate the volume of water that would otherwise come across this section of coastline to the neighborhood behind. Although, as currently envisioned, the top of the bulkhead is not elevated from the present +12 ft. the final details are still to be determined during the final design phase of the PBC project.

Status

Grant Request submitted August, 2014 and, on December 19th_{, we were notified that it}

(28)

5 - Flood Prevention Penfield Beach to Reef Road

Cost Structure

Project description

This is perhaps the most challenging segment of the Master Plan. There are many residences close to the high water line along the natural barrier beach between Penfield Beach’s Durrell Pavilion and Reef Road. Some beach elevations are higher than others, some residences have private seawalls that vary in elevation but none are at the VE-13 FEMA 100 year Base Flood Elevation. The objective is to provide storm surge protection to as many properties as possible which would suggest that a floodwall be constructed between the southerly faces of the residences and L.I. Sound – the enemy. The distance along the shoreline is approximately 1,650 ft.

One challenge in locating the floodwall at the shoreline is getting agreement among all of the property owners directly affected by such construction. One early step will be to gather data regarding the existing elevations and then have dialog with the residents and

consider their opinions.

A less desirable location for a floodwall between Penfield and Reef would be at the margin of the marsh behind the properties on the north side of Fairfield Beach Road. This location would eliminate protection for about 165 residences and 3 commercial properties.

Homes in the floodplain would get relief from storm surge that would otherwise flow across the lower elevations of barrier beach. With a floodwall at the shoreline, emergency services would have access to all the properties along Fairfield Beach Road

6 - Earthen Dike at the perimeter of Pine Creek Marsh

Cost Structure

Approximately 1,350 linear feet of earthen dike will be constructed between Reef Road and the dike surrounding the WWTP (see item #8) to protect the low lying properties to the north and east of Pine Creek Marsh from flood waters. The exact path of this dike

(29)

the dike will be located at the margin of the marsh continuing by the most direct path until it intersects the section of dike surrounding the WWTP described in item #8.

This new dike will better define the salt marsh perimeter and keep floodwaters from the adjacent properties in the floodplain.

Project Status

This project is conceptual only at this time.

7 - Pine Creek Culvert Replacement

Cost Structure

Total estimated cost - $560,000 CDBG-DR Grant Award - $560,000

Town exposure - any amount that MAY exceed $560,000

Currently, a 48” culvert drains approximately 310 acres of our southwest marsh and the surrounding residential areas. The culvert has a tide gate to prevent high tides from flooding this major section of our Primary Beach Area. Due to the relatively small size of this single culvert, the post Storm Sandy floodwaters remained trapped for 4 days; and were ultimately evacuated by rented emergency pumps. A September, 2013 Engineering Study suggested that replacing the existing installation with a combination of one 48” SRT and two 60” Sluice gates would improve the evacuation time to a maximum of 29 hours; it was on that basis that the grant request was submitted. As developed, the design now calls for an additional 48” SRT which will further reduce the time required to evacuate floodwaters. Combined, the new culverts will have 5 times the cross-sectional area of the existing. The new installation will use improved materials that will make the water flow more efficient and the installation of concrete headwalls will prevent erosion of the earthen berm containing the culverts – as has happened in the past. This berm also covers our Waste Water Treatment Plant’s discharge pipe as it goes across Fairfield Beach Road and out into L.I. Sound.

The SRTs will provide tidal marsh restoration by allowing a controlled amount of salt water to flow back through the 48” culverts into the upstream marsh areas with each tide cycle. The sluice gates would normally be kept closed allowing the proper volumes of salt water to be exchanged with the marsh daily. Prior to a storm, the valves would be opened to

(30)

reduce the water level in the marsh to lower than normal so that it provides the maximum retention volume for the storm waters. During and after the storm, the Sluice Gates would be manually opened or closed in phase with flood water levels on the marsh side and tide water levels on the creek side such that the impounded water is drained in the shortest possible time.

Once completed, the impounded floodwaters will be evacuated within one day. By reducing the time flood waters remain in the flood plain any necessary Emergency Services can be provided that much more quickly to the 1,300 homes and businesses in the 310 acre section of our flood plain. The new SRTs will allow an increase in tidal flows to the salt water starved marshes which will restore their habitat.

Project Status

A Grant Application was submitted in March, 2014 under the CDGB-DR program for the full cost of this work as estimated by an Engineering Study performed in September, 2013. We were awarded the full grant in July, 2014. Fairfield’s Conservation Department has formally endorsed the project. The design has begun and considering the design, permitting, contract evaluation and award lead times involved, this work is expected to begin in early 2016 with completion in the summer of 2016. The Town’s Engineering and Purchasing Departments will be involved in the normal course of their duties but no Town expenditures will be needed unless the actual cost exceeds the grant amount.

8 - Waste Water Treatment Plant Hardening

Cost Structure

Total estimated cost - $3,088,000 CDBG-DR Grant Request - $2,316,000 Connecticut Clean Water Fund - $617,600 Town Portion - $154,400

Description of Project

This project would construct a continuous earthen berm around the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP), Regional Fire Training Center, Animal Shelter and

Conservation Dept. facilities located on Richard White Way. The FEMA 100 year base flood elevation for this area is +13 ft.; the new Dike will have an elevation of +14 ft. preventing flood waters from inundating this critical public facility when a storm surge occurs. Additionally, a 7,000 GPM pumping station will be included to remove any accumulating storm water from within the diked area. That capacity equals the 100 year rainfall event.

(31)

Keeping the WWTP functioning continuously is imperative. Should the plant become incapacitated due to storm water inundation, the entire facility would not function for an extended period of time. Untreated sewage would backup into residences and be discharged into L.I Sound causing ecological damage to shellfish, fin fish and the beaches. A general health hazard would exist for everyone in the vicinity of untreated sewage. Should salt water infiltrate the digester tanks, the beneficial bacteria will be marginalized. When this happens, it can take weeks to restore the required

eco-environment and restore the bacteria, and thus, the treatment, to full function. This project is one of the critical action recommendations in our Town’s NHMP.

Every Town Resident will benefit from this project. The fact that our WWTP will be protected from the 100 year storm and continue to function should that happen, assures that the sewage will be treated and discharged thus avoiding any backups into the 17,000 residences and businesses throughout the town. The entire region also benefits because the possibility of untreated sewage being discharged into L.I. Sound will be avoided. Lastly, the worst case damage, should the WWTP be totally inundated, could reach a repair & restoration cost of $35 million; that would be an unconscionable burden on our taxpayers.

Project Status

The CDGB-DR Grant was applied for in July, 2014 and was selected for funding on December 19, 2014. We will immediately begin the process of executing an Assistance Agreement, applying for the CT Clean Water Fund Grant and then designing the project. Considering the scope of the project including Design, Permitting, Contract Award and Construction, the overall time to completion will be approximately 2 years.

9 - Fairfield Beach Road Sluice Gate

Fairfield Beach road currently has two berms west of Reef Road on the peninsula which, along with the berm at creek side, trap storm surge waters that come over the barrier beach. There are approximately 50 residences that remain flooded while the rest of the peninsula drains immediately as the “tide goes out”. In addition to those properties trapped in flood waters, access to the approximately 100 additional residences farther west is denied to both residents and emergency services until the flood waters drain away. A 30“ sluice gate was installed between the berms to drain the standing flood water. It is undersized for the volumes that become trapped during Coastal Storms that top the beach. An additional 36” sluice gate will be installed more than halving the drainage time

(32)

for the area. This project is being performed by the Public Works Department in the normal course of their duties at minimal direct cost.

This additional, larger sluice gate will reduce the time required to drain storm waters from a portion of Fairfield Beach Road enabling the residents and emergency service

personnel earlier access to the properties to the west.

Project Status

The new sluice gate is on hand and scheduled to be installed early in 2015.

10 - New Dike at South Pine Creek Road

Cost Structure

This segment of the Master Plan will create approximately 2,350 linear feet of earthen dike to protect the low lying properties at the western edge of the Pine Creek Marsh from flood waters. These low lying areas are vulnerable to flooding during a severe rain event which happens concurrent with a high tide. With the flood gates closed to keep high tidal waters out of the flood plain, the rain waters draining from the north have nowhere to go and so their level increases to flood stage.

This additional section of new and elevated dike will better define the marsh perimeter and keep floodwaters from the adjacent properties which include The Meadows.

Project Status

(33)

11 - Pine Creek Avenue Dike Elevation Project

Cost Structure Phase One:

Total Project estimated cost - $7,692,308 Engineering Feasibility Study Army Corps of Engineers - $5,000,000 Total Cost: $335,000

CDBG-DR Grant Request - $2,019,231 Town Portion: $118,000 Town Portion - $673,007

This wasn’t initially part of our Master Plan but is a component of the Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Town of Fairfield. Using a small portion of the $5million budget to repair Super Storm Sandy damages Mr. Michelangelo commissioned Tigh & Bond to do a preliminary study of a portion of the South Pine Creek dike to raise the dike, which was built in the 70’s, for approximately 1,660 feet. Having this plan in hand allowed theFECB and Public Works to reach out to the Pine Creek Residents Association and share the idea of raising the earthen/stone armored existing dike with them at a March, 2014 meeting, they are in general agreement with the plan. That study was then shared with ACOE who have endorsed it and propose to do a full study as they feel the cost benefit ratio is very positive. The ACOE has agreed to pay for the first $100,000 of the study with the town agreeing to split any overage 50/50 with the ACOE. The proposal calls for increasing the existing dike elevation by 3 feet. The proposed method is to install a steel flood wall at the crest of the existing dike then encasing it in concrete to protect it from corrosion. This design minimizes the impact on adjacent properties vs. enlarging the actual dike which wasn’t favorably looked upon by the residents directly affected. This dike protects the town golf course, tennis center, ball fields and all of the residences east of the base of Sasco hill and West of Pine Creek between RT1 and the Sound. The current dike was in the process of being topped by Sandy and the area was spared only when the wind shifted before high tide. A copy of the ACOE proposal is attached.

The dike protects millions of dollars of homes and town facilities from flood waters of Long Island Sound. The 3 foot proposed elevation above the old dike built to elevation +12 ft., the FEMA standards of the 70’s, would bring the dike to the current, VE-15, FEMA 100 year flood elevation. The proposed raising of the Pine Creek Dike elevation will provide this neighborhood with the coastal resilience needed to protect it from future coastal events.

(34)

Status

The ACOE has agreed to pick up 65% of the construction cost with the town paying 35%. To reduce the town’s portion of the total Project Cost, Public Works applied for a $2 million grant to cover most of the town’s portion – that request was not selected for funding in the current round; we will try again. The next step in this project is for the town to commit to sponsoring the ACOE Feasibility Study at a cost of $118,000.

12 – Old Dam Road Dike Elevation Project

Cost Structure

This sub-project was also not included in the $27 million Grant Request but is an integral component of Mitigating the coastal storm effects on our Primary Beach Area. This section, of what is in aggregate termed the Pine Creek Dike, is within Pine Creek and not exposed to the wave actions of L.I. Sound. The 100 year FEMA Base Flood Elevation for this section changes from VE 15 where exposed to the wave action to AE 12, 13 or 14 along various sections of the total 5,900 foot length. The original 1970 vintage Earthen Dike has a current elevation of approximately 9.5 feet. The water levels experienced during Storm Sandy did not top the Dike - but only by inches.

The dike now protects homes and town facilities from flood waters of Long Island Sound. Increasing the elevation to the current FEMA standards will provide this neighborhood with the coastal resilience needed to protect it from future coastal flooding.

Status

(35)

P a g e | 17

SUMMARY OF THE MEASURES

PR O JEC T NU M BE R PR O JEC T NA M E APP R O XI M AT E C O ST C O NC EP TU AL C O ST G R AN T PR O G R AM D AT E SU BM IT TED ST AT US D ES C R IPT IO N 1 A sh C re ek to J en ni ng s B ea ch C oa st al R es ili an cy $5 ,0 00 ,0 00 N FW F Ja nu ar y, 2 01 4 G ra nt re qu es t d en ie d R ai se d ik es & d un es , i m pr ov e cu lve rts , co ns tru ct fl oo dw al ls 2 S ou th B en so n S to rm W at er P um p S ta tio n $5 ,0 00 ,0 00 C D G B -D R A ug us t, 20 14 G ra nt re qu es t d en ie d C on st ru ct d ee p su m p P um pi ng S ta tio n at J en ni ng s B ea ch 3 Fl oo dw al l a t Fa irf ie ld B ea ch C lu b $3 ,0 00 ,0 00 C on ce pt ua l P ro je ct C on st ru ct 1 ,0 00 fe et o f S ea w al l a t S ou th S id e of Fa irf ie ld B ea ch R oa d 4 S ho re lin e R es ili an cy a t P en fie ld B ea ch $3 00 ,0 00 C D B G -D R A ug us t, 20 14 G ra nt A pp ro ve d fo r $2 25 ,0 00 D ec em be r, 20 14 E xe cu te T im be r B ul kh ea d an d D un e Im pr ov em en ts a t P en fie ld I P av ili on 5 Fl oo d P re ve nt io n M ea su re s fro m P en fie ld to R ee f R oa d $5 ,0 00 ,0 00 C on ce pt ua l P ro je ct C on st ru ct Fl oo dw al l a nd D un e S tru ct ur es a lo ng th is 1 ,6 50 fe et o f sh or el in e 6 E ar th en D ik e at P in e C re ek M ar sh $3 ,0 00 ,0 00 C on ce pt ua l P ro je ct C on st ru ct 1 ,3 50 fe et o f D ik e S tru ct ur e fro m R ee f R oa d to th e W W TP 7 P in e C re ek C ul ve rt R ep la ce m en t $5 60 ,0 00 C D G B -D R M ar ch , 2 01 4 G ra nt A pp ro ve d fo r $5 60 ,0 00 J ul y, 2 01 4 Im pr ov e th e m aj or S to rm W at er O ut fa ll fo r t he w es te n si de o f t he B ea ch A re a 8 W as te W at er T re at m en t P la nt H ar de ni ng $3 ,0 88 ,0 00 C D B G -D R Ju ly , 2 01 4 G ra nt fo r $ 2, 31 6, 00 0 ap pr ov ed D ec em be r, 20 14 C re at e D ik e ar ou nd th e W W TP a nd in st al l S to rm W at er P um p S ta tio n 9 Fa irf ie ld B ea ch R oa d S lu ic e G at e $1 0, 00 0 N on e C om pl et io n ea rly 2 01 5 A dd a dd iti on al 3 6" M an ua lly o pe ra te d G at e to E va cu at e Fl oo dw at er s. In st al la tio n by D P W 10 N ew D ik e a t P in e C re ek M ar sh $2 ,2 00 ,0 00 C on ce pt ua l P ro je ct C on st ru ct D ik e at m ar gi n of P in e C re ek M ar sh a t S . P in e C re ek R d. 11 P in e C re ek D ik e E le va tio n $7 ,6 92 ,0 00 U S A rm y C or ps o f E ng in ee rs (A C O E ) E ar ly 2 01 4 Fe de ra l I nt er es t D et er m in at io n pr op os al re ce ive d U S A rm y C or ps o f E ng in ee rs w ill fu nd a m aj or p or tio n of ra is in g 1, 66 0 fe et o f t he E xi st in g D ik e 12 O ld D am R oa d D ik e E le va tio n $7 ,1 00 ,0 00 C on ce pt ua l P ro je ct R ai se 5 ,9 00 fe et o f e xi st in g di ke to n ew FE M A S ta nd ar ds $2 1, 65 0, 00 0 $2 0, 30 0, 00 0 $4 1, 95 0, 00 0

F

A

IR

FI

EL

D

F

LO

O

D

&

ER

O

SI

O

N

C

O

N

TR

O

L

B

O

A

R

D

B

EA

C

H

A

R

EA

F

LO

O

D

C

O

N

TR

O

L

M

A

ST

ER

PL

A

N

(36)

CONTROLLING EROSION

Recently, Public Works executed 5 projects with portions of the $5 million Sandy repair funds that improved erosion resistance of our shorefront. They are:

1) Repairs to the rock face of the Pine Creek Dike directly exposed to the Sound. 2) Replacement of the Southport Beach Wave Breaker with a more robust design. 3) Repair and hardening of the Fishing Jetty at Jennings Beach

4) Construction of a seawall at the Fairfield Beach Road turnaround.

5) Construction of a more robust replacement for the deteriorated bulkhead, creek side, at the Fairfield Beach Rd. turnaround.

Photos of these projects are attached.

CONCLUSION

Flood protection will be a long process for our Town always restricted by budget constraints, funding availability and the sometimes conflicted stakeholder desires.

Nonetheless, we feel the recent flooding we have experienced, projected Sea Level Rise and Climate Change demand that we improve our current status. Mr. Michelangelo’s team and the FECB will continue to refine elements of the Master Plan and ferret out any & all State and Federal Grant funding opportunities. The FECB will continue to reach out to stakeholders affected by the various projects as they are further developed to share our thinking and consider theirs to arrive at the best result for all. Based on the success with Grant Requests for the Pine Creek Culvert Replacement and the Pine Creek Dike projects the FECB feels it is extremely supportive to have an initial engineering study for a project that allows us to engage stakeholders in a fact based, meaningful dialog. Both our Town Engineering Department and hired Consultants have produced such studies. Having a formal report in hand also shows the grant reviewer that the plan is doable, will be effective in mitigating flooding or erosion and has a realistically evaluated cost of implementation. We will be including costs to fund specific studies in future budget

requests. As Grant offers are received, we will seek approvals and funding for the Town’s portion from the appropriate Town bodies.

Flooding & Erosion is a large topic. We welcome this opportunity to have shared it briefly with you and stand ready to expand on any of the elements as you may wish.

(37)

(38)

(39)

(40)

(41)

(42)

(43)

(44)

(45)

(46)

(47)

For Continuing Authority Feasibility Investigation

Section 103 Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Project

Fairfield Beach

Fairfield, Connecticut

US ARMY CORPS

OF ENGINEERS

(48)

(49)

FAIRFIELD BEACH

FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT

(50)

(51)

Fairfield Beach, Fairfield, Connecticut

Section 103 Federal Interest Determination

1. Project Name:

1 2. Congressional District and Sponsor

1 3. Project Location

1 4. Project Purpose, Problems and Needs

1 5. Alternative Plans Considered

4 6. Economic Justification

7 7. Caveats/Constraints

9 8. Sponsorship

10 9. Recommendation

10 10. IEPR

10 11. Schedule

10 -i-

(52)

(53)

1. Project Name: Fairfield Beach Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Project,

Fairfield, Connecticut. This study is authorized through the continuing authority of Section

103 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962, as amended.

2. a.

Congressional District:

Connecticut – 4th (Representative Jim Himes)

b.

Sponsor: Town of Fairfield, Connecticut

3. Project Location: The Town of Fairfield is in coastal Connecticut, approximately

60 miles Northeast of New York City and bordered by Bridgeport, Trumbull, Easton,

Redding and Westport (see Figure 1). Fairfield is a 31.3 square mile town situated on the

coast of Long Island Sound and had the largest number of damaged homes in Fairfield

County as a result of Hurricane Sandy. Much of the damage to the town was the result of

wave attack on shorefront properties along Fairfield Beach as well as backside flooding

within the neighborhoods between Pine Creek and Ash Creek caused by storm surge.

4. Project Purpose, Problems and Needs:

The objective of this initial appraisal is to determine whether there are any potential storm

damage protection projects within the area of concern that demonstrate enough Federal

Interest to pursue a cost-shared Feasibility Study. Federal Interest is to be determined by

comparing the costs of the project to the overall public benefit.

In October 2012, Hurricane/Post-Tropical Cyclone Sandy moved from the Caribbean to the

east coast of the U.S. and made landfall along the southern NJ shore on October 29

th

. The

storm resulted in over 200 deaths; making Sandy the deadliest hurricane to hit the U.S.

mainland since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, as well as the deadliest hurricane/post-tropical

cyclone to hit the U.S. East Coast since Hurricane Agnes in 1972. (NOAA, 2013) Damage

estimates from Sandy exceed $50 billion, with 24 states impacted by the storm.

During Hurricane Sandy the Town of Fairfield had the largest number of damaged homes in

Fairfield County. At least 900 single family homes were estimated to be affected in the

town. Much of the damage to the town was the result of wind and storm surge along the

coastal areas, particularly within the area between Fairfield Beach and Shoal Point (Cover

photo). Figures 3 through 7 (below) show flooding and other damages in the Fairfield

Beach area.

The water resource problem identified in the area of concern is the overall vulnerability of

the Fairfield Beach area to storm damage from wave attack and storm surge. These forces

constitute a threat to human life and increase the risk of flood damages to public and private

property and infrastructure. More specifically, the generally low topography combined with

limited drainage outlets creates a ‘bath tub’ effect within the interior neighborhoods that

following flooding events, results in long periods of standing water. Figure 2 depicts the

interior elevations, which are lower than the barrier beach itself.

(54)

(55)

(56)

Figure 7: Fairfield Beach Road

5. Alternative Plans Considered:

(57)

The town has developed a conceptual plan for a large scale flood control levee system, with

multiple pump stations that would significantly reduce flood damages in the Fairfield Beach

area and they are currently seeking funding opportunities to construct it (see Figure 7). The

area that would be protected by this alternative is loosely bounded to the north by Route 1,

to the east by Ash Creek, and to the west by South Pine Creek Road. The southern limit of

this area is Long Island Sound. This is an historically flood prone 880 acre area that

includes, 2,771 residences, 212 residential condominiums, 264 commercial buildings, a

senior center, public elementary school, Town Hall, police station, fire station, public works

operations, water pollution control facility, town beach facilities and their associated

infrastructure. These areas are almost all located in Special Flood Hazard Areas ("SFHA")

as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA").

The proposed project would elevate existing dikes within that area as well as install new

dikes and a flood wall in order to create a physical barrier capable of protecting against a

1% chance return storm. The town estimated that the project would cost approximately $27

million. Given the amount of property and infrastructure protected by this project there is

reason to believe the benefits of such a project would be significant. However, while

Federal Interest may exist for studying this alternative, the estimated cost far exceeds the $5

million spending limit of the authority under which this study is being conducted. This

alternative was eliminated from discussion under the Section 103 authority, accordingly. It

should be noted though, that this alternative would merit further investigation in the study of

Western Connecticut, planned to start in fiscal year 2015, under a study resolution for New

Haven and Fairfield Counties.

(58)

Following Hurricane Sandy, the Town of Fairfield hired Tighe and Bond, Inc. to evaluate

the existing condition of the dike built along the western bank of Pine Creek, who

conducted a coastal engineering analysis and provided recommendations for a potential

increase in dike elevation. The dike was constructed in the 1970's and is armored with large

stones, approximately 4 feet wide, beginning near the intersection of South Pine Creek Road

and Pine Creek Avenue, running approximately 1,600 linear feet eastward into the entrance

of Pine Creek. Once inside the mouth of Pine Creek, the dike becomes earthen with

established vegetation and smaller stones (6-12 inch diameter) scattered along the face.

Some of the properties along this section of the dike contain individual shoreline

stabilization structures such as timber bulkheads and cribbing in various degrees of

deterioration as well as timber piers, gangways and floating docks for boating access.

Building off of Tighe and Bond, Inc.’s report, the Corps evaluated an alternative that would

raise the crest of the dike by 3’ (see Figure 8). Property encroachment was a significant

consideration when investigating this alternative because the existing buildings are located

in close proximity to the dike system. Accordingly, the team chose to evaluate a vertical

modification that would include a driven steel sheet pile wall and concrete cap. Only one

specific alternative was evaluated for the purpose of establishing Federal Interest but

additional concepts and variations are expected to be evaluated during the Feasibility Study.

(59)

reduction measures to the Town of Fairfield, Connecticut. The analyses followed the U. S.

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) guidance for conducting economic evaluation

procedures as contained in ER 1105-2-100, Appendix E, Section IV, “Hurricane and Storm

Damage Prevention,” 22 April 2000, and used the Hydraulic Engineering Center-Flood

Damage Analysis (HEC-FDA) tool. The economic benefits of providing coastal storm

damage protection were calculated by comparing expected without-project conditions to

conceptual with-project conditions. A preliminary estimate of the project costs was

prepared concurrently, in order to establish a baseline Benefit-Cost Ratio that would be

refined in the Feasibility Study.

Project Costs

In order to estimate project costs, a scope of work including the construction of a steel sheet

pile wall with a concrete cap was evaluated. The cost estimate assumed that the sheet pile

would be driven to a depth of 16’ which would require approximately 40 tons of steel.

Additional costs were factored into the estimate in order to account for the confined nature

of the construction, potential revetment rework and stone replacement associated with

placement of steel sheet pile wall, and any potential property/real estate mitigation. Based

on these factors the project was estimated to have a total cost of $7.3 million and an

annualized cost of $312,477 over a 50 year life span.

It should be noted though that this is a preliminary estimate for the purposes of establishing

Federal Interest in conducting a Feasibility Study. Therefore the likelihood exists that

estimated costs will fluctuate with more in-depth analysis. At this time those adjustments are

not expected to significantly impact the project’s viability.

Project Benefits

For the purpose of this Federal Interest Determination, project benefits were based on a

reduction in storm water surface elevations and the consequent reduction in flood damages

experienced at structures in the Pine Creek area. The study evaluated 130 residential

structures at risk of flooding. The value of each structure was obtained from the 2013 tax

assessment records available from the Town of Fairfield. Structure and start-of-damage

elevations were estimated from topographic maps and on-line images, where available.

Hydrologic data available from the 2012 Flood Insurance Study was used to provide a

general planning level estimate of flood stage in the area. The water surface profiles,

structure inventory with elevations, and standardized depth-damage curves from the

Institute of Water Resources (IWR) were entered into the Hydraulic Engineering Center’s

certified tool for Flood Damage Analysis (HEC-FDA). In a without-project scenario,

coastal communities in Fairfield are expected to continue experiencing flooding and wave

attack during high frequency storm events that erode beaches, destroy shorefront homes and

expose backshore properties to flood damages. Expected Annual Damages in the

without-project condition were $821,200. The damages by storm frequency are presented in Table 1

below.

(60)

Probability

Recurrence

_Interval

(Years)

Number of

Structures

Damaged

Dollars

0.5

2

4 $766,450

0.2

5

26 $1,260,500

0.1

10

32 $2,432,200

0.04

25

67 $7,956,500

0.02

50

118 $13,016,400

0.01

100

121 $15,365,100

0.004

250

124 $18,496,300

0.002

500

126 $21,800,000

Estimated project benefits were calculated using the HEC-FDA levee feature and a

Wall elevation of 13.5 Feet (NAVD88) on the western side of the study area, and a

Top-of-Wall elevation of 12.5 Feet (NAVD88) on the eastern side. The project was estimated to

protect against storms having a .02 Annual Exceedance Probability. The Expected Annual

Damages amounted to $387,000 in the with-project condition compared to $821,200 in the

without project condition, yielding approximately $434,200 in annualized damages

prevented (i.e. benefits). The benefits were calculated at the reconnaissance level. They

would need to be further defined during the Feasibility Study by collecting detailed

information on actual storm damages and structure elevations. Similar to the cost

estimation, benefits calculated during a more in-depth analysis may be higher or lower than

those estimated here.

Benefit-Cost Ratio

With an annual benefits estimated at $434,200 and annual costs estimated at $312,477, the

floodwall concept described herein has a projected Benefit-Cost Ratio of 1.39. A Benefit-

Cost Ratio greater than 1 demonstrates Federal Interest.

7. Caveats/Constraints

Real Estate

Any modifications to the existing system will require consent from the property owners

and would likely require that some form of property easements be established.

Additionally, the existing dike system is in close proximity to the buildings and piers

located on those properties. During the Feasibility Study additional consideration will

also need to be given to potential real estate mitigation such as modifying, relocating, or

(61)

a. Essential Fish Habitat. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 requires all

federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on all

actions, or proposed actions, permitted, funded, or undertaken by the agency, that may

adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). Accordingly, during the Feasibility Study,

the Corps will submit an EFH assessment to NMFS who will provide conservation

recommendations in return.

b. Historic Properties. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as

amended requires all federal agencies to coordination with the State Historic

Preservation Officer (SHPO) and/or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer(s) (THPO), for

proposed actions that may impinge upon properties with cultural or Native American

significance, or listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic

Places. Accordingly, during the Feasibility Study, the Corps will submit an assessment

to the local SHPO and THPO who will provide conservation recommendations in return.

c. Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act declares the intention of

Congress to conserve threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems on which

those species depend. During the Feasibility Study the Corps will coordinate with U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), NMFS and the CT DEEP’s Wildlife Diversity

Program to evaluate the potential impacts of any proposed work on state and/or federally

listed threatened and endangered species.

d. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act

requires consultation with the FWS and the fish and wildlife agencies of States where

the "waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted

or licensed to be impounded, diverted . . . or otherwise controlled or modified" by any

agency under a Federal permit or license. Consultation is to be undertaken for the

purpose of "preventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources." The Corps would

coordinate with those respective agencies during the Feasibility Study.

e. Previous Coordination. As a component of other project studies such as Woodmont

Beach and Prospect Beach, the above mentioned correspondence has occurred. While it

will still need to be completed for this specific project, the general environmental

concerns are readily understood for this area and are not expected to present significant

hurdles.

Hydraulic/Economic Analysis

The hydraulic analysis conducted and applied towards the above mentioned economic

analysis was preliminary in nature and commensurate with the level of detail required to

establish Federal Interest. A comprehensive hydraulic analysis would need to be

conducted during the Feasibility Study. The economic analysis and any recommended

levels of protection are subject to change during the Feasibility Study, as a result of

more comprehensive hydraulic modeling.

(62)