metedeconk river watershed protection & restoration plan · metedeconk river watershed...

Metedeconk River WatershedProtection & Restoration Plan

Stakeholder Advisory Committee MeetingJune 21, 2013

Metedeconk River Yacht Club

Project Overview

Funded by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s Watershed Restoration Program

$666,000 grant from NJDEP

$200,000 for Metedeconk plan development

$466,000 for implementation of highest-priority projects identified in the plan

$91,500 BTMUA in-kind match for planning phase

Main project goals:

Preserve the Metedeconk River as a viable water supply source for the region

Protect the health of the Barnegat Bay estuary

Eliminate water quality impairments, address TMDL’s, and attain compliance with the surface water quality standards throughout the watershed

Project results in formal plan

Strategy for Metedeconk watershed protection & restoration

Prioritized listing of projects/management actions that can be carried out by any of the stakeholders

Project Overview (cont’d)

Plan follows USEPA watershed plan guidance:

“Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters”

Nine (9) minimum elements of watershed plans

Project Overview (cont’d)

BTMUA and Metedeconk Watershedin Relation to the Barnegat Bay Watershed

BTMUA

Task 1 - Establish Stakeholder Advisory Committee completed/ongoing

Task 2 - Visual Assessment Project Plan (VAPP) completed - July 2011

Task 3 - Watershed Technical Analysis completed - July 2011

Task 4 - Set Plan Objectives completed - September 2011

Task 5 - Identification of Watershed Management Strategies completed

- May 2012

Task 6 - Education and Outreach Program completed - October 2012

Task 7 - Quality Assurance Project Plan (undergoing revision)

Task 8 - Development of the Metedeconk River Watershed Protection

and Restoration Plan completed

Task 9 - Development of Conceptual Design Plans (under review)

Task 10 - Final Report

Task 11 - Implementation (Phase 2) Scope Development

Project Tasks / Status

Stakeholder Meetings

SAC meetings held at key project stages

1. Kickoff “breakfast” meeting; project introduction, preliminary goals & objectives (1/13/10, MRYC, Brick)

2. Review of SVA & Watershed Technical Analysis findings (4/27/11, Ocean County College)

3. Finalize watershed plan goals & objectives (7/13/11, Brick Twp)

4. Watershed management strategies review and prioritization with decision support tool (11/29/11, Howell)

5. Draft Metedeconk watershed plan (4/26/12, Jackson)

Steering Committee

1. Draft SVA & Technical Analysis; SAC meeting planning (3/9/11)

2. Watershed strategies & prioritization; E&O and QAPP (10/25/11)

Education & Outreach Committee (1/31/12)

Task 8 – Development of Watershed Plan

Draft plan open for public

comment – April-May 2012

Plan revisions; discussions

with municipalities to gather

additional, local-priority

implementation projects –

summer/fall 2012

Meetings/presentations to

NJDEP - May & December 2012

NJDEP/USEPA Region II review

and comments addressed –

winter/spring 2013

PLAN FORMALLY APPROVED BY NJDEP MAY 23, 2013


Plan is a work product of:

Stakeholder Advisory Committee

Steering Committee

Education & Outreach Committee

Diverse and representative group of watershed interests

Committee input vital to the success of project

Based upon stakeholders’ goals, objectives and priorities

Result is plan built consensus that is broadly supported

Will help secure successful plan implementation


Lots of public interest in the Metedeconk watershed plan

Presentations:

New Jersey Environmental Federation (NJEF) Annual

Conference (April 6, 2013, Georgian Court University)

New Jersey Water Environment Association (NJWEA)

Annual Conference (May 15, 2013, Bally’s Atlantic City)

Awards:

2012 Barnegat Bay Partnership Guardian of the Bay Award

2012 Ocean County Freeholders’ Clam Digger Award

2013 NJ Association of Environmental Authorities

Wave Award, Forward Thinking Category

Summary of Major Issues

Stormwater is the primary cause of problems within the watershed

Impervious Cover

%Impervious

ChannelStability

Water Quality

StreamBiodiversity

Pollutantsof Concern

Characteristic

0-10 StableGood to Excellent

Good to Excellent

Sediment,temperature

Stable

11-25 UnstableFair to Good

Fair to Good…&

nutrients,metals

Unstable

26-100Highly

UnstableFair to Poor

Poor …& bacteria Highly unstable

Percent impervious cover within the “unstable” category

from Schueler, 1995



Overall water quality still holding, but degrading

TMDLs & 303(d)

Water Quality: Surface Water

BTMUA Monitoring Program

Extensive, including 68 samplingstations

North and South Branches

Routine samples collected at or immediately upstream of intake

USGS, EPA

List of Identified ImpairmentsSubbasin HUC14 Area (mi

2) Subwatershed Name TMDL 2010 Integrated List (Priority Ranking)

NB 1 02040301020010 8.6Metedeconk R NB

(above I 195)

Phosphorus, Stream

Fecal Coliform

Dissolved Oxygen (M)**, Arsenic (L), DDD(L),

DDT(L), DDE(L), Chlordane in Fish Tissue(L),

Mercury in Fish Tissue(L), PCB in Fish

Tissue(L), Turbidity*, Lead*

NB 2 02040301020020 10.9Metedeconk R NB (Rt 9

to I 195)

Stream Fecal

Coliform

Dissolved Oxygen(M)**, Temperature(M),

Arsenic(L), Turbidity*

NB 3 02040301020030 6.1 Haystack BrookStream Fecal

ColiformCause Unknown(M)

NB 4 02040301020040 4.8 Muddy Ford BrookStream Fecal

Coliform

TP(M), TSS(M), Arsenic(L)**, Mercury in

Water Column(L)

NB 5 02040301020050 7.9Metedeconk R NB

(confluence to Rt 9)

Stream Fecal

ColiformTemperature(M), Arsenic(L)**, Lead*

SB 1 02040301030010 5Metedeconk R SB

(above I 195 exit 21 rd)

Stream Fecal

ColiformDissolved Oxygen (M)**, Arsenic (L), Lead*

SB 2 02040301030020 5.6

Metedeconk R SB

(74d19m15s to I 195

X21)

Stream Fecal

ColiformTurbidity*

SB 3 02040301030030 7.6

Metedeconk R SB

(Bennetts Pd to

74d19m15s)

Stream Fecal

Coliform

Cause Unknown (M), Polychlorinated

biphenyls(L), Mercury in Fish Tissue(L),

Chlordane in Fish Tissue(L)

SB 4 02040301030040 7.8Metedeconk R SB (Rt 9

to Bennetts Pond)

Stream Fecal

Coliform, Lake Fecal

Coliform

Arsenic(L)**

SB 5 02040301030050 4.8Metedeconk R SB

(confluence to Rt 9)

Stream Fecal

ColiformArsenic(L)**, Lead*

CNFL 1 02040301040020 9.2Metedeconk R

(Beaverdam Ck to confl)

Stream Fecal

Coliform, Lake Fecal,

Total Coliform

Arsenic(L)**, Cause Unknown(M)

* = listed on draft 2012 303(d) list

** = listed on 2010 303(d) List, but NOT included on draft 2012 303(d) list




TMDLs & 303(d)

Natural flow regime is degrading




TMDLs & 303(d)

Natural flow regime is degrading

Data gaps

Groundwater data

Antiquated infrastructure


Management Strategies Summary

1. Retrofit existing stormwater detention basins

2. Install structural BMP at existing direct outfalls; where

feasible

3. Source control and flow path BMPs (runoff reduction at the

source); treatment train approach

4. Resource conservation and protection

5. Strengthen stormwater management ordinances for more

Low Impact Development (LID), zero runoff goal

6. Aggressive watershed education and outreach


Two-Fold Prioritization Approach

1. HUC14 sub-watershed basis

- Water quality (stream impairments)

- Runoff reduction

2. Individual projects

- Identified by stakeholders

- Identified by project team:

- Stream visual assessments

- Rutgers stormwater planning tool

- NJEIT proposals not awarded

- Etc.*

Implementation Projects

Watershed # ProjectsNB2 13

NB5 13

SB5 8

CFL1 11

NB4 5

NB1 2

NB3 10

SB4 14

SB2 3

SB3 14

SB1 0

More than 90 projects identified to date

Watershed Plan Implementation

Stakeholder committee involvement

“Planning” Committee “Implementation” Committee

Convene on regular schedule to discuss plan implementation

Initial funding for implementation projects:

$466,000 from current NJDEP grant

$700,500 319(h) grant just awarded from NJDEP

~$1.2 million total

New Metedeconk Watershed website forthcoming

http://brickmua.com/metedeconk/watershed.asp

Watershed Plan Implementation

Metedeconk watershed education and outreach

General and target audiences identified (e.g. municipalities,

businesses, civic groups, etc.)

Specific educational materials for implementation projects

Presentations to municipal planning boards, zoning boards and

environmental commissions

Water quality monitoring (QAPP)

Evaluate progress towards water quality objectives

Assess long-term trends in

watershed health

Implementation Projects

Project Rank

Model Stormwater Management/Low Impact Development (LID) Ordinance Designed for the Metedeconk Watershed

1

Brick Park & Ride Site (Visual Assessment Site TR1-2) 2

Stormwater Outfall at Route 9 (former Jamesway Site - Visual Assessment Site NF14)

3

Park along South Lake Drive (Visual Assessment Site SG) 4

Brick Plaza (Visual Assessment Site CBB-3) 5

Howell Township Fire Substation (Visual Assessment Site GH-1 - Maxim Southard Road)

6

Stormwater Basin off of Moses Milch Drive (Visual Assessment Site GR4) 7

Stormwater Discharge Pipe Near Arkansas Drive (Visual Assessment Site TR23-1) 8

Downtown Lakewood (Clifton Avenue) 9

Culvert beneath Pine Street (Visual Assessment Site SE-P) 10

Outfall at Maypink Lane & Juniper Place (Visual Assessment Site GR2) 11

Stormwater Discharge Pipe at Newbury School (Visual Assessment Site SPC-1) 12

Develop an LID Ordinance

Not included in conceptual designs but recommended for Phase 2

Conceptual Designs

Five projects:

Moses Milch basin in Howell

Rain garden in Lakewood (South Lake Drive)

Rain garden, soil decompaction, pervious asphalt in Jackson

Brick Plaza in Brick

84” stormwater outfall in Lakewood

Conceptual

Additional investigations necessary

– Need to resolve unknown items

Modification to occur during design

All include education & outreach

Costs

Conservative

Contingencies

– Assumptions

Private contractors

Fixed percentages for engineering, general conditions, etc.

Some or all need to be implementable in Phase 2

Refined during design

Moses Milch Drive Detention Basin

Moses Milch Drive: Howell

Retrofit existing detention basin

Major assumptions

Liner and underdrains do not exist

Soil infiltration is sufficient

Seasonal high water table is more than 4 feet from the surface

Recommends design follow Ocean County Retrofit Project’s Project Recommendations and Guidelines

Retrofit Existing Stormwater Basins

Moses Milch Drive Detention Basin

Conceptual cost estimate: $400,000

Within range from Ocean County basins

Opportunities to reduce cost

Design can be modified

Low flow channel

Planting plan, etc

Clifton Avenue Outfall: Lakewood

Outfall at Clifton Avenue: Lakewood

Two components:

Source control

End of pipe – constructed wetland

– End of pipe component cannot be implemented in Phase 2

Major assumptions

Slope/alignment of 84” pipe

Water table

Land acquisition / construction permitted

Outfall at Clifton Avenue

Constructed wetland

Conceptual cost: $1.3M (without land acquisition)

Relies on land acquisition

Significant project

Look for opportunities to reduce cost

– Length of pipe / connection to 84” pipe

Captures/treats a portion of the water quality design storm

Couple wetland with extensive source control

Can modulate source control / urban GSI

htt

p:/

/sto

rm-t

ree.

com

/pro

ject

s/

Brick Plaza: Brick

Brick Plaza

Represents a “blank slate” with multiple options

Conceptual design represents a sample

Good opportunity for partnership with owner of plaza

Detailed survey needed for evaluation of other alternatives

Brick PlazaConceptual cost estimate: $300,000

Major assumptions:

Soil will readily infiltrate (urban land)

Owner will approve

Local drainage needs to be better defined

Other alternatives

Re-grade and install trench

Include channel improvements

Retro-fit parking lot islands

Infiltration tree boxes

Green roofs, other htt

p:/

/sto

rm-t

ree.

com

/pro

ject

s/

Arkansas Dr. / Woodlane Rd: Jackson

Arkansas Dr / Woodlane Rd

Source control & drainage improvements

Water table in neighborhood – problematic

Sumps to storm sewer

Infiltration BMPs…..?

Improve drainage along Woodlane Rd

Soil decompaction at athletic field

Modular

Arkansas Dr / Woodlane RdConceptual cost estimate:

>$500,000 (asphalt)

– Can reduce with refined design (not entire lot)

$200,000 (source control)

$80,000 (rain garden)

– Likely require some type of pre-treatment (forebay / reduce sediment load)

Major assumptions:

Soil will readily infiltrate at rain garden and lot

Water table

South Lake Drive: Lakewood

South Lake Drive

Rain garden

Major assumptions

Water table

Pipe condition

South Lake Drive

Conceptual Cost Estimate: $100,000

Water table could be problematic

Additional sites could provide excellent opportunity

Conceptual Designs

Costs and designs will likely be refined with additional investigations

Common elements are need for detailed survey and seasonal high water table elevation

Some or all of all 5 can be implemented during Phase 2

Watershed Plan ImplementationConclusion

Implementation will be a long process

Important to maintain active Stakeholder Advisory Committee through implementation

BTMUA to continue to serve leadership role

Maintain strong working relationship with NJDEP, BBP and stakeholders towards common watershed goals

Metedeconk Plan is “Everyone’s Plan” – projects can/should be completed by all as opportunities arise

Leverage funding and partnership opportunities

Plan will be “living document” with updates (Table 5-3) as projects are completed and new ones are identified

Metedeconk website will be portal for status and updates

Robert KarlSource Water SupervisorBrick Township Municipal Utilities Authority1551 Highway 88 WestBrick, NJ 08724Tel: (732) 458-7000Fax: (732) [email protected]

Dan O’RourkeProject ManagerCDM Smith110 Fieldcrest AvenueEdison, NJ 08837Tel: (732) 225-7000Fax: (732) [email protected]

Project Contacts

metedeconk river watershed protection & restoration plan · metedeconk river watershed...

Documents