Sometimes living in the City makes one feel so wholly nestled in urban sprawl that the natural world vanishes from the mindscape. One dreams of trees in brick. So an active, outdoorsy person may suspect that the nearby fields of Central Park, or Prospect Park (or wherever the nearest green space may be) are his only respite. Actually, New York’s extensive waterways offer a great alternative: one of largest kayak networks in the country, with cityside docks and a wildlife refuge to boot.

Unbeknownst to many, New York City operates a unique Water Trail during the warmer months that consists of nearly fifty docks from in and around the Rockaways and Jamaica Bay all the way up along the Hudson, East, and Harlem Rivers. Landings occupy strategic sites on both the Upper and Lower Bays. Basically, if a waterway touches one of the five boroughs, there’s very likely bound to be a port in the vicinity.

Just south of Queens lies Jamaica Bay, an estuary that includes 25,000 acres of open water, salt marshes, and small grassy islands. It is a seasonal home to many waterfowl, and boasts large stretches of natural Long Island flora and fauna. Even more surprising, it lies entirely within the New York City metropolitan area.

The Sebago Canoe Club is a non-profit organization headquartered in Canarsie, Brooklyn affiliated with the American Canoe Association and in continuous operation for seventy-five years. The organization has partnered with the New York City Parks and Recreation Department to act as licensed concessionaire to New York City Water Trail users. Additionally the Club offers educational opportunities and coaching for participants in a wide variety of flat-water sports from kayaks to canoes, and sailboats.

For interested parties, the North Atlantic Canoe and Kayak, Inc. (NACK), another New York State non-profit corporation, also fosters a community of paddling enthusiasts. The NACK provides extensive safety instruction and practice sessions so members can hone their skills and enjoy what Long Island has to offer - safely. The group holds monthly meetings and coordinates member participation in ACA expeditions, such as a tour of the San Juan Islands in the Pacific Northwest two summers back.

Here’s the short of it. Water has always been at the heart of New York. If you’re looking for a way to explore the Island’s natural scenery, if you’d like to see the City from a different perspective, or if you’d like to keep active on the weekends, check out this awesome resource.

One must acquire a safety permit to use the launch points ($15), available from an office in each borough. Use necessitates compliance with all federal, state, and local boating laws and regulations. Participants must follow safe practices, such as carrying personal floatation devices (PFDs), current maps and charts. The Parks and Recreation Department also recommends satisfactory training (though not necessarily certification) in CPR, first aid, and treatment of hypothermia.

The New York City Water Trail operates from May to November.

Source(s):  http://www.paddling.net/articles/Trail23.html  |  http://www.nycgovparks.org/facilities/kayak  |  http://get-the-nack.org/library/history/  |  http://www.sebagocanoeclub.org/about.html  |  http://www.sailtasca.org/?page=History-59  |  http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_about/rules_and_regulations/rr_2-06.html  |  http://www.nycgovparks.org/facilities/kayak/1

This month New York Senator Charles E. Schumer introduced a bill in Congress to issue a five year moratorium on flood insurance plans for areas of Long Island recently designated “high-risk flood zones.” It is only the latest development in an on-going debate between irate homeowners and FEMA over the implications of the agency’s overhauled flood plain map.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) collected most of the data for its new Flood Insurance Study about two years ago with the hope of creating a more accurate and up-to-date Floor Insurance Rate Map (FIRM).  The hydrodynamics of a flood plain will change over time naturally, but real estate development and public works projects can affect drastic changes to the drainage basin.  Regardless many agreed that the existing maps were no longer useful as an indicator of a property’s actual flood hazard.

But now this new map has drawn significant criticism.

Prior to introducing the aforementioned legislation Senator Schumer criticized FEMA’s flood-mapping techniques, claiming that they fail to “reflect on-the-ground realities” about the communities they chart.  Although more cost-efficient, the GIS data mapping method used for the Study leaves a greater margin of error than a traditional ground-to-ground survey.  Long-time residents of various South Shore hamlets question why their neighborhoods, which have no documented history of significant flooding, might suddenly be at risk.

Others feel FEMA’s decision to change its base flood elevation (BFE) from eight to eleven feet to be an arbitrary one, or at worst one motivated by monetary gain.  For some homeowners this means an insurance rate on par with coastal real estate.  Surely there must be some mistake!

The proposed moratorium would waive the federal requirement for homeowners to purchase flood insurance for up to five years.  Schumer intends the measure to provide residents with sufficient time to challenge the FEMA maps.  After five years homeowners in high-risk areas would still be required to purchase flood insurance, but then at a gradually increasing rate for the next five years.  That addendum aims to ease homeowners into the new rates, some of which top out at $2000 a year.

Additionally residents who held flood insurance prior to the rezoning will be allowed to renew their policies at discounted prices comparable to most Preferred Risk Policies, so long as they provide documentation of their former flood zone status with that application.

Senator Schumer joined the cause of Long Island homeowners against FEMA’s new maps as far back as the Spring, and in response to local unrest FEMA arranged for a panel of representatives to attend town-hall-style meetings around the country to explain the methods and implications of the FIRM.  Throughout early November FEMA additionally performed spot checks on one hundred sites across Nassau County to amend any miscalculations.

Critics deny the usefulness of the spot checks, however, as they were carried out once more by FEMA engineers.  Skepticism will remain until a third party can carry out its own re-evaluation, and Schumer pushes the point even further: “FEMA has to go back to the drawing board,” he declared, “[and] not in a small way, but from scratch.”

In Nassau County alone, redrawn flood hazard lines upgrade 20,000 homes to AE or VE status, which denote high-risk flood plains and coastal affect zones, respectively.  An additional 8000 homes were removed from these risk areas, making the South Shore among the most keenly affected areas in the state.  North Shore and Suffolk residents on average have witnessed far less topsy-turvy.

Back in September at a Village Hall meeting in Valley Stream Deputy Mayor Joanne Antun dredged up a collection of historical documents from 1938 to illustrate the locale’s storm surge resiliency.  The records included minutes from the village hall meetings following in the wake of the Great Hurricane of 1938.

For a little historical background the Great Hurricane of 1938, also known as the “Long Island Express,” ranks among the costliest and deadliest storms in the nation’s history.  On Long Island alone 15,000 homes were damaged, nearly a third of them beyond repair.  Across the mid-Atlantic and New England nearly 2 billion trees were uprooted and roughly $306 million worth of damage was inflicted.  [Note:  Value not adjusted for inflation.]  The force of the Atlantic waves remapped whole sections of the South Shore and formed at least a dozen new inlets.

Even with these impressive statistics, the effects of flooding in Valley Stream contributed minimally to the damage.  Residents reported some localized flooding from storm water back-up, but none from coastal swells, which Antun claims to be the central concern of FEMA’s newest charts.  Homeowners all along southern Hempstead express a similar feeling of disconnect between FEMA’s numbers and reality.

Senator Schumer’s battle with FEMA over the new flood maps has not been exclusive to Long Island.  In May he pushed for FEMA to extend its ninety-day deadline for appeals so that residents of Onondaga County and the City of Syracuse could challenge the verity of their new hazard classification.  And somewhat reassuringly for Long Island homeowners, Schumer managed to pass a five-year reprieve for affected residents in Onondaga County very much like the one he now proposes for Nassau and Suffolk.  The United States House of Representatives approved the bill 239 to 182.

FEMA’s flood mapping debacle will have a considerable effect on the local real estate market.  Buyers can easily be intimidated by the cost of flood insurance premiums.  Still others will find the implications of the phrase “high-risk flood zone” more than sufficiently off-putting.  And yet for Island-dwellers—even ones so urbane as ourselves—flood insurance is far from wasted money.  According to FEMA, “more than 25 percent of all flood insurance claims are from moderate-to-low risk flood zones.”  It is worthy of consideration even for those outside high-risk zones.

Thus we might simplify the question here.  How do we identify the real risk of disaster?  And what is that risk worth?

New York RealEstateRama.  “Schumer Introduces New Legislation For 5 Year Flood Insurance Moratorium For  Long Island Homeowners.” http://newyork.realestaterama.com/.  December 2, 2010.  ||  Hackmack, Andrew.  “Flood Insurance Relief on the Way.”  Long Island Herald.  December 8, 2010.  &  “Schumer to FEMA: Start From Scratch.”  Long Island Herald.  September 15, 2010.

Four years of public opposition have finally sunk the Atlantic Sea Island Group’s (ASIG) proposal to construct a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal 13 1/2 miles off the coast of Long Beach, New York.  While the company’s decision to withdraw its application represents a victory for locals and environmentalists alike, the proposal’s dismissal from the public eye also leaves Long Island in the same quandary as before.  If energy consumption continues to increase, where will it come from?

Late in 2006 the Manhattan-based developer ASIG announced its project to install an artificial island called the Safe Harbor Energy port; they formally submitted an application to state and federal agencies the following year.  The plan detailed construction of a 60-acre artificial island a dozen miles off the coast and situated outside existing shipping lanes.  Developers expected that the site may process 2 billion cubic feet of LNG per day to provide power and jobs to residents of Long Island.  Due its location the plan required approval from authorities both in New York and New Jersey.

Liquefied natural gas is the same mixture of methane and other hydrocarbons present in any traditionally acquired source of natural gas.  The difference is that the natural gas is temporarily converted to a liquid form to make transport over long distances more efficient.  The Safe Harbor Energy port would act as a receiving station for international shipments of LNG—mostly from Russia—and convert the liquid back into a usable gas form.  Among the benefits cited by ASIG of switching to LNG are its relative inexpensiveness and the flexibility that having at least one station in operation might afford to consumers: options push prices down.  Proponents of such terminals also claim that switching to LNG would decrease the country’s dependence on the Middle East for fossil fuel resources.

Soon after the proposal went public, residents of the Rockaways and Long Beach, the town most proximate to the terminal site, rallied to have the application overturned.  The Central Long Island chapter of the Surfrider Foundation and a purpose-made Taskforce Against  LNG Island both organized rallies for the cause.

While natural gas has been touted as the greenest of the fossil fuels, the process of liquefaction, transport, and regasification requires extensive energy input.  A study conducted by Paulina Jarmillo at Carnegie Mellon University calculates that the sum of these added factors makes LNG nearly as dirty a fuel as coal.  Processing plants also typically release as a by-product nitrogen oxide, which was shown in a 1997 U. C. San Francisco study to correlate with higher rates of asthma, emphysema, hypertension, and heart failure.

Additionally the construction of the artificial island would disrupt marine life in the region considerably.  Though the terminal would occupy only 60 acres at the surface, it would expand below the tides to cover 110 acres of ocean floor with fill from Ambrose Channel.  Not only would this destroy a large swath of underwater habitat near to shore, but the commissioner of Long Beach’s Zoning Board of Appeals, Ray Ellmer, speculates that the construction could also release toxic debris leftover from a nearby decades-abandoned oceanic dumping site.

Adding to the aggravation, ASIG long delayed its release of an environmental impact statement.  The document was reported to be only 75% complete as of last October.  Even now it has not materialized.

Opponents of the plan were not exclusively environmentalists, however.  Both local lawmakers and businessmen were underwhelmed by the proposal to exchange one foreign fuel dependence for another.  Many residents of the seafaring community were not eager to have an industrial plant so close to their waterfront, a place they felt best left to boating and fishing.  Other town officials worried that the terminal, so close to New York Bay, could become a target for future terrorist attacks.

Despite a unanimous vote by the Long Beach City Council during the first quarter of 2009 to veto the project, the prospect loomed in the local consciousness and continued to attract attention.  As recently as this past April, environmental activists and lawmakers from across the South Shore—including both Democrat Dave Denenberg and Republican Denise Ford—were attending rallies to close the file on Safe Harbor for good.  At about the same time New Jersey Governor Chris Christie sided with the opposition.

In large part the events that pushed ASIG to withdraw its permit application from the Maritime Administration have less to do with the overwhelming local opinion against the project and more with the global economy.  With the aftermath of BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster still playing out in the Gulf of Mexico, the market viability of offshore energy stations looks less than stable to future investors.  Even though fears that a similar incident could occur here are somewhat misguided—natural gas does not produce a slick like oil—the flammable substance still presents great safety risks for improper handling.  Thus the application has been removed, but may be resubmitted at a point when the financial risks are less intimidating.  This fact has some of the South Shore’s most adamant crusaders still a tad apprehensive.

Now that some of the hubbub has settled, the dismissal of the Safe Harbor Energy port leaves New Yorkers much where they before: an imminent energy crunch.  While it is easy for a conscientious person to advocate higher efficiency homes and more responsible energy consumption, it is another task entirely to reverse a trend of several generations that favors expansion and the path of least resistance.  While individuals can affect change in their own habits, as Bayshore businessman Roger Jette has done in redesigning his factory to run off of solar power, the needs of a society can be met only by innovation at the problem’s source or a drastic shift in the cultural expectations.

This is the fork in the road faced not only by Long Island but by nations.  If not from imported fossil fuels, if not from nuclear reactors, where will the power come from?  And the complimentary query: how much do we really need?

Somewhere between these two questions lies a solution—however partial—to the problem at hand.  While residents of the South Shore may for a time find relief in the folding of ASIG’s proposed terminal, their victory is one battle in a greater war—a war that has no clear-cut heroes or villains.

By: Gwen Moran

Flooding risks, as well as the value of your home and your possessions, help determine whether the cost of flood insurance is worth it.  Homeowners may be required to carry flood insurance if their homes are in high-risk areas, called Special Flood Hazard Areas.

Damage caused by driving rain is usually covered under standard homeowners insurance policies. Once the precipitation hits the ground, however, all bets may be off. Homeowners insurance typically excludes damage resulting from “seeping water, snow melt, rising bodies of water like lakes or rivers, and any type of rising ground water,” says DonnaLyn Giegerich Zapcic, an insurance professional in Red Bank, N.J.

Flood insurance can fill that gap in coverage, but before you invest in it, take an hour or two to review your current homeowners’ policy. Based on your home’s flooding risks and the value of your possessions, you might have enough protection already. If not, the cost of flood insurance averages $540 a year.

How to get flood insurance

Getting flood insurance is the easy part. Homeowners can purchase coverage through the National Flood Insurance Program, so long as their communities participate. (Most communities do.) The program, part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, will insure homes no matter the risk of flooding, though premiums will vary accordingly.
�
Homes located in the highest-risk areas, known as Special Flood Hazard Areas, may even be required by lenders to carry flood insurance, especially when the home is financed with a federally insured mortgage. Homes in Special Flood Hazard Areas have a 26% chance of experiencing flooding over the life of a 30-year mortgage.
�
Flood policies through this federal program are purchased from traditional insurance companies. Call NFIP at 1-888-379-9531 for a referral. The maximum coverage limit is $250,000 for damage to the building and an additional $100,000 for damage to the contents. The annual premium for a residential policy that covers contents only in a low-risk area can run as little as $39; the cost can approach $6,000 to cover the building and contents of a home in a high-risk coastal area.

Weigh cost of flood insurance vs. benefits

Start by assessing your home’s risk of flooding, says Etti Baranoff, associate professor of risk, insurance, and finance at Virginia Commonwealth University. Has your neighborhood flooded in the past? Homeowners can view FEMA flood maps online.

Once you have a good handle on your risk profile, consider the potential loss you would sustain in case of a flood, says Baranoff. The average flood claim is $33,000, according to NFIP, but even an inch of water can cause thousands of dollars’ worth of damage to a home and its contents.

Damage done by an inch of floodwater

Source: National Flood Insurance Program

“Look how many people buy the insurance coverage on their cellular phones…when it’s a major catastrophe that can really cost you,” Baranoff says. “If you’re the type of person who buys the cellular phone insurance, you want to be sure you’re acting within your risk tolerance.”
�
To get an idea of your liability, take a day to create a home inventory of your possessions, as well as estimate the cost of repairing or rebuilding your home. You might even find that the NFIP policy limits are inadequate. If so, check with your agent about rates for private flood insurance.

Additional flood resources for homeowners

Uncle Sam offers other assistance to homeowners who may become victims of flooding, in addition to flood insurance. Take taxes, for instance. The IRS will give some flood victims extra time to file returns, and it may be possible to take tax deductions for flood losses. Read IRS Publication 547, “Casualties, Disasters, and Thefts.”
�
If flooded homes are located in declared federal disaster areas, homeowners may be eligible for low-interest loans through the Small Business Administration. (You don’t need to own a small business to qualify.) It’s possible to get up to $40,000 to replace or repair clothing, furniture, cars, or appliances, and up to $200,000 to repair or replace primary residences to pre-flood condition.
�
One quirk to keep in mind when it comes to SBA assistance: In high-risk areas, aid may be contingent upon a homeowner already having flood insurance. Because of this, SBA assistance shouldn’t be construed as a fool-proof safety net.

On the Great Peconic Bay at Cutchogue Harbor rests the quiet hamlet of New Suffolk.  Though the smallest community in Southold Town, the area boasts navigable creeks, deep fish-rich waters, and nearly 350 years of settlement history.  Descendants of one 17th century farming family still work the nearby fields, and the town’s fewer than 400 residents often convene in the summer months for potlucks, yoga, or other recreational activities.  This relaxed atmosphere has made the area a popular destination for weary city-dwellers and a haven for summer residents.

Three decades ago the village witnessed the first of a series of attempts by private developers to commercialize the area.  In each instance New Suffolk’s residents have rallied together to oppose projects that might threaten the community’s rural charm, natural scenery, or historic structures.

After years of weighing in on the potential impact of building projects, several members of the New Suffolk Civic Association decided to take the future of the New Suffolk waterfront into their own hands.  To that end they founded in 2005 the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF), a non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation of the town’s precious waterways.  With help from the Peconic Land Trust, the NSWF has worked to raise money for the purchase of the bayside properties.  Upon that success, they intend a laundry list of renovations.  Among these they hope to repair  the town’s storm-damaged docks, many of which were built at the turn of the last century.  Other proposals include the addition of a community amphitheater and a maritime history museum to honor the site’s role as home to the first United States Navy submarine base.

As much as land, water, or wildlife, the NSWF is seeking to preserve an historic identity, one shared by a very small but dedicated community.  New Suffolk is a place where the character of the village speaks for itself.

The Town of Hempstead has taken up action to plant 3 acres of beach grass along the dunes west of Point Lookout this winter.  Beach grass has a deep root system which allows it to reach down to the water table.  It thrives in arid, nutrient poor conditions so it a terrific match for sandy dunes.  The root structure forms a net below the ground while spreading horizontally which helps to stabilize the dunes while the tops of the plants, which can reach up to 3′ tall, assists with dune height by capturing sand blowing in the wind.  The Town’s strategy is an eco-friendly, affordable solution to beach erosion and will help protect the more than 1,000 residences in Point Lookout and Lido Beach.

Black Sea Bass, which can be found in and around Long Island’s waters from May through September, have had NY State impose new fishing regulations.  As proposed, the recreational fishing season will be reduced from 12 months to 2 months, June and September.  These rules have come on the heels of new  NY State license fees for salt water fishing and increased limits on fluke, causing angst among both recreational anglers and charter boat captains.  Is it fair?  Is it necessary to sustain a viable balance in our coastal waters?  What do you think?

The DEC moved last week to include the Great South Bay along with other waterways & inlets around Suffolk County to include them on their “impaired list”.  Inclusion on this list opens the way for Federal monies to help address the recurring blooms of brown tide algae.  Inclusion on the Federal list does not affect recreational boating or public access.  The final proposed list is sent to the EPA for approval  April 1st.  Other waters include were Moriches Bay, Shinnecock Bay & Inlet, and Quantuck Bay.  Hopefully this designation will result in State action to limit nitrogen flowong from septic systems & storm water run off.

New York Secretary of State Lorraine Cortés-Vázquez today announced $23.8 million in funding from the state Environmental Protection Fund’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program for 90 projects across New York.  These awards cover a variety of planning, design and construction projects that focus on economic, community, environmental and recreational improvements, reinforcing Governor Paterson’s commitment to improving both local economies and the environment.  The following is a list of local projects.  A complete list of the 2009-2010 grant awards may be found on the Department of State’s website at www.dos.state.ny.us.Nassau County

Town of Oyster Bay: Hempstead Harbor to Cold Spring Harbor Blueway Trail
The Town of Oyster Bay, in collaboration with the Friends of the Bay and the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee, will complete the planning of a Blueway Trail through Hempstead Harbor, the Long Island Sound and the Oyster Bay/Cold Spring Harbor watershed area.  The project will identify trail heads that are best-suited for access, adjacent recreational facilities and other amenities, as well as ecological and cultural resources along the trail.  The project will generate engineering and feasability reports, design options, a final plan and a Blueway Trail Map.
Total Project Cost: $152,500   Amount Awarded: $76,250

Suffolk County

Town of East Hampton: Hard Clam/American Oyster Enhancement/Restoration in Three Mile and Napeague Harbors
The Town of East Hampton will undertake restoration of Hard Clams and American Oysters in the State-designated Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats of Three Mile Harbor and Napeague Harbor.  The Town’s aquaculture personnel will seed and deploy 1,000,000 oysters and 750,000 clams to each harbor over the course of two years.  Seed plantings are expected to result in increased harvestable product for town residents while adding to dwindling clam and oyster stocks, enhancing reproductive potential and immediately augmenting bio-filtration capacity in these harbors.
Total Project Cost: $265,312   Amount Awarded: $132,656

Town of Huntington: Heron Park Improvements
The Town of Huntington will complete development of Heron Park on Mill Pond at Centerport Harbor.  Grant funding will support site preparation and the installation of retaining walls, fencing, guide rails, decorative lighting, benches, walking paths, plantings and other park amenities.
Total Project Cost: $150,000   Amount Awarded: $75,000

Town of Islip: Sayville and West Sayville Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
The Town of Islip will focus preparation of its Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan on the coastal hamlets of Sayville and West Sayville on the Great South Bay in the South Shore Estuary Reserve.  The plans will focus on community waterfront land use issues, public access to the shore and water quality.
Total Project Cost: $100,000   Amount Awarded: $50,000

Town of Islip: Implementation of the Green’s Creek and Brown’s River Watershed Management Plan
The Town of Islip will implement the Green’s Creek and Brown’s River Watershed Management Plan through capital improvement projects that will collect and filter stormwater runoff at Brook Street in the hamlet of Sayville before it can enter the Great South Bay.  The project will design and install leeching pools along Brook Street and replace asphalt, curbing and landscaping.
Total Project Cost: $200,000   Amount Awarded: $100,000

Village of Northport: Village of Northport Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
The Village of Northport on the Long Island Sound will prepare a draft Local Waterfront Revitalization Program that will address protection and preservation of its harbor waterfront and natural resources, and plan for climate change and sustainable design.
Total Project Cost: $57,000     Amount Awarded: $28,500

Village of Port Jefferson: Village of Port Jefferson Revitalization Plan
The Village of Port Jefferson, in collaboration with the Town of Brookhaven, will prepare a village revitalization plan for the upper business district on Main Street.  Applying Smart Growth principles and economic development strategies, the plan will focus on reclaiming the 2,000 foot south shoreline as a public place, connecting the Village’s lower business district to the harbor through the creation of a Village Square and replacing the Town of Brookhaven parking area with a Harbor Park.  The two municipalities will collaborate on a traffic study and the development of schematic designs that would be functionally and aesthetically appropriate to the area.  Final schematic designs, a feasibility report, analysis of construction requirements and SEQR review will be included.
Total Project Cost: $95,000     Amount Awarded: $47,500

Town of Shelter Island: Town of Shelter Island and Village of Dering Harbor Watershed Management Plan
The Town of Shelter Island, in partnership with the Village of Dering Harbor, will prepare a Watershed Management Plan.  The management plan will generate recommended management actions and strategies to address nonpoint source pollution and improve water quality.
Total Project Cost: $72,975     Amount Awarded: $36,487

Town of Southold: Implementation of the Town of Southold Hamlet Study - Phase II
The Town of Southold will update its Comprehensive Plan by updating underlying data and analysis and integrating long-term planning goals identified in its 2007/2008 Hamlet Revitalization Plan.
Total Project Cost: $137,136   Amount Awarded: $68,568

Town of Southold: Restoration of Goldsmith Inlet
The Town of Southold will assess, mitigate and restore the ecological functions and values of Goldsmith Inlet off the Long Island Sound to address the accretion of sand, loss of use due to degraded water quality, loss of littoral habitat and loss of low and high marsh habitat.  The Town will undertake a pollution source tracking analysis; a flush rate analysis; restoration of the littoral zone; non-native species removal; development of a Storm Water Pollution Plan; design and implementation of storm water volume reduction measures between the Town and the County; and installation of four catch basins as stormwater control retrofits.
Total Project Cost: $222,882   Amount Awarded: $111,441