HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppl for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:'"
APPLICATION FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
For
FISHERS ISLAND FERRY DISTRICT
FOOT of STATE STREET
NEW LONDON, CT
Project No. 202013
April 2002
Prepllred By:
OCEAN AND COASTAL
CONSULTANTS. INC.
35 Corporate Drin. TrumbuU, CT 06611 (203) 268-5007 FAX 268-8821
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OCEAN AND COASTAL
CONSULTANTS,INC,
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
May 17,2002
FEMA
LOMA Depot
P. O. Box 2210
Merrifield, Virginia 22116-2210
Reference: Request for Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)
Fishers Island Ferry District
New London, CT
Dear CLOMR Manager:
Ocean and Coastal Consultants, Inc. (OCe) is pleased to submit for your review, the enclosed
Request for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and supporting information in
which the Applicant seeks to revise the existing FIRM map for the above referenced site based
upon the expansion of a ferry terminal and construction of a new steel sheetpile bulkhead. This
request is based upon a detailed analysis taking into account the 100 year frequency tidal flood,
site specific bathymetry and exposure, calculated wave properties and proposed site specific
topography.
Please find enclosed the following items:
. Vicinity Map
. Site Photographs
. Property Information Form, MT-l Form 1
. Elevation Information Form, MT-l Form 2
. Riverine/Coastal Mapping Form, MT -2 Form 5
. Fill Information Forms, MT -1 Forms 3 & 4
. Coastal Analysis Form, MT -2 Form 9
. Revision Requestor and Community Official Form, MT -2 Form 1
. Coastal Structures Form, MT-2 Form 10
. Wave Analyses (WHAFIS) for Transects
. Electronic CHAMP Files
. Certified Property Survey
. Site Plan with Existing Flood Hazard Zones
. Site Plan with Revised Flood Hazard Zones
. Copy of Property Deed
. Flood Insurance Rate Map 090 I 00-0001-C (with site noted)
. CLOMR Application Fee for the Amount of$4,000
. Bulkhead Structural Analysis
. Additional Project Information
35 CorpOfote Drtve. Trumbull. CT 06611 (203) 268-5007 FAX (203) 268-8821
http://www.ocean-coastol.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
",
"
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
May 17, 2002
Page 2
All of the calculations used to support the proposed actions were based upon linear wave theory
methods provided in the US Army Corps of Engineers Shore Protection Manual (1984). The
project site is situated in New London Harbor which is hydraulically connected to the Long
Island Sound as depicted in the attached NOS chart no. 13205. Nine (9) transects were analyzed
across Long Island Sound and continued within New London Harbor, using waves generated by
the 1 DO-year flood conditions. The significant wave height was determined using a restricted
fetch analysis in the "Wind Adjustment and Wave Growth" module of the US Army Corps of
Engineers Automated Coastal Engineering System (ACES) computer program. The wave
transformations were performed utilizing the WHAFIS model as provided in the CHAMP
program. The detailed WHAFIS simulation demonstrated that some local revisions of the flood
hazard zones as shown on the existing FIRM would be appropriate if the site is expanded and the
new bulkhead is constructed as proposed. These transect analyses have been enclosed for FEMA
review.
We appreciate your timely review of this application. Please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned should you require any additional information regarding the proposed change of
flood zone designation.
Very truly yours,
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Stanley M. White, P.E.
President
cc: Reynolds duPont, FIFD
Mark Easter, FIFO
Joshua Horton, Supervisor, Town of Southold
Richard Smith, Robinson & Cole
Keith Neilson, Docko, Inc.
Richard M. Brown, City Manager, City of New London
encl: As stated
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC,
.,-..-...,- ..... .
. .
1',:f;'-:;');:';~;;;'j;f:f~;W:,;:;<,,;p.';; '-, ......
;"I,:.pCEANANQCOASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
-" '''--' . . .':""'35 CORPORATE DRIVE -,
. <.,--:' 'TRUMBULL, CT 06611
PH. 203-268-5007 .
~
!;j068
. ",' ',','!. ',;" "'" .
WESTPORT NA riONAL BANK'
51-1325.211 ,
" : .' '. -,', ~.':, :' - , ! > . ".
"
I
I
I
I
CHECK DATEMay 17, 2002
~
.
J
f[]
PAY
Four Thousand and 00/100 Dollars
AMOUNT
$4,000.00
i
I
;
.
.!
€
~
.
TO
National Flood Insurance Program
8401 Arlington Division
F airfax VA 22031
...
AI.,QTS-'''\''''c~_"'OO 50b811' _I_:~ 2 ~ :__~_~!n~l:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I EIDDEUIllEIU......_. .....,,,..... -- - -
5068
Invoice ~umber Date Voucher Amount Discounts Previous Pay I Net Amount
2 5/17102 0007714 4,000,00 ! 4,000.00
National Flood Insurance Progra Totals 4,000.00 I 4,000.00 i
3 1 , I
I
I
I
I
I:
I
I
1
I
I:
I
11
1
I.:
11
I'
1
1
1
1
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
TABLE OF CONTENTS
New London, CT
April 2002
Descriotion
Transmittal Letter
Vicinity Map
Flood Insurance Rate Map 090 I 00-000 I C
Site Photographs
Property Infonnation Form (MT-I Form I)
Elevation Information Forms (MT-I Forms 2 & 5)
Fill Information Forms (MT-I Forms 3 & 4)
Revision Requestor (MT-2 Form I)
Riverine/Coastal Mapping Forms (MT-2 Form 5)
Coastal Analysis Forms (MT-2 Form 9)
Coastal Structures (MT-2 Form 10)
Wave Analysis
Bulkhead Design Analysis
Temporary Wave Barrier Design
Runup & Overtopping Analysis
WHAFIS 3.0
Existing Conditions Property Survey
Proposed Conditions Property Survey
OCC Drawing Detailing Existing Flood Hazard Zones
acc Drawing Detailing Proposed Flood Zone Modifications
Annotated FIRM Panel
Certified Copy of Property Deed
Increased BFE Acknowledgment Letter
Additional Project Drawings
Section
Attachment I
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
Attachment 5
Attachment 6
Attachment 7
Attachment 8
Attachment 9
Attachment 10
Attachment II
Attachment 12
Attachment 13
Attachment 14
Attachment 15
Attachment 16
Attachment 17
Attachment 18
Attachment 19
Attachment 20
Attachment 21
Attachment 22
Attachment 23
OCEAN AND COAST AL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'.
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, cr
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 1
VICINITY MAP
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
,I
'I /...1'
I
I ~~
~ ~ .....
%
IV
I,)"
I _oa ~
r--~
I -~ -~
I
TAlCtN FROM DelORWE WAPEllPERT
I ....oows ."..
I
I
I
I
'".'
~ 1/>,\~c...~~;p;p,,~:;-, '/\k 1""01
I;; ~L '''"""''f." of. " ~ ]~
v. ~ ~'t--"'{:" .....1\:""- I" \
'C~~ ~ <,g,S'{) ~ \. ...::zeol. S'o, MemOdOI,...rae \ '-95 '"
t DO, ~~~'\ \~ \4T" V \ ~
~ "r .'!j;.~- \~ 5 ,nTW "'h'Op Poln' v--~
~
l~ ('
- "'~ 'lr ;]
- " }! YrE:OERA~ 'I,. ~,:\..
............. -r I ~iom' em riol P rk J.- J
\ \ ~ ~~ L ~
\ 'O~ " e N/L~n ~
T r(~ c~.. o...fJ~ ~.
l,go I ~ ~
,,~ \k ,j
~~~~
WA~Ui' ~ V /'
r~ ~
~rv J
y 'I
I~ ~
'/
\l'#
~~..
~
""
BRaAn
(
~ QJ
~
~
!:i ...
QJ
m
-W
~
~~
ONUME r (
~
o
~
c:I3
~~I.Q ~~
\I'
,
SITE
lort G iswOld Stote Pork
'\
'N!MN
bA",
I."
'1- 10_ Grot, n
,~ 0
--'
11-
Sh1 0
)1
NEW
LON DON
H ARB 0 R
.
H r N
~
~
l~
<aREST V
W rlD~RKI~
CHES ER _,
RAINWIi:" \
DEANE I
~
of"
L
A'~O
'\ ~ let" ~A
--' ~ J.
yb&- A I'
..A ..0.'0 .
~> y;' ^
I ~~. PO<k\- / V
Oft Trumbull
o 2000
~
SCALE
4000 FT.
I
DE~ED BY: FISHERS ISLAND FERRY DISTRICT
I OCEAN AND COASTAl I . A~TED ..-
ORA'M\l BY; NEW LONDON, CT
~ C\l ..~.l!.2 0
CH[O<EO BY:
.. SKETCH NO.
I CONSULTANTS. INC. I VICINITY MAP SK-01
20201J\SK\1 (1)
.
.
I
I
.
..
-.
.
.
I
I
.
.
..1
.
I
.
I
.
Fishet:S Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 2
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
0901000001 C
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
. -
.
'. '.
'I
'.
" .- ~ ~
.'
.- -.. ~ . ...... ~
. 1
.'>.::' :;. .j
~ ,''- ..: -." ~
.' ",.-'-.-' -0: .-: - . .,:" :..... :..~' ::" $
:";.: ";::::/i;:, ~/::';::';:;". J I
:: . ....:,:::>:::;.j:::.:.;:/~~:~i(....~;.::.4 \
. ~ .
:.1 ... ...... ..::.:jy>';t . ~",",Emo"""__'_"
j , . - ':::;:::,:';.' 1;
I ..:........ '.i.::.... -:"K::'::.:.:.:..i:.....\ i.+. .
: - ." . :.. ";::i'J.:". ........ '. "::'~:'.''''': ....:.,.....,..,.:"..:<'...'.:",,:0.:."'.....:...'....'.".:.........,............"..'.. .;":'..'...:.';.':
1 I
"I
~I
rl
. ,'~.- . .".-
. ...-.....-.
....; .
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
CITY OF
NEW LONDON,
CONNECTICUT
NEW LONDON COUNTY
PANEL 1 OF 2
(SEE MAP INOEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED)
COMMUNITY.PANEl NUMBER
090100 0001 C
MAP REVISED:
AUGUST 19, 1985
....::....(. .'
. '.
L
.1
I
.-'- . .... ,,'
: ~t:~:)::):~t~\~:i:::~j:\:l:~)\;~i
I
il'
I
,
f.":':- ....
i
I
I -,
!
- '.
~::..:::::){;:~ :':': /.
- - .
... ," .....
-. .~~:jl;\.:~'l\:\~;jl\\::~,i:
. . .. .
.- .....;. ..'
I. .
I '.
I .
I'
. ,
I
. ,
I
500.\
100.\
Zone
Date
e,g.. i
100.'
500.'
Base
With :.
'.
--
Base :.
Whcl ~
Elev. :.
---
Zone i.
I; . .
I:\\~~\'~';ll:\t\'ll";i;;t~;\;l;l"i'.\\;::~~;:;;\;~;\i.
---
CORPORAl! _ !::.!MITS
'.
::':. ':\,:~.
*E r:'
---
---
---
zor'
;
A..
,:
I;
1..'-
--
Al
AI;
THAMES
RIVER
I' ..
i' ...:.'.....
,:J
Al-J1"
AC;
~.
E .
'J . . . .' ,: ~ ~
. ~
:r ..
..
<r "'
:> "'
<r
0 ..
.. '"
(
(
\
Ii
FLOOD ELEVATIONS
COASTAL BAS~DWARD OF 0.0 NGVD
APPLY ONLY LA
Vl.' ~~:::
1.' i
J" . '.
. .
>-
l-
I' .
.J
~,\.\..
0"
CeO
m'l
~o"
: ...\~G
; ~ \
STREET
Thi~
pOSt
ing
floo
diff.
$cn
EUGENE
I
8
S7
For
p,n
Ii
~,
j-
Co,
oh'
I:
-'"
~/.-:J.
COJ
shO
..
I
Ii
i
11
*1
I
ii
I.
I
IJ
'"I
IJ
1\
IJ
IJ
, I
I]
II
Ii
I]
IJ
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 3
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.~~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
PHOTOGRAPHS
Photo 1: Existing site looking north
Photo 2: Southwest comer of site. Riprap to remain.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
"
Photo 3: Existing ferry tenninal.
-
.
Photo 4: Existing ferry tenninal to be expanded by fill and re-graded.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 4
PROPERTY INFORMATION
(MT-l FORM 1)
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
:.
I
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
FEDERAl EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY a.M.B. Burden No. 3067-ll147
PROPERTY INFORMATION Expires May 31. 2001
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 1.63 hours per response. The burden estimate includes
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Proiect (3067-01481, Washinaton, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMS Control Number
Is disDlaved In the upper ri!lht corner of this form.
This form may be completed by the property owner, registered land surveyor, or registered professional engineer
1. Community Name of NFIP map panel on which the property is located: Citv of New London
County: New London
State: CT
Panel or Map Number: 090100 0001 C
Effective Date: Auaust 19. 1985
2. Street Address of Property: Foot of State Street
3. Description of Property Lot and Block (if a street address cannot be provided):
Fishers Island Ferrv Terminal
Foot of State Street
Mao 28. Block 108 Lot 2
Are you requesting that the SFHA designation be removed from (a) all of the land within the bounds of the property, (b) a
portion of land within the bounds af the property (a certified metes and bounds description of the area to be removed is
requiredJ, or (c) the structure(s) on the property? (Answer "a, " "b, "or "cj l!.
Is this request for (a) a single structure, (b) a single lot, (c) multiple structures, (d) multiple lots? (Answer "a," "b," "c" or "dj
~
4.
5.
6.
What is the type of constructian? (a) crawl space; (b) slab on grade; (c) basement; (d) other (explain). (Answer "a," "b,"
.c,.or-d") Q
7.
Is this reque~rior to the transfer of ownership of the property in question from a developer to an individual property
owner? U Yes 181 No
Is this request for (a) existino conditions, or (b) orooosed project? (Answer "a" or "bj !!
Has fill been placed on the property to elevate the ground elevation of the property, to elevate a structure(s), or to elevate
the ground elevations around a structure?!l!2 If yes, when? _
For proposed projects, will fill be placed to elevate this land or structure? m
8.
9.
10.
11.
If known, list the case number and/or the street address of previous requests that have been submitted to FEMA for this
property or adjacent properties?
12. One of the following documents Is requined of all cases:
1 have enclosed the following documents In support of this request
o a. Copy of the Subdivisian Plat Map (with recordation data and stamp of the Recorder's Office)
OR
181 b. Copy of the property Deed (with recordation data and stamp of the Recorder's Office), accompanied by a tax
assessor's map or other suitable map showing the surveyed location of the property with respect to local streets
and watercourses.
(For these maps a map scale must be provided and they should not be reduced or enlarged.)
PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS
FEMA Fonn 81-87
Property Infcnnation Fonn
MT-l Fonn 1 Page 1 of 2
I
'''1
I
181
The following documents should be enclosed as applicable:
Revnolds duPon!. Jr.. Chairman Company:
(please print or type)
53094 Main Road Southold. NY 11 971
(please print or type)
Daytime Telephone Number: 631-788-7463 Fax Number: 631-788-5523
I
l'
Ii
I:
If
I,
13.
Ii
~~J
I;
['I
I,
14.
Applicant's Name:
I
Mailing Address:
I,
'1
Date~
Ii
Ii
I
I
Ii
FEMA Form 81-87
c. Copy of the effective FIRM panel on which the property location has been accurately plotted (if the request is for
more than one lot/sfructure. this location must be certified by a licensed land surveyor or registered professional
engineer)
181
d. A map showing the location of any structures existing on or proposed for the property (certified by a licensed
land surveyor or registered professional engineer)
e. Metes and bounds description and accompanying map of the portion of the property to be removed from the
SFHA (certified by a licensed land surveyor or registered professional engineer) (only if the request is for a portion
of land within the bounds of the property, not the entire lot or the structure(s) only)
o
181
f. Form 2 Elevation Information form or A FEMA NFIP Elevation Certificate may be submitted in lieu of the
Elevation Information form (for structures/property located in Zone AO see instructions for further guidance.)
181
181
g. Form 4 Community Acknowledgment form (only if fill has been or will be placed)
h. Form 3 Certification of Fill Compaction form (only iffill has been or will be placed and the requesf is not for an
existing single residenfial structure)
i. Additional information: Wave and Structural Analvses Additional Site Plans
please specify
181
PAYMENT ENCLOSED
181
Processing fee (see instructions for processing fees and exemptions)
CLOMR-F
(Type of request)
$4000.00
(amount enclosed)
Check or money order only. Make check or money order payable to: National Flood Insurance Program. If
paying by Visa or Mastercard, please complete or submit the Credit Card Information form (Form 1A) which
follows this form.
All documents submitted in support of this request are correct to the best of my' knowledge. I understand that any false
statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001.
Fishers Island Ferrv District Town of Southold
Property Information Form
MT-1 Form 1 Page 2 of 2
.:'I~
"
"
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 5
ELEVATION INFORMATION
(MT-l FORMS 2 & 5)
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
-'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.......
-
I
I
I
I
I
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY C.M.B. Burden No. 3067-0147
ELEVATION INFORMATION Expires May 31, 2001
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form Is estimated to average 0.63 hour per response. The burden estimate Includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Proiect 13067-0148), Washinoton, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMS Control Number
is disDlaved In the upper right corner of this form.
This form must be completed by a registered professional engineer or licensed land surveyor. These forms should not be
used for requests Involving Channelization, Bridges/Culverts, or Fill in the FEMA-Designated (regulatory) Floodway;
Instead, forms entitied Revisions to National Flood Insurance Program Maps (MT-2) should be used. The Elevation
Information Form must be Included for all requests, unless the request Is for a determination In which the FIRM already
shows the property to be CLEARL Y outside the SFHA. Cases In which the determination for the property or structure Is
uncertain will require the submittal of elevation data to provide a definitive determination. "an Elevation Certificate has
been completed for the subject property, It may be submitted In lieu of this form.
~eem&ruclionsrordeffiH~
1. Community Name: City of New London
2. Legal Description of Property: Fishers Island Ferrv District
3. Flooding Source: New London Harbor Lono Island Sound
4. Based on the FIRM, this property is located in Zone(s): V9 lEI. 121. A7 lEI. 1 0\
5. Is any portion of this property located in the regulatory floodway? o Ves 181 No
Are any structures (existing or proposed) located in the regulatory floodway? o Ves 181 No
6. Is this area subject to land subsidence or uplift? o Ves 181 No
If yes, what is the date of the current releveling? _
Far Items 7-11 multiple lotslstructures, complete the appropriate column(s) of the Summary of Elevations _ Individual Lot
Breakdown form, Identifying the elevation for each lot/structure. To support items 9,10, and 11, please note a map
(certified by a licensed surveyor or registered professional engineer) may be required to relate the ground elevations and
locations of structures or lots. The map should Indicate whether It reflects "as-bullf' or "proposed" conditions.
7. What is the BFE far this property? (Provide elevalion to nearest tenth of a foot and datum)
12 Elevation NGVD Datum (NGVD, NAVD or other) ..
8. How was the BFE determined? {attach a copy of the Flood Profile or table from the FIS report, If appropriate, a copy of a
letter from a state agency establishing a BFE, or other necessal}' supporting inrormation including Forms 3 and 4 from
rorms entitled, "Revisions to National Flood Insurance Program Maps" (MT-2)).
see FIS in Wave Analvsis. Attachment 11
-
-
9. If this request Is to remove the SFHA designation from a parcel of land or lot{s), what Is the existing or orooosed elevation
of the lowest grade; that Is, the lowest ground on the property or within the metes and bounds description of the portion
being removed? (Provide elevation to nearest tenth of a foot and datum) 4.1' Elevation ~ Datum
PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS
FEMA Form 81-87 A
Elevation Information Form
MT-1 Form 2 Page 1 of 2
I
10. If this request is to remove the SFHA designation from a structure(s), what is the elevation of the existing or orooosed
lowest adjacent grade; that is, the lowest ground touching the structure, including any attached decks or garage? (Provide
elevation to nearest tenth of a foot and datum) L..1: Elevation NGVD Datum
11. If fill has been/will be placed to elevate the structure(s) on this property, what is the existing or orooosed elevation of the
lowest floor, including basement, and/or attached garage? (Provide elevation to nearest tenth of a foot and datum) !l
Elevation NGVD Datum
12. Are the measurements in items 9 - 11 based on (a) proposed or (b) existing conditions? l!
13. If any of the above elevations were computed based on a datum different than the effective FIS, what is the conversion
factor? FIS Datum = Local Datum +/- feet
14. All information submitted in support of this request is correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false
statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001.
Name (please print or type): Stanlev M. White. P.E.
Title (please print or type): President. Ocean and Coastal Consultants. Inc.
Registration No.: 12042
Expiration Date: 01/31/03
State: CT
\\111111111111111
,,'t\ _ I'\.~ 1,/
~, ~ C;.J :~'V >. "
:or..'''' I."i~ /,
SO; 0" ....._h.~ "C" ~
~ <(,. I,'(.<t'< M ti-;>~ '"'> ~
~~/'<!>'~.>/' ('1<'
- , ~ . /', .'--
.::: f{i,J...:. '. ~,\ \...'::::.
=~:CI) -.. I ~=
-(I) , -
~ * \ 1112042 j * ~
~... ~.~~
. ~ '$-....{,f.r;Et~s.~,'.~l
. 'f1.~ ...... ~ ~
~~$IOIA\. ~ \"~~
-'''"''"Cll\''~
I
Date
Seal (Optional)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I CI:UA c:_ Q1 D'7^
1:1_"";..... I..f..........fi..... c:........
UT1c:_")D........."),.f')
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-.
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY O.M.B. Burden No. 3067-0147
SUMMARY OF ELEVATIONS . INDIVIDUAL Expires May 31, 2001
LOT BREAKDOWN
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE. NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 0.67 hour per response. The burden estimate includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering. and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Proiect (3067-01471, Washinoton, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMB Control
Number is disDlaved in the upper riaht corner of this form.
Community Name: City of New London
Property Name or Address: Fishers Island Ferrv District Terminal
LOT BLOCK LOWEST LOWEST LOWEST BASE (100- FOR FEMA
NUMBER NUMBER LOT FLOOR ADJACENT YEAR) USE ONLY
ELEVATION' ELEVATION' GRADE TO FLOOD
STRUCTURE' ELEVATION
2 108 4.1 8 7.1 12
'For requests that an entire Ilarcel of land be removed from the SFHA; If the re~uest involves an area described
by metes and bounds, proviae the lowest elevation within the metes and boun s description
'For requests that a structure be removed from the SFHA when fill has been or will be placed on the property
the lowest floor, Including basement or garage, must be submitted
3For requests that a structure be removed from the SFHA the lowest adjacent grade to the structure, Including
an attached deck or garage, must be submitted.
FEMA Form 81-870
Summary of Elevations-lndMdual Lot Breakdown Form
Mr-l Form 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 6
FILL INFORMATION FORMS
(MT-l FORMS 3 &4)
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY O.M.B. Burden No. 3067-0147
CERTIFICA nON OF FILL PLACEMENT Expires May 31,2001
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average .35 hour per response. The burden estimate includes
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Coliections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Project (3067-0148), Washington, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMB Control Number is
displayed in the upper right corner of this form.
Citv of New London
Fishers Island Ferrv ~istrict Terminal. Foot of State Street
Property Name or Address
Community Name
The Fill is: 0 Existing 181 Proposed
I hereby certify that fill placed on the property to raise the ground surface to or above the base flood elevation in order to gain
exclusion from a Special Flood Hazard Area meets the criteria of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section
65.5(a)(6), listed below. For proposed fill, I hereby certify that it is designed in accordance with these criteria. 'Please note'
Both Section 1 and Section 2 must be certified; however, different individuals may certify them. As used herei n the
word certify shall mean an expression of the Consultant's professional opinion to the
SECTION 1 best of its information, knowledqelandtbelief, and does not constitute a
warranty or guarantee oy tne Consu tan .
The fill has been compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density obtainable with the Standard Proctor
Test. m~thod .or an accept~ble equivalent method for (check one of the following): (See attached
modIfIcatIon to thlS sentence).
181 a. Fill pads prepared for the foundations of residential or commercial structures
o
1.
b. Entire legally defined parcel (Note: if the location of fil!f.".? has not been determined, the fill
over the entire legally defined parcel must be comP'A~l!:d~6~ve criteria).
DaYl'd L Freed ~....", Of ......'Nl:o't''-
Nam~e (please pz.nt r~ty.):" ..."........1)\..1':.....'-"-'.-
. ~ J!' ,'.;Y-,g~ ~<<"~~(;, ~
.. .....0, It::) '"()'~-
~ . . .-
, ~ . 1 =
6Sign :;: \ : * ::
.:.. .. *\ No.15832 I ...
;1.3 't t7 UJI::? ?- -; .... I, 0 .... ~
Date Communi . rii"fi .......
Engineer's sth ~'Number
2.
Fill slopes for granular materials are not steeper than one vertical on one-and-one-half horizontal (steeper
slopes must be justified); and
3.
Adequate erosion protection Is provided for fill slopes exposed to moving flood waters {slopes exposed to
flows with velocities of up to 5 feet per second {fpsl during the base flood must, at a minimum, be protected
by a permanent cover of grass, vines, weeds, or similar vegetation; slopes exposed to flows with velocities
greater than 5 fps during the base flood must, at a minimum, be ~rf{f!d!fJJIl'1fl/ropriateIY designed stone,
rock, concrete, or other durable productsl. :0.' r::ff CON",,... ',-
~ ~t, ...........'"O~ ~
Dayid L. Freed $,~ ,,~,O\..".Q:" t\ ~
...;~ I."",g.~~""""
_"oI.q (:).~-
- . .~-
= \' ; =
- :. =
." .. No.1S832 ,. Jr'"
~.. . ~.'"
-:, ..,!'CE'",E9 .'~' Ji) ~
, ........ ~--..."
Community llJ.'IIlm ~
Engineer's Seal idilltM\on Number
hnat,:,re
1,1 ZtJd"Z-
Date
)3
Page 1 of 2
.
.
.
.
I
.
I
I
I
.
.
I
.
..
.
.
.
I
.
FISHERS ISLAND FERRY DISTRICT TERMINAL, FOOT OF STATE STREET
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
CERTIFICATION OF FILL PLACEMENT (continued)
SECTION 1: Replace Sentence with the following:
The fill placed above mean sea level is specified to be compacted to 95 percent of the
maximum density obtainable with the Standard Proctor Test method of an acceptable
equivalent method, while the crushed stone fill below mean sea level will be placed in-
the-wet to a density near 95 percent, for (check one of the following):
Page 2 of 2
I
I
I
I
i
Ii
; I
I
lA
"
Ii
: I
II
LI
~
II
,-1
Ii
~.:
Ii
I'j
~_-J
II
I
~j
Ii
I
~j
~j
II
!
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY O.M.B. Burden No. 3067-0147
COMMUNITY ACKNOWLEDGMENT Expires May 31, 2001
OF REQUESTS INVOLVING FILL
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average .88 hour per response. The burden estimate includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Proiect (3067-0148\, Washinaton, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMS Control Number
is disDlaved in the upper riaht corner of this form.
Community Name: City of New London
Property Name or Address: Fishers Island Ferrv District. Foot of State Street
We hereby acknowledge receipt and review of this Letter of Map Revision (Based on Fill) request and have found that the
completed or proposed project meets or is designed to meet all of the community's applicable floodplain management regulations,
including the requirement that no fill be placed in the regulatory floodway. We understand that this request is being forwarded to
FEMA for a possible map revision. For proposed projects, we understand that FEMA is being asked to provide comments on the
potential effects of this project on the flood hazards of our community.
Community comments on the proposed project:
-
-
-
-
-
-
It NT" IV · 0 tI .ALVc~ s
Community Official's Name (please print or type):
Address (please print or type): i/I U,vl CJJ.J !;t-
- AI t~<A.I U:J rv~ rr-..; o~Jf)o
-
Daytime Telephone Number. $--(,0 . 4I..n-r';).4~
-
C:i ~;:;t):ure Date
5-- I ]- 02-
PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS
FEMA Form 81-87C
Community Acknowledgment or Requesllnvolving Fill Form
MT-1 Form 4
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 7
REVISION REQUESTOR
(MT-2 FORM 1)
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY a.M.B No. 3067-0148
REVISION REQUESTER AND COMMUNITY OFFICIAL Expires April 30, 2001
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 2.13 hours per response. The burden estimate includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions
for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street,
S.W., Washington DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (3067-0148),
Washinaton, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of Information unless a valid OMS Control Number Is displayed In the upper right comer of
this form.
1. REQUESTED RESPONSE FROM FEMA
This request is for a:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
121 CLOMR A leller from FEMA commenting on whether a proposed project, if built as proposed, would justify a map
revision, or proposed hydrology changes (See 44 CFR Ch. 1, Parts 60,65 & 72).
D LOMR A leller from FEMA officially revising the current NFIP map to show the changes to floodplains,
floodway or flood elevations. LOMRs typically decrease flood hazards. (See 44 CFR Ch. 1 Parts 60 & 65.)
D Other Describe:
2. OVERVIEW
1. The basis for this revision request is (are): (check all that apply)
121 Physical Change 121 Improved MethodologylData D Floodway Revision
D Other Describe: _
Note: A photograph is not required, but is very helpful during review.
2. Fiooding Source: New London Harbor Lono Island Sound
3. Project Name/Identifier. Fishers Island Ferrv District
4. FEMAzone designations affected: VS EI. 12. A7 EI.l0
(example: A, AH, AO, Al-A30, A9S, AE, V, Vl-V30, VE, B, C, 0, Xl
5. The NFIP map panel(s) affected for all impacted communities Is (are):
Community No. Community Name State Map No. Panel No. Effective
Date
Ex: 480301 Katy, City TX 480301 00050 02108183
480287 Harris Countv- TX 48201C 0220G 09/28190
090100 City of New London CT 090100 ooolC 08119/85
6. The area of revision encompasses the following types of flooding and structures. Check all that apply.
Tvoes of Floodino Structures
D Riverine D Channelization
121 Coastal D LeveelFloodwall
D Alluvial fan D Bridge/Culvert
D Shallow Flooding (e.g. Zones AO and AH) D Dam
D Lakes 121 Fill
D Othe': (describe) 121 Other (describe) (l,u LK HE'll t>
PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS
~
FEMA Form 81-89
Revision Requester and Community Official Form
MT-2 Form 1 Page 1 of 2
I
4. ENCROACHMENT INFORMATION
1. Does the State have jurisdiction over the floodway or its adoption by communities participating in the NFIP?
DYes 181 No
I
I
If Yes, attach a copy of a letter notifying the appropriate State agency of the f100dway revision and documentation of the
approval of the revised floodway by the appropriate State agency.
2. Does the development in the floodway cause the 1% annual chance (base) elevation to increase at any location by more than
0.000 feet? 0 Yes 0 No 181 N/A
I
3. Does the cumulative effect of all development that has occurred since the effective SFHA was originally identified cause the base
flood elevation to increase at any location by more than one foot (or other increase limit if community or state has adopted more
stringent criteria - even if a floodway has not been delineated by FEMA)? 0 Yes 181 No
I
If the answer to either items is Yes, please attach documentation that all requirements of Section 65.12 of the NFIP
regulations have been met, regarding evaluation of alternatives, notice to individual legal property owners, concurrence of
CEO, and certification that no insurable structures are Impacted.
I
I
I
I
5. MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY
The community is willing to assume responsibility for 0 performing 181 overseeing compliance with the maintenance
and operation plans of the Fishers Island Ferry District Terminal
(Name)
flood control structure. If not performed promptly by an owner other than the community, the community will provide the
necessary services without cost to the Federal govemment.
Operation and maintenance plans are attached.
181 Yes 0 No
6. REVIEW FEE
ON/A
I
I
The review fee for the appropriate request category has been included. 181 Yes Fee amount: $4000
OR
This request is based on a federally sponsored flood-control project where 50 percent or more of the project's cost is federally
sponsored, or the request is based on detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies conducted by Federal, State, or local agencies to
replace approximate studies conducted by FEMA and shown on the effective FIRM; thus the project is fee exempt.
DYes
Please see Instructions for Fee Amounts
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7. SIGNATURE
Nole: I understand that my signature Indicates that all Information
submitted in s port of this request Is correct
----
Printed Name and nle of Revisioo Requester
Company Name
Telephooe No.: Dale:
CERTIFICATION BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEER AND/OR LAND SURVEYOR
ThiS~;:~.1,Sect65.2
..../
Signature
Stanlev M. Whne President of Ocean and Coastal Coosuttants. Inc.
Printed Name and nle of Revisioo Requester
Registr No. 12042 Expires (Dale) 01/31103 Stale CT
Type of UcenselExpertise: Professional Enain_
Nola: Signature Indl tes \hat the community understands, from the
revision requ I the mpacts of the revision on flooding conditions
In the commu
Signalure of Community Official
'i\IlMrJ M. 'bawll, err'! mM1f6ff2.
Printed Name and Trtle of Community Official
~y FF New /.ptl~ t.T
Community Name
Telephooe No.: 'f'f1-sUJI Dale:
Check which forms have been Included .
Fonn Name and INumber}
o Hydrologic (3)
o Hydraulic (4)
o Mapping (5)
o Channelization (6)
o Bridge/Culvert (7)
o Levee/Floodwall (8)
181 Coastal (9)
181 Coastal Structures (10)
o Dam (11)
o Alluvial Fan (12)
Reauired if ......
new or revised discharges
new or revised water.surface elevations
floodplainlf100dway changes
channel is modified
addnionlrevision of bridge/culvert
addnionlrevislon of IeveeJf100dwaIl
new or revised coastal elevations
addition/revision of coastal structure
addition/revision of dam
structures proposad on alluvial fan
I
I
Fishell's Xslan.J F eny Dis~JrJid
I
DImicICrt.t:J#J By Sp<<UlAdtfIM New Yori: SfIff# ~(lAM afNew Yeri. 1947, CJu.pter699)
Fishers IslanJ, New Yor!. 06390
ROBERT P. KNAUFF
I Ma1lfJger . S<<r<tary
T.I.pLoor. 631.788-7463
Fox, 631-~R 2002
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Ite,..old. dUPODl. Jr. Chainnan
1\081" F. Dol-en,.. ]1'.
Lillie M. AL......
Duid C. DIII'.L.m II
G.......J.F-..J..
I
I
Dewberry & Davis LLC
8401 Arlington Boulevard
Fairfax, VA 22031
I
Re: Fishers Island Ferry District Terminal
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
Conditional Letter of Map Revision
I
Dear Sirs:
I
This letter is submitted with respect to an application of the Town of South old to amend the Flood
Insurance Rate Map designation for the property of the Fishers Island Ferry District's ferry terminal at the
Foot of State Street in New London, Connecticut ("Ferry Terminal").
I
The Town of South old holds title to the Ferry Terminal property. The Fishers Island Ferry District was
created by Special Act of the New York State Legislature to acquire, construct, equip, operate and maintain
a public ferry for the transportation for hire of persons and vehicles, and goods, wares and merchandise, to
and from Fishers Island. (Chapter 620 of the Laws of 1957, N.Y.S.)
I
This letter will acknowledge that a goverrnnent agency must assume responsibility for overseeing
compliance with the maintenance and operation plans for the proposed modifications to the bulkhead at the
Ferry Terminal property.
I
I
The Fishers Island Ferry District ""ill be responsible for complying with the maintenance and operations
plans for the proposed bulkhead modifications. The Fishers Island Ferry District will review inspection
reports and take appropriate actions to ensure the bulkhead functions as designed to maintain the revised
flood zones of the area.
I
Sincerely, U___.
R~ont, Chairm
Fishers Island Ferry District
I
I
Cc:
Richard Brown, City Manager, City of New London, CT
Joshua Y. Horton, Supervisor, Town of South old, NY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
City of New London
181 State Street. New London, CT 06320. Phone (860) 447-5201 . Fax (860) 447-7971
May 17, 2002
Dewberry & Davis, LLC
8401 Arlington Boulevard
Fairfax, VA 22031
Re: Maintenance Program, Fishers Island Ferry District Terminal
New London, CT
It is our understanding that the Fishers Island Ferry District (FIFD) of the Town of
Southold, New York has applied to FEMA for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) based on the proposed expansion of the ferry terminal and construction of a
new bulkhead. One condition of the approval of the modification is that the Fishers
Island Ferry District develop a maintenance program for the bulkhead. The maintenance
program is to be overseen by a government agency.
The Town of Southold is willing to oversee the maintenance program for the Fishers
Island Ferry District (FIFD) terminal. The Town of Southold will review inspection
reports and recommendations made by an engineering hired by the FIFD.
Based on these facts, if maintenance and recommendations made by an engineer hired by
FIFD, are not carried out, the City of New London will notify FEMA that the necessary
maintenance/repairs have not been completed.
Sincerely,
.~Aff-.
Richard M. Brown
City Manager
cc: Town of South old, NY
Ocean and Coastal Consultants, Inc.
FEMA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, cr
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
, ATTACHMENT 8
RIVERINE/COASTAL MAPPING
(MT -2 FORM 5)
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
I
.
.
I
I
.
I
I
.
I
.
.
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY O.M.B No. 3067-0148
RIVERINE I COASTAL MAPPING Expires April 30, 2001
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 1.5 hours per response. The burden estimate includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions
for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street,
S.w., Washington DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (3067-0148),
Washinaton, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of Information unless a valid OMS Control Number Is dIsplayed In the upper right comer of
this form.
Note: Fill out one form for each flooding source studied
Community Name: City of New London
Flooding Source: New London Harbor Lana Island Sound
Project Namelldentifier: Fishers Island Ferrv District
This is a 181 Manual 0 Digital submission. Digital map submissions may be used to update digital FIRMs (DFIRMs). For
updatino DFIRMs. these submissions must be coordinated with FEMA Headquarters as far in advance as possible.
1. MAPPING CHANGES
1. A topographic workmap must be submitted showing the following information (check N/A when not applicable):
a. Revised approximate 1 OO-year floodplain boundaries (Zone A) .............................................................. 0 Yes
b. Revised detailed 100- and 500-year floodplain boundaries. ................................................................... 0 Yes
c. Revised floodway boundaries ..................................................................................................................0 Yes
d. Location and alignment of all cross sections with stationing control indicated. ....................................... 0 Yes
e. Stream alignments, road alignments and dam alignments. ....................................................................181 Yes
f. Current community boundaries. .............................................................................................................. 0 Yes
g. Effective 100- year floodplain and floodway boundaries from FIRM/FBFM reduced or
enlarged to the scale of the topographic workmap .................................................................................. 0 Yes
h. Tie-ins between the effective and revised 100-, 5OO-year and floodway boundaries............................... 0 Yes
I. The requeste~s property boundaries and community easements ...........................................................181 Yes
j. The signed certification of a registered professional engineer................................................................. 181 Yes
k. Location and description of reference marks ...........................................................................................181 Yes
I. Vertical datum (example: NGVD, NAVD) ................................................................................................181 Yes
m. Coastal zone designations tie Into adjacent areas not being revised ......................................................181 Yes
n. Location and alignment of all coastal transects used to revise the coastal analyze ................................181 Yes
o. V-zone has been delineated to extend landward to the heel of the primary frontal dune ........................ 0 Yes
DNa 181 N/A
DNa 181 N/A
DNa 181 N/A
DNa 181 N/A
DNa ON/A
DNa 181 N/A
DNa 181 N/A
DNa 181 N/A
DNa ON/A
DNa ON/A
DNa ON/A
DNa ON/A
DNa ON/A
DNa ON/A
DNa 181 N/A
If any Items are marked No or N/A please attach an explanation.
2. What is the source and date of the updated topographic information (example: orthophoto maps, July 1985: filed survey. May 1979,
beach profile, June 1987 etc.)? Site Survev 03108/01
3. What is the scale and contour interval of the following workmaps?
Scale 1"=500' Contour Interval 10'
Scale 1"=30' Contour Interval 1.:
NOTE: Revised topographIc Information must be of equal or greater detail than effective.
4. Attach an annotated FIRM/FBFM at the scale of the effective FIRM/FBFM showing the revised 100- and 500-year floodplain and the
floodway boundaries and how they tie Into those shown on the effective FIRM/FBFM downstream a!!!! upstream of the revisions or
adiacent to the area of revision for coastal studies. FIRM/FBFM attached? 181 Yes U No
PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS
Effective FIS
Revision Request
Riverine I Coastal Mapping Fonn
MT-2 Fonn 5 Page 1 of 2
FEMA Form 81-890
I
I
1.
I 2.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
".
2. EARTH FILL PLACEMENT
3.
The fill is:
o Existing
181 Proposed
Has fill been/will be placed in the regulatory floodway?
If Yes, please attach completed Riverine Hydraulic Analysis Form (Form 4).
Has fill been/will be placed in floodway fringe (area between the floodway
and 100-yearfloodplain boundaries)?
DYes
181 No
DYes
181 No
If Yes, then complete A, B, C, and D below.
a.
Are fill Slopes for granular materials steeper than one vertical
on one-and-one-half horizontal?
o No
DYes
If Yes, justify steeper slopes _
b.
Is adequate erosion protection provided for fill slopes exposed to moving flood waters? (Slopes exposed to flows
with velocities of up to 5 feet per second (fps) during the. 100-year flood must, at a minimum, be protected by a cover
of grass, vines, weeds, or similar vegetaDon; slopes exposed to flows with velocities greater than 5 fps during the
100-year flood must, at a minimum, be protected by stone or rock riprap.)
DYes
o No
c.
If No, describe erosion protection provided _
Has all fill placed in revised 100-year floodplain been compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density obtainable
with the Standard Proctor Test Method or acceptable equivalent method? 0 Yes 0 No
d.
Can structures conceivably be constructed on the fill at any time In the future?
DYes
o No
If Yes, attach certification of fill compaction (Item 3c. above) by the community's NFIP permit official, a registered
professional engineer, or an accredited solis engineer In accordance with Subparagraph 65.5(a)(6) of the NFIP
regulations.
Fill certification attached
DYes
181 Yes
o No
o No
Has fill been/will be placed in a V zone?
If Yes, Is the fill protected from erosion by a flood control structure such as a revetment or seawall?
181 Yes
o No
If Yes, attach the Coastal Structures Form (Form 10).
FEMA Form 81-890
Riverine/Coastal Mapping Form
MT -2 Form 5 Page 2 of 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,.
I
I
I
I
I
~..;
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
MT-2 FORM 5 ATTACHMENT
1) The map submitted includes only the proponent's property and therefore is not of a small
enough scale to include the 500 year flood plain, floodways, or community boundaries.
Stream and dam alignments, as well as the primary frontal dune, are not applicable to this
property, however, nearby roads have been shown.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 9
COASTAL ANALYSIS
(MT -2 FORM 9)
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,.
I
I
I
I
I
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY I O.M.B. Burden No. 3067-0148
COASTAL ANALYSIS Expires April 30, 2001
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 1.0 hour per response. The burden estimate includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C s~7:et, S.w., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Proiect 3067-0148\, Washinatan, DC 20503.
You are not required to respond to this collection of Information unless a valid OMS Control Number Is displayed In the upper right
comer of this form.
Community Name: Citv of New London
Flooding Source: New London Harbor. Lona Island Sound
Project Namelldentifier: Fishers Island Ferrv District
.':;e.
1. COASTLINE TO BE REVISED
Describe limits of study area:
Aooroximatelv 500 feet south of the New London Citv Pier
2. EFFECTIVE FIS
The area being revised was studied in the FIS using (Check all that apply):
~ Approximate methods
Only the stillwater surge elevation designated
Detailed methods with:
~ Wave setup computations
Wave runup computations
Wave height computations
Dune erosion computations
Stonm surge modeling. Specify model used:
~ SPLASH
TTSURGE
FEMA STORM SURGE
~ SLOSH
WIFM
OTHER: _
3. REVISED ANALYSIS
Number of transects in revised analysis
9 throuah Lana Island Sound and New Landon Harbor. 2 throuah orooertv far WHAFIS
Check all analyses used to prepare the revision:
Wave setup analyses (complete Items 1, 2, and 3)
Stillwater elevation detenminations (complete Item 1)
Erosion considerations (complete Item 2)
Wave height analysis (complete Items 2 and 3)
Wave runup analysis (complete Items 2 and 3)
Wave overtopping assessment (complete Items 2 and 3)
Reflect more detailed topographic Infonmation (Fonm 2)
Reflect shore protection structures (attach completed Coastal Structures Fonm - Fonm 10)
Other
If other, give basis of revision request with an explanation:
I
PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS
~
FEMA Form 81-89H
Coastal Analysis Form
MT-2 Form 9 Page 1 of 3
I
3. REVISED ANALYSIS (CONTINUEDI
1. Stillwater Elevation Detenninations
a. How were stillwater elevations detennined?
~ Gage anaiysis
Stonn surge analysis
Other - explain below:
Effective FIS. Annv Corns of Enoineers New Enoland Tidal Fiood Profile
-
If revised gage analysis, list gages utilized:
Gage Number Number of Years of Record Gage Site Location
Provide copies of gage data and revised analysis.
b. Specify what datum was used in the calculations: NGVD 29
If not the FIS datum, have the calculations been adjusted to the FIS datum:
DYes 0 No o Specify Conversion factor: _
c. If revised stann surge analysis, was FEMA's stonn surge model utilized:
,
DYes ONo
If Yes, amount of wave setup added to stillwater elevation J!.ll ft
d. If wave setup was computed, attach a description of methodology used. Description attached 121 Yes 0 No
e. If FEMA's storm surge model used, attach a detailed description of the differences between current analysis and
revised
analysis, and why revised analysis should replace current analysis:
Description attached OVes 0 No
-
2. Revised analysis (i.e., erosion, wave height, wave runup, and wave overtopping)
If FEMA procedures were utilized to perform the revision, attach a detailed description of differences between the
current and the revised analysis, and why the revised analysis should replace the current analysis:
Description attached 121 Ves 0 No
If FEMA procedures were not utilized to perform the revision, provide full documentation on methodology
and/or models used, Including operational program, detailed differences between methodology and/or
model utilized and FEMA's methodology and/or model. Also, attach an explanation why new methodology and/or
model
should replace current methodology and/or model.
Explanation attached OVes 0 No
I
I
I
I
I
HI
I
I
I
I
I
I
;1
I
I
I
I
FEMA Form 81-89H
Coastal Analysis Form
MT-2 Form 9 Page 2 of 3
I
I
'':L:.
3. REVISED ANAL VSES /CONTINUED)
I
3. Wave height and wave runup analyses
Wave runup and overtopping analyses are typically considered when wave heights and/or wave run up are close to or greater
than the crest of shore protection structures or natural land forms.
a. Was an overtopping analysis performed for any coastal shore protection structures or natural land forms that
may be overtopped? 0 Ves 181 No
If Yes, attach an explanation of the methodology utilized and describe In detail the results of the analysis:
I
I
Explanation attached
OVes 0 No
I
b. What is the estimated amount of overtopping
cfslft.
If No, attach an explanation why these analyses were not performed.
Explanation attached
181 Ves 0 No
I
c. Was wave setup included in wave height analysis and removed for erosion and wave runup analyses? 181 Yes 0 No
I
4. RESULTS
I
1. Stillwater storm surge elevation
2. Wave setup
3. Minimum ground elevation within project area
4. Maximum wave height elevation
5. Maximum wave runup elevation
+10.0 ft NGVD
0.27 feet
+4.1 feet NGVD
15.35 feet
I
WA
I
6. As a result of the revised analyses, the V Zone location has shifted a maximum of 120 feet seaward and Q
feet landward of its existing position.
7. Have areas designated as coastal high hazard areas (V-zones) increased or decreased?
o Increased 0 Decreased 181 Both
Attach a description where they have Increased and/or decreased.
I Description attached 181 Yes 0 No
I
8. The 100-year (base) flood elevations have:
I 9. What was the greatest increase?
10. What was the greatest decrease?
.[.1 11. The base flood boundary has:
Attach a description where It has Increased or decreased.
Description attached 181 Ves 0 No
181 increased 0 decreased
~feet
N/Afeet
o increased 181 decreased
I
Please provide a map with revised shoreline due to either erosion or accretion, If appropriate.
I Map Attached? 0 Ves 0 No 181 N/A
I
I FEMA Form 81-89H
Coastal Analysis Form
MT-2 Form 9 Page 3 of 3
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
MT-2 FORM 9 ATTACHMENT
Id) Wave set-up was calculated according to methods presented in the Shore Protection
Manual (SPM). The significant wave height and period were calculated using the Army
Corps of Engineers Automated Coastal Engineering System (ACES) computer model for
a restricted fetch analysis. The ratio of significant wave height to deep water wave length
and the nearshore slope were entered into Figure 3-53 on page 3-109 SPM. The resulting
ratio was multiplied by the significant wave height to determine the set-up due to random
storm waves. Spreadsheets have been included for reference.
2) The revised analysis was performed using FEMA methods provided in "Guidelines and
Specifications for Wave Elevation Determination and V Zone Mapping." The significant
wave height analysis was performed using the restricted fetch analysis module in the
Automated Coastal Engineering System (ACES) program. The revised analysis also takes
into account the proposed bulkhead that will serve to protect the property from the wave
damage characteristic of a V -Zone. Due to protection provided by this structure, our
analysis shows that portions of the Fishers Island Ferry District Terminal property cannot
support 3 foot breaking waves and therefore should be reclassified into" A-Zones."
3b) The top elevation of the bulkhead is +9.0 feet NGVO and the 100 year storm still water
elevation is at +10 feet. Therefore, the structure is submerged, and consequently
overtopped before any wave action is considered. It is not applicable to perform a runup
and overtopping analysis on submerged structures.
7) The coastal high hazard areas have both increased and decreased as a result of the revised
analysis. The majority of the site is currently listed as VE Zone Elevation 12 and AE
Zone Elevation 10. The revised analysis indicates that there will be a VE Zone Elevation
14 which will terminate at the proposed bulkhead followed by a 30 foot buffer zone of
VE Zone Elevation 12. The remainder of the site will be AE Zone Elevation 12.
11) Changes in the location of the V-Zone and A-Zone and base flood boundaries are
depicted on the revised worlanap.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I:
I
II
,..I
II
,".1
1\
I
I,
.",
~_--1
I,
I
I
I'
.1
II
J
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 10
COASTAL STRUCTURES
(MT-2 FORM 10)
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULT ANTS, INC.
O:r::::
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
.1
I
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY I O.M.B. Burden No. 3067-0148
COASTAL STRUCTURES EXDires Aori! 30, 2001
PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE
Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 1.0 hour per response. The burden estimate includes the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and
completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Stf7:et, S.W., ~.ashington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Proiect 3067-0148, WashinQton. DC 20503. .
You are not required to respond to this collection of Information unless a valid OMB Control Number Is displayed In the upper right
comer of this form.
Community Name: City of New London
Flooding Source: New London Harbor. Lana Island Sound
Project Name/ldentifier: Fishers Island Ferrv District
":-..::.
1. BACKGROUND
1. Name of structure (if applicable): Steel sheetDile bulkhead
2. Structure location: South and east sides of oroDertv
3. Type of structure:
~ Levee/dike" .
Revetment
Breakwater
Other: _
"Note: If the coastal structure Is a levee/floodwall, complete the LeveelFloodwall System Analyses Form (Form 8).
The remainder of this form does not need to be completed.
~ Bulkhead
Seawall
Soft Shore Protection (i.e., sand dunes)
4. Material structure Is composed of:
~ Stone ~ Earthen fill
Concrete Steel
Sand Other
5. The structure is:
o New
o Existing
181 Proposed
If existing, describe in detail the modifications being made to the structure and the purpose of the
modifications:
6. Copies of certified "as-built" plans 0 are 181 are not attached. If "as-built" plans are not available for submittal, please
explain why and submit a sketch with general structure dimensions Including: face slope, height, length, depth, and
toe elevation referenced to the appropriate datum (example: NGVe 1929, NAVe 1988, etc.)
7. Has a Federal agency with responsibility for the design of coastal flood protection structures designed or certified that the
structure(s) has/have been adequately designed and constructed to provide protection against the base 100-year (base) flood?
DYes 181 No
If Yes, specify the name of the agency and dates of project completion and/or certification. No other sect/ons of this
form need to be como/eted. _
II PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE MAILING ADDRESS. ~
FEMA Form 81-891 Coastal Structures Form MT-2 Form 10 Page 1 of 6
I
I
I
I
.>~.
2. DESIGN CRITERIA
11.
Desion Parameters
a. Were physical parameters ~resenting the base flood event or greater used to design the coastal flood
structure? ~ Yes 0 No
protection
lb. The number of design water levels that were evaluated 6. (number) range from mean low water -0.9 feet to the 100-year
stillwater surge elevation of 1Q feet. The critical water level is +3 feet. The datum that these
elevations are referenced to is NGVD 1929 (example: NGVD 1929, NAVD 1988, etc.)
I
I
I
I
c. Wave heights and periods were computed for each water level analyzed. 0 Yes 181 No
If No, attach an explanation specifying which water levels were analyzed:
Explanation attached
I8l Yes 0 No
d. 100-year significant wave height is: 8.67 ft
e. 100-year significant wave period is: 5.62 sec
f. 100-year one-percent wave height is: 13.87 ft
g. Were breaking wave forces used to design the structure?
181 Yes 0 No
If No, attach an explanation why they were not used for design:
I 2. Settlement
a. What is the settlement rate expected at the site of the structure?: No aooreciable settlement of structure exoected.
I
I
I
I
b. Please provide a settlement analysis.
DYes
181 No
Settlement Analysis Attached?
I
.'.
: .:~.
H
I FEMA Form 81-891
I
I
I
I
Coastal Structures Form
MT-2 Form 10 Page 2 of 6
1
2. DESIGN CRITERIA Icontinuedl
1
3. Freeboard
a. Does the structure have 1 loot of freeboard above the height of the one-percent wave for the lOa-year stillwater surge
elevation or maximum wave runup (whichever is greater)? 0 Yes 181 No
:1
b. Does the structure have freeboard of at least 2 feet above the lOa-year stillwater surge elevation: 0 Yes 181 No
1
FEMA does notlypically recognize sl(uctures as providing lOa-year (base) flood protection if they do not meet the freeboard
criteria listed above. Please note, occasionally exceptions are made to the minimum freeboard requirement. Please consult
the National Flood Insurance Program Regulation 65.10, regarding freeboard requirements.
1
4. Toe Protection
Specify the type of toe protection: RioraD stone Drovided alono southern face of bulkhead to Drotect aaainst desian wave
~
1
1
If no tae protection Is provided, provide analysis of scour potential and attach an evaluation of structural stability
perfonmed with potential scour at the toe. Analysis and Evaluation Attached? 0 Yes 0 No 181 NIA
1
5. Backfill Protection
Will the structure be overtopped during the base fload event?
181 Yes D No
1
If the structure will be overtopped, attach an explanation of what measures are used to prevent the loss of backfill
from rundown over the structure, drainage landward, under or laterally around the ends of the structure, or through
seams and drainage openings In the structure?
I
Explanation attached
181 Yes 0 No 0 NIA
,
1
1
1
'I
,.
1
I
1
FEMA Fonn 81-891
Coastal Structures Fonn
MT-2 Fonn 10 Page 3 of 6
I
I
I
"::.::.;
2. DESIGN CRITERIA (continuedl
I
6. Structural Stabilitv - Minimum water level
a. For coastal revetments, was a geotechnical analysis of potential failure in the landward direction by rotational gravity slip
performed for maximum loads associated with minimum seaward water level, no wave action, saturated soil conditions
behind the structure, and maximum toe scour? DYes D No
b. For gravity and pile-supported seawalls, were engineering analyses of seaward sliding, seaward overtuming, and of
foundation adequately using maximum pressures developed in the sliding and overtuming calculations performed?
DYes D No
I
I
c. For anchored bulkheads, were engineering analyses performed for shear failure, moment failure, and adequa9t of
tiebacks and deadmen to resist loading under low-water conditions? 181 Yes U No
7. Structural Stabililv - Critical Water Level (Note: All structures must be designed to resist the maximum loads associated with the
critical water level to be credited as providing 100-year protection.) ,
a. For coastal revetments were geotechnical analyses performed investigating the potential failure in the seaward
direction by rotational gravity slip or foundation failure due to inadequate bearing strength? DYes D No
b. For revetments, were engineering analyses of rock, riprap, or armor biocks' stability under wave actio..!l.Performed or uplift
forces on the rock, riprap, or armor blocks? DYes U No
I
I
I
c. Are the rocks graded?
d. Are soil or geotextile filters being used in the design?
DYes D No
DYes D No
I
e. For gravity and pile supported seawalls, were engineering analyses of landward sliding, landward overtuming, and
foundation adequacy performed? DYes D No
1. For anchored bulkheads, were engineering analyses of shear and moment failure performed using "shock" pressures?
181 Yes D No
I
I
For all analyses marked No above for the appropriate type of structure, please attach an explanation why the analyses
were not performed.
Explanation attached
DYes D No
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I FEMA Form 81-891
I
Coastal Sbuclures Form
MT-2 Form 10 Page 4 of 6
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
I
~1)..
2. DESIGN CRITERIA (continuedl
8. Material Adeauacv
The design life of the structure given the existing conditions at the structure site Is !>D years.
9. Ice and Imoact Alianment
a. Will the structure be subjected to ice forces?
OVes ~No
If Yes, was a designed for such forces?
OVes ONo
If Ves, attach Impact analysis.
Analysis attached
b. Will the structure be subjected to impact forces from boals, ships, or large debris?
If Yes, was a designed for those Impact farces?
(Impact of Floating Objects Incidental to Design)
If Yes, attach impact analysis.
Analysis attached
DYes 0 No
1& Ves 0 No
~Ves DNo
OVes 0 No
10. Structure Plan Alianment
The structure is (check one):
o isolated
o part of a continuous structure with redundant return walls at frequent Intervals.
Please provide a map showing the location of the structure and any naluralland features which shelter the structure
from wave actions. Map Attached? 0 Ves 0 No
..
I
.
I
I
I
I
11. Certification
As a professional engineer, I certify that the above structure will withstand all hydraulic and wave forces associated with
the 1 % annual chance flood without significant structural degradation.
These forces provided by Ucean and Coastal Consultants Inc. As used herein the
word certify shall mean an expression of the Consultant's professional opinion
to the best of its information, knowledge and belief, and does not constitute a
warranty or guarantee by the Consultant.
~ 1123~~
Date
Seal
,
,""
~
<
~ ()~~9.'i!'!c,,~
~r;... .c.~.~
:;.. ~ ~..~
: z:
: : ~
. ~ . ~
. . . ~
~.. 0001(.9'.. ~ :j
.. q.:':'!!Fr:NS'f-.~..:1J9. /
~ (",('10,.. .. ..r":'(~'." ..~
~', VloJ1C"~L1,;."'\"" /
,~..~~;.."~~.~.. :::..:.: .:." ' .'
"""./
."0~ ,,, \" "., "'..~;,::?'I
~ttIJjl'JI ~'"
. (~
~
$
FEMA Form 81-891
Coastal Structures Form
MT-2 Form 10 Page 5 of 6
I
I
I
I
I
:~-
3. ADVERSE IMPACT EVALUATION
1.
The structure Is:
o existing
121 new
o an enlargement of an existing structure
o a replacement structure of the same size and design
as what was previously at the site
2.
If the structure is new or enlarged, will the structure impact flooding and erosion for areas adjacent to the structure?
121 No 0 Yes
If Yes, attach an explanation
I
HI
I
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Explanation attached
DYes 0 No
4. COMMUNITY AND/OR STATE REVIEW
1. Has the design, maintenance, and impact of the structure been reviewed and approved by the community, and any Federal,
State, or local agencies having jurisdiction over flood control and coastal construction activities In the area the structure
impacts: 121 Yes 0 No .
If Yes, attach a list of agencies who have reviewed and approved the project
Explanation attached
121 Yes 0 No
If No, attach an explanation why review and approval by the appropriate community or agency has not been obtained.
Explanation attached
DYes 0 No
2. Enclose all design analyses that apply.
Design Analyses Attached? 0 Yes
121 No 0 NJA
FEMA Fonn 81-891
Coastal Slruclures Fonn
MT-2 Fonn 10 Page 6 of 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
":;ll.
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
MT-2 FORM 10 ATTACHMENT
5) The entire area upland of the upland will be paved to prevent erosion. Drainage is
provided to control surface water on the upland surface.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
-------------------
LIST ALL OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY LICENSES
PERMITS OR CERTIFICATION OBTAINED FOR THE PROJECT
,
TYPE OF AUTHORIZATION
REOUIRED
1. Site Development Plan.
2. Coastal Site Development
Plan
3. Minor Modification of Site
Development Plan
4. Zoning Permit
5. Modification of Basic
Building Code
6. Variance
7. Variance
8. Permit to place fill and
structures in the waters of
the State
9. Section 401 Water Quality
Certification
10. Section 10 and Section 404
permits to place fill and
structures in waters of the
United States.
HARTI-1017173-2
".~ ,)il ,',',/:,;;R'.'>:t~~fJ';1~if.~~t.J,;1m,\!;,":>";:, ,,>~>:~~~,,:~i, 'ft .:'
;,:\ :.;",( "AGENcy'APPROVALISSUINGAGENcY,1<;i: ~f 'J.. ';
New London Planning and Zoning Commission
New London Planning and Zoning Commission
',APPLICATION APPEAL
'; ,...'t"Y"(NUMBER,'IF
:~, .-2.-",1; ~~.'~; "
"};'APPLICABLE)
Approval Issued
Approval Issued
New London Zoning Enforcement Officer
Approval Issued
New London Planning and Zoning Commission
Department of Public Safety, State Building Inspector's Office
Permit No. 0079
M-256A-93
M-256B-93
New London Zoning Board of Anneals
New London Planning and Zoning Commission
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Long
Island Sound Programs
199501565-PF
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Long
Island Sound Programs
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
199501565-PF
1998-02195
,0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
JOSHUA Y. HORTON
SUPERVISOR
Town Hall, 53095 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Fax (631) 765-1823
Telephone (631) 765-1889
OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
May 8, 2002
Mr. Joseph Marrone, P.E.
Ocean and Coastal Consultants, Inc.
35 Corporate Drive
Trumbull, CT 06611
Re: Conditional Letter of Map Revision
Fishers Island Ferry District Terminal
New London, CT
Dear Mr. Marrone:
This letter will acknowledge that, based upon the CLOMR application referenced above,
a government agency must assume responsibility for overseeing compliance with the
maintenance and operation plans of the Fishers Island Ferry District terminal in the City
of New London, CT.
As the official property owner of the site, the Fishers Island Ferry District is willing to
oversee the maintenance program for the Fishers Island Ferry District (FIFD) terminal.
The Fishers Island Ferry District will review inspection reports and recommendations
made by an engineer hired by the FIFD and coordinate with the Town of Southo1d to take
appropriate actions to ensure the bulkhead functions as designed to maintain the revised
flood zones of the area.
Sincerely,
~~~
I~pervisor, Town of South old
cc: City of New London, CT
Reynold duPont, FIFD
Ocean and Coastal Consultants, Inc.
I
II
I
Ii
11
II
II
I
I:
. ,
Ii
. .
f
Ii
c I
II
, I
11
..J
t1
-:
Ii
~".j
Ii
'-.j
Ii
I:
-,
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 11
WAVE ANALYSIS
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.".:
,
,I J
"J
. -,"
coRPS OF ENGINEERS
o
N
N
C T
'j NEW LO~N
-:t1t
.:!;.'
w
!
.... .
"'.- "':;.~ ..:. -' ;
, .~\~-~:-::::~.:~;;~-~::.~
"
>:.
q
~
. ..'-:.~.:~:.-~rcl<";T.-:'
" :>'; ii'~'d ,,~
.. ~:~},5:$W"'~,~....~.,i\'t:C'":l$""
.......,-_.~~... .~"'-
.- r"'::-:;r~:"__,;.~""._. ."'~'~~:-::
. ':::.:::?~~V~-".7:' ),'.
'=:.<l.
~T{:~7
..-.-
~
~
..
i'
':,' d
11
," .::'_7::=-:f.1::;:~~::..::f; .
. _ :~. >-~_'::l~.~~:..:'-:~;~
;.... ,>':.;.~:;"...
.. :~.l.~::l::?;;:~:~...
L 01lg
Isla.
1 S 1ll.
.' ~....': ~.:
-~ .::::->~(-
.'7
...,-,_...
:,,-.
;.~..,
. --. "~ - ,;;:. '.-:..
_ _....4..,..
-~,:"':-".'-:. .
,
"- . ~.. .. -.
LEGEND:
(Xl
(%)
~E.4 6.,..
',.
N.II~.' 0&." SlII'r., i:.,..
_n_ '-,"C-'" . _-OJ.' ~.._...,::;:.;-C
.;...-- --.",
,..
~
Jl
IN\
'l)
NEW ENGt.AND COASTLINE
TIDAL FLOOD SURvE't
BASE MAP FOR PROFILE NO.4
OLD LyME. CONN. TO
STONINGTOH, CONN.
ot"A.lII11II(1CT t1I T>C ........
Ole- tMGI..UIO O,vI11ClOlo tOM'S ~ DtGIOlEtAS
w&l..1MUl"tIAss.
sumoaDI"..
PLATE C-8
~
~
,
SCALE" $Tt.lUT[ MILES
I V29 I ~ 1 4
.
.;.-
,,:
.....
j'
.'
-
l'
-I
-,
)'
\ i
j'
,,'~
~(r~
(;' :
~
-~.'J
r 1
~.
Iij ',:
n'i
!I j
,I ;
~'
IFi~t
~~~~~1
~l
~
r
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
OLD SAYBRDOK I
T
Q
>
..
z:
..
>
Q
..
<t
...
..
..
..
;:
z:
o
...
<t
>
..
...
..
10
"
..
"
..
"
..
"
'0
~~
,
,
1
.
i
i;; ;
I S I
l I ~
i : ;
.
.1--,
,
,
o
-,
-,
-,
~~
..
...
=
:>
0:
..
...~
~ti
~
~
j
i
i
--
I-
~
.
"
OLD LYME
~ .
r: i i
~ ;-~;-
~ i
. . .
! ~ 1
-.
-
I
,
i
i
s
~
.
~
i
J
I i
..
,-...::
.--: .
,;
..
..
,_'
i
.
I
i
I
I
3i .
;:.= =~ ~:.
-Ii ...-. ._.._...~~
..::~ ~... l! I 5 .
: ~= ;; 'i i; S :
i:3iii:i!
EAST LYME
-- -- 1---
....
i
.
~
=
.
!-
1~!
WATERFDRD
I r -"rw LONDON
GROTON
I
!
.
=
i ':~5
t- ...:=-
-.
: '!!:a:;
I ::1:
o ........
. _00
6 .3
...= ".
.:: ... ~:
2"i l!-~:.I
a .. og
:1:; :1.1
!J i !i
-.
;,. HUIfRICANE 0'. S.OTEIIB~II Z I. ,,~. nDAL
~_ L~H~"RICAHl' CAItDI.. Au,)qsr 81. '''4
-
~
3
ii
:
~
i
-
-
I~.
Ii
v-
f-,
--
, 3
:-r-~
" .
i ;:
. 3
. "
--I-
,
.0
--
_...-~~-::.
PROJCC
HUlUttCANc
MEAN SPIIIN'!
'I 1
, ,
-
-
--1--
--1-- --,..,
nooD
r/~AL
I
i I
.. - ..
~ Iv IlIr
~-~. .
_~"Ill_&..
.... a ~~ "!
'.....J:::
1."_'
~. I,-
:;~JrS-
Ifi
.. .
gl J 'z
r",-,L
FLOOD ~,
I
I
.
> .
~-f-
!
,
.
!
a-e
~
.
;
om
,
--
I
.
l
.! !
1- f-~-h-- ,
I ; ! i
. .
1- -~;E-~
1-" - -
.--
100--- IUO
,
,~~ f'{
,
, -
-lit
~,
,
O~
.,.
!-
-!~
. ~.
= .
. l'
~ ~-. -
~
-
1
l'r~~
-- -;1 !-
'"
m -I
"ll." ..
~~. ~.
".
.' 1-- -- ----
) .Y'
a~ ~ I r&.AN ~R~W&.Ncr TIDAl. FLOOD
--,..---~---- --
1---
H18~ "'AT1"~
,
\ i1 ,1:
/
, '- MEAIt'
IIC~II rlD1' LEV ~~
/tATIDNAL fiCDDCTIC vERTICAL DATUII'Z t-......
MEAIt; LO" ""ATEI~' 0.,,\ f(
!
"
100
I'
NIIN
STATUTE MILES -LONG ISLAND SOUND Ar~D BLOCK ISLAND SOUND
CONNECTICUT
STONING TON ". '
. 1=
35. 1 ~
1- ~-! I
j II!
!i i1 it
!i-I--i ~i~
=1 ' : :~3
! ~ 1,1 i
. '
. .
.~ '~.,"
RHOO{ ISLANO:'::;'
,h.".,f: ..'
,
..
01
..
os
-- -- ---
..
"
.
laid
:! ,"
.._t
.. ~,
0: ~I
.. t!
l'
-- -- ---- '-- ---
I
l
I
.~
-.
tOf} YEAR FRE~ TIDAL 'I'LDOIJ141 -
...
1-'
--
-~
:l'
.~.
M' ?
.-
-- ~...
-
-
""
g
....
g!
...
c
~
.
X
--~.
c
S
Mn YEAR FREOI.IDtC:r TIDAL /'Loot,".'
.,. ,.u.,LrL i..ooll~'
"
---
LEGEN():
.
B SEPTEM"ER 21.lne HI;II .ATEII
G AUliUST 31."'4 Hllill wATE"
10" NUYIER IDENTI'IES """ WATEII
MARC
WATEII
"
~.
L ,.dlltS ,1II0M 'l'C" TO TltA" wAI.UI QIWIt.
MElli .ASO 011 ~.,~ SUIIS 06 '101 OISU..
,.ATIORltllO'.' lilt liT'." THt ...TI01t"L ..
oet...sU.Wll'l'O..l....'l'IlSC..St. .
&." ,.IXtD t1c,.lttlIWCa "0"'1'10"'" .T........
GEOOETIC OATUII FOIl ELI....TIOII.I. TMI V.ITD
STATES Of' "IIEltICL 'OltIlP,," Itlnlt"lD TO'
AS liE". SEa LlYe\. I.SUDaTUII. aUT 1I0T TO
TO IE COMI"US[O wIT. "OCAt. 1I1all SE" LEYEL.
15'" TIOI "IYU. COII,uTED 1,15111. "1M. ._.
'TAllO 01" Sla LEVE\. Of "." ...
4..UCOOlll.......... Wtlltl om. ~TU ~ ..,
,ltE!t[WT sta l."Il'E COIdM
'0'
..:'
.............
._PJ
. "\-:-':"';.~'.
.........? '''.
:~- _.-:..:~~;~~\
NEW~. ENGLAND. ,COASTLINE
: TIDAL FLOOD. SURVEY
TIDAL'fLOOO PROfiLE NO.4
.., OLD LY"-IE, CONN, TO
. ,~.' S!ONIN.GTON, CONt{.
::,...,.,~-..~~: 0('''''''(",,0' he U1~'~.. ...
."l-;' ".(~I.(.C1L".O O''''.'Olt,COlllP, O( t.e...ttIllS
. ~ .....__.;~.~:'\ ...LT...... OIl.'''' .',' \-
. It'Tell,elIU, .
.~1.:4ii~~:~.i~;~~i;,}.:~l~t~~eJ5~~~f~.~:.~~3<::, ,~~::'">.".
,.
..
"
-~
"
~t'l
'0
.
/'
1/,
~.: ~
,
..
.
.
_:
s
z
,,0
~
. -::: . ~~'...
.
-I
-z
-s
, '
.'-
-, ,!
~~.~ :!
:?:~F;f~~
y._"'f>,.'~'n.
;'::"fi"4.' ~
~~f.i~
.:."":.oi"'I\":"'I'
-:~~~~:;. 1.
':'''&'', "
r.-~..'t;-r~"'. l
;'.:.:.~-:~:-~~i
:':":"=1'
'.'-::. -:~i
-.:~;
~.,~ .'
!.:. ...,!.;.' .,^:)
. ':',:~7;;:::~,;.. "..
..:":..,,,;-~:~~ !
.,_? :,~ I
.'.. '-'.:
i.
Q
>
..
z:
...
>
o
..
<t
..
..
...
..
z:
2
...
~
...
...
...
"
..~ - . .
.'.....'..
'---,'..:0
-
- FLOOD "_
-INSURANCE- ~
- STUDY
.-:;~;
_SUPPLEMENT -
I WAVE
" HEIGHT
I. ANAL YSIS
II "
I
I
I CITY. OF. ; ".
I NEW.LO.NOON,
CONNECTICUT .
_ . NEW l<?NDON COUNTY
'-
~
FEBRUARY 19. 1985
1
1
1
1
\1
.,:;~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 . 0 INTRODUCTION
Page
1
1
1.1 Background and Purpose
2.0 INVESTIGATIONS
2
2
2
3
7
2.1 Previous Studies
2.2 Data Collection and Review
2.3 Wave Height Analysis
2.4 Results
3 .0 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS
7
7
8
8
3.1 Flood Boundaries
3.2 Base, Flood Elevations
3.3 Velocity Zones .
4.0 INSURANCE APPLICATION 9
4.1 Flood Hazard Factors 9
4.2 Flood Insurance Zones 9
4.3 Flood Insurance Rate Map 10
. .
5.0 OTHER STUDIES 11
6.0 REFERENCES 11
i
I
I
'"
>.
TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued
I
FIGURES
I
Figure 1 - Transect Location Map
I
Figure 2 - Typical Transect Schematic
I
I
TABLES
Table 1 - Transect Descriptions
Table 2 - Flood Insurance Zone Data
I
EXHIBITS
I
Exhibit 1 - Flood Insurance Rate Map Index
Flood Insurance Rate Map
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ii
I
Page
4
6
5
10
J_
I
I
Ii
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 1
I
I
"
INTROOUCTION
1 Background and Purpose
1.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recently adopted
recommendations by the National Academy of Sciences to include prediction
of wave heights in Flood Insurance Studies for coastal communities
subject to storm surge flooding, and to report the estimated wave crest
elevations as the base flood elevations on Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRMs) .
Previously, FIRMs were produced showing only the .stillwater elevations
due to the lack of a suitable and generally applicable methodology for
estimating the wave crest elevations associated with storm surges. These
stillwater elevations .were subsequently stipulated in community flood
plain management ordinances as the minimum elevation of the lowest floor
including basement of new construction. Communities and individuals had
to consider the additional hazards of velocity waters and wave action on
an ad hoc basis. Because there has been a pronounced tendency for
buildings to be constructed only to meet minimum standards, without
consideration of the additional hazard due to wave height, increasing
numbers of people could unknowingly be accepting a high degree of flood-
related personal and property risk in coastal areas subject to wave
action. Therefore,. the FEMA has pursued the development of a suitable
methodology for estimating the wave crest elevations associated with
storm surges. The recent development of such a methodology by the
National Academy of Sciences has led to the adoption of wave crest
elevations for use as the base flood elevations in coastal communities
(Reference 1).
Historic flooding in eastern Connecticut extends back to the early 17th
century. The hurricanes of 1635 and 1638 caused extensive tidal flooding
in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and although no records exist for
Connecticut, it is reasonable to assume that these hurricanes caused
extensive damage along the Connecticut coast as well.
Since 1769, the coast of Connecticut has experienced or has been
threatened by hurricanes on 66 occasions. On nine of these occasions,
severe tidal flooding occurred. The five greatest events were the
hurricanes of 1938, 1893, 1954, 1815, and 1944 .(in descending order of
magnitude). Damage caused by the hurricanes of 1938 and.1954 amounted to
six million dollars and three million dollars, respectively (Reference
2). The damage from the 193.8 hurricane was sustained primarily along
Mott Avenue: Flooding from the 1954 hurricane reached an elevation of
8.9 feet (Reference 3).
I
I
The purpose of this study is to revise the FIRM for the City of New
London to include the effects of wave action for the following flooding
s"urces: Long Island Sound and the Thames River.
I
The wave height analysis for this study was prepared by Dewberry & Davis
for the FEMA, under Contract No. EMW-C-O 543. This ,.,rk was completed in
March 1983.
I
I
2.0 INVESTIGATIONS
I
2.1 Previous Studies
I
Storm stillwater elevations used in'this analysis were developed by
Dewberry & Davis by adjusting the elevations contained in the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers (CDE) publication, Tidal Flood Profiles for ~ ~
England Coastline (References 4, 5, and 6). The adjustment was made
using a New London, Connecticut, tidal gage analysis and the profiles for
the 1938 and 1954 storm events (Reference 7). The elevations determined
for this study supersede the elevations used in the previous Flood
Insurance Study for the City of New London (Reference 8).
I
I
2.2
Data Collection and Review
I
,All available source data applicable for the wave height analysis were
collected and reviewed. Because wave height calculations are based on
such parameters as the size and density of vegetation; natural barriers
(sand dunes), buildings, and other manmade structures, it was necessary
to obtain detailed information on the physical and cultural features of
the study area.
I
I
I
During the course of this analysis, l\ero Graphics Corporation of Bohemia,
New York, the Connecticut Departments of Transportation and public Works,
the CDE, and the City of New London were contacted for data.
I
The principal source materials for the wave height analysis are described
below.
I
1. Aerial photographs and glass aerial plotting plates (stereoscopic.
coverage) of New London were obtained from Aero Graphics Corporation of
Bohemia, New York (Reference 9). The photographs were used to determine
the type, size, and density of vegetation and physical features. The
aerial plotting plates generated the topographic maps used in this
analysis.
\1
I
2
,
I
~,
---
I
I
I
I
11
II
"f
II
1'\
,
II
Ii \
Ii!
.! I
1;\
.11 \
I: I
i
;
I
Iii I
.0
I
1
;..1
Ii
.-,
2. Topographic maps of the shoreline areas of the City of New London were
obtained from the City of New London at a scale of 1:480 and a contour
interval of 1 foot and from the New England Division of the COE at a
scale of 1:1,200 and a contour interval of 1 foot (References 10 and 11).
Additional topographic maps at a scale of 1:2,400 and a contour interval
of 4 feet were developed by Dewberry & Davis (Reference 12). These maps
were used to supplement the base maps, for work maps to calculate wave
heights, and for plotting wave elevations and boundaries of the Flood
Hazard Zones (Section 3.1).
3. U. s. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangles of Uncasville and New London,
Connecticut, were used for the creation of base maps, the placement of
transects and for fetch calculations (Reference 13).
4. Stillwater elevations for.the storm surges were obtained from Tidal ~
Profiles for the Connecticut Shoreline of Long Island ~ and Tidal
Flood profiles ~~ Thames River (References 4 and 5).
2.3 Wave Height Analysis
The methodology for analyzing the effects of wave heights associated with
coastal storm surge flooding is described in the National Academy of
Sciences report (Reference 1). This method is based on three major
concepts. First, depth-limited waves in shallow water reach a maximum
breaking height that is equal to 0.78 times the stillwater depth. The
wave crest is 70 percent of the total wave height above the stillwater
level. The second major concept is that wave height may be diminished by
dissipation of energy due to the presence of obstructions such as sand
dunes, dikes and seawalls, buildings, and vegetation. The amount of
energy dissipation is a function of the physical characteristics of the
obstruction and is determined by procedures described in Reference 1.
The third major concept is that wave height can be regenerated in open
fetch areas due to the transfer of wind energy to the water. This added
energy is related to fetch length and depth.
Wave heights were computed along transects (cross section lines) that
were located along the coastal areas, as illustrated in Figure 1, in
accordance with the Users Manual for Wave Height Analysis (Reference 14).
The transects were located with' consideration given to the physical ,and
cultural characteristics of the land so that they would closely represent
conditions in their locality. Transects were spaced close together in
areas of complex topography and dense developnent. In areas having more
uniform characteristics, they were spaced at larger intervals.' It was
also necessary to locate transects in areas where unique flo?ding existed
and in areas where computed wave heights varied significantly between
adjacent transects.
3
'b-::.
. ..".",
1---1 1---1
l--i
000'
("00 NOCN01 M3N)
13 "NOUNOl M~N :10 All3
.....
UJ
a:
::>
(!)
-
u.
dVW NOI.1 VOOl .103SNVl:I.1
.L:J:!=' 0009.
000.
OOOZ
3"1v:lS UYWllCOUddY
o
A:>N:lDV .LN:lW:lDVNVW A:>N:lDIl:lW:llVIl:lO:l~
j"
>
... "";.;-,.
i
/j: )/'V10
, :. Jell C:I
/10 /C11}
I..... I"
"I J
",! .
?-' 0 .
/ .,'."
, '
~4' .
(J ....;
...
...",:0,,)'
.~
''''.''0 *'''0
41"0 i!f.
"
./.o~,:)O~
. t..,o Ytv
....OV~l::'
so ",'
,
y
))1)
&lyl),.
~.{ ,
I
,.- '0
~
.
to. :
.,
\ ,,'
:r\ '.
I, \
"
.~
'l'
.~
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -"
I
I
I
II
II
1
I
I Transect
I No. 1
I \ No. 2
;
,
,
\ No. 3
I
, No. 4
I
No. 5
I \
I
I No. 6
,
':-:1 I
i No. 7
I No. e
I'
_I
Each transect was taken perpendicular,to the shoreline and ext~nded
inland to a point where wave action ceased. Along each transect, wave
heights and elevations were computed considering the combined effects of
changes in ground elevation, vegetation, and physical features. The
stillwater elevations for the 100-year flood were used as the starting
elevations for these computations. Wave heights were calculated to the
nearest 0.1 foot, and wave elevations were determined at .m.ole-foot
increments along the transects. The location of the 3-foot breaking wave
for determining the terminus of the V Zone (area with velocity wave
action) was also computed at each transect. Table ,1 provides a listing
of the transect location and stillwater starting elevations, as well as
maximum wave crest elevations. It was assumed that the beach areas would
erode during a majo~ storm, thus reducing its effectiveness in decreasing
wave heights.
TABLE 1 - TRANSECT DESCRIPTIONS
Location
Elevation (feet)
Maximum
Stillwater ~ Crest
100-year 100-year
10 15
10 15
10 15
10 13
10 12
10 12
10 12
10.5 13
Southwestern corporate limits to Neptune
Avenue, extended
Neptune Avenue, extended, to Rockabourne
Lane, extended
Rockabourne Lane, extended, to Hall Avenue,
extended
Hall Avenue, extended, to Plant Street,
extended
Plant Street, extended, to Walbach Street,
extended
Walbach Street, extended, to the Interstate
95 bridge
Interstate 95 bridge to Farnsworth Street,
extended
Farnsworth Street, extended, to the northern
corporate limits
Figure 2 is a profile for a typical transect illustrating the effects of
energy dissipation and regeneration on a wave as it moves inland. Tll'is
figure shows the wave elevations being decreased by obstruCtions, such as
buildings, vegetation, and rising ground' elevations, and being increased
by open, unobstructed wind fetches. Actual wave conditions in the City
Of New London may not include all the situations illustrated in Figure 2.
5
-
-,
#,1:
-
-
-
_.a
V ZONE
WAVE HEIGHT GREATER THAN 3FT.
BAS[ FLOOD nEV"TION
INCLUDING WAYE EfFECTS
IOO.YEAR STILLWATER
MUN
SI!A LE:VEL
I
.
SHORRINE
I
.
.sAND DUNE
- -
-
I
.
WOODED REOION
-
-
-
,'....-,...........n.. ""'._...~,_,.,~~~-.;>--
-
IiiIII
A ZONE
WAVE HEIGHT LESS THAN 3FT.
.
OVERLAND
WIND FnCH
FIGURE 2
TYPICAL TRANSli:CT SCHEMATIC
. ...----..--..
.. ......._...~.._...__.__._-
w
I
.
BUILDINGS
-
-
-
-
-
,;
.e
.
LIMIT OF
TIDAL FLOODINQ
AND WAVES
1
.~~;
1
After analyzing wave heights along each transect, wave elevatiQns were
interpolated between transects. Various source data were used in the
interpolation, including the topographic work maps, aerial photographs,
and engineering judgment. Controlling features affecting the elevations
were identified and considered in relation to their positions at a
particular transect and their variation between transects.
1
1
2.4
Results
1
1
Computed wave heights and elevations associated with the 100-year storm
surge are summarized below for various reaches in the study area.
Long Island Sound and the Thames River (Transects 1-8)
I
I
The maximum wave crest elevation affecting the New London shoreline from
Long Island Sound to the Thames River is 15 feet. .Waves greater than 3
feet do not propagate inland significantly due to the sharp rise in
ground elevatio~s. Waves less than 3 feet affect the few.low-lying areas
of Alewife Cove, Long Island Sound, and the Thames River. In the
southern areas, waves less than 3 feet propagate inland as far as 400
feet at Ocean Beach and as far as 350 feet to Pequot Avenue. Near the
northern portion of Greens Harbor, waves less than 3. feet may propagate
inland 1,200 feet. At th~piers near Water Street, waves less than 3 feet
may propagate 1,800 feet inland. Wave .action and inundation are reduced
by the sharp rise in ground elevations in New London.
I
I
I
On April 20, 1983, the results of this study were reviewed at a final
Consultation and Coordination Officer's (CCO) meeting attended by
representatives of the FEMA, the City of New London, and Dewberry &
Davis.
I
HI
I. 3'-0 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS
A prime purpose of the National Flood Insurance Program is to encourage local
governments to adopt sound flood plain management programs designed to reduce
future flood losses. The FIRM for the City of New London has ~een revised to
incorporate the latest available information, including wave height data, to
ass~st these communities in developing the most appropriate arid effective
flood plain management measures.
1
I
3.1 Flood Boundaries
I
In order to provide a national standard without regional discrimination,
the 100-year flood has been adopted by the FEMA as the base flood for
purposes of flood plain..management. This flood has a 1 percent chance of
being equalled or exceeded each year and is expected to be exceeded once
I
7
I
1
..:;::~,
1
on the average during any 100-year period. The risk of having a flood of
this magnitude or greater increases when periods longer than 1 year are
considered. For example, Over a 30-year period, there is a 26 percent
chance of experiencing a flood equai to.or greater than the 100-year
flood. The SOO-year flood plain is also shown on the FIRM to indicate
areas of moderate flood hazards.
1
1
Areas inundated by the 100-year flood are shown as A and V Zones on the
community's FIRM. It is in these areas that the FEMA requires local
communities to exercise flood plain management measures as a condition
for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program.
1
1
3.2 Base Flood Elevations
1
Areas within the communities studied by detailed engineering methods have
baSe flood elevations established in A and V Zones. These are the
elevations of the base (100-year) flood relative to the National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (mean sea level) of 1929. In coastal areas affected by
wave action, base flood elevations are generally maximum at the normal
open shoreline. These elevations generally decrease in a landward
direction at a rate dependent on the presence o~ obstructions capable of
dissipating the wave energy. Where possible, changes in base flood
elevations have been shown in 1-foot increments on the FIRMs. However,
where the scale did not permit, 2- or 3-foot increments were sometimes
used. Base flood elevations shown in the wave action areas represent the
average elevation within the zone. Current program regulations generally
require that all new construction be elevated such that the first floor,
including basement, is above the base flood elevation in A and V Zones..
1
I
I
I
1
3.3 Velocity Zones
1
The COE has established the 3-foot breaking wave as the criterion for.
identifying coastal high hazard zones (Reference 1S). This was based on
a . study of wave action effects on strUctures. This criterion has been
adopted by the FEMA for the determination of V Zones. Because of the
additional hazards associated with high-energy waves, the National Flood
Insurance Program regulations require much more stringent flood plain
management measures in these areas, such as elevating structures on piles
or piers. In addition, insurance rates in V Zones are higher than those
in A Zones with similar numerical designations.
.....
..
1
I
The location of the V ZOne is determined by the 3-foot breaking wave as
discussed previously. The detailed analysis of wave heights performed in
this study allowed a much more accurate location of the V Zone to be.
established. The V ZOne generally extends inland to the point .mere the
10Q-year flood depth is insufficient to support a 3-foot breaking wave.
I
1
8
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
'.
~ I
I
I
r
I
I
I
'-I
, I
I
c::<!
4.0 INSURANCE APPLICATIONS
The assignment of proper actuarial insurance rates requires that frequency and
depth of flooding be estimated as accurately as possible. Because waves can
add considerably to expected flood depths, it is impOrtant that insurance
rates consider this additional hazard. The FEMA has developed a process to
transform the data from this study into flood insurance criteria. This
process includes the determination of Flood Hazard Factors and the designation
of flood insurance zones.
4.1 Flood Hazard Factors
The Flood Hazard Factor (FHF) is the device used to correlate flood -
information with insurance rate tables. Correlations between property
damage from floods and their FHF are used to set actuarial insurance
premium rate tables.
The FHF is shown as a three-digit code that expresses the difference
between the 10- and 100-year flood elevations to the nearest 0.5 foot.
For example, if the difference between water-surface elevations of the
10- and 100-year floods is 0.7 foot, the FHF is ~OS; if the difference is
1.4 feet, the FHF is 015; if the difference is 5.0 feet, the FHF is 050.
When the difference between t~e 10- and 100-year water-surface elevations
is greater than 10.0 feet, the FHF is computed to the nearest foot. ,
4.2 Flood Insurance Zones
After wave elevations for the 100-year storm surge wre determined and
mapped, the study areas were divided into zones, each having a specific
flood p:>tential and FHF. Each zone was assigned one of the following
flood 'insurance zone designations:
Zone V9:
Special Flood Hazard Areas along coasts inundated by
the 100-year flood as determined by detailed methods,
and that have additional hazards due to velocity
(wave action!; base flood elevations shown, and zones
subdivided according to FHFs.
Zones A7 and AS:
Special Flood Hazard Areas inundated by the 100-year
flood, determined by detailed methods; base flood ele-
vations shown, and zones subdivided according to FHF.
Zone B:
Areas between the Special Flood Hazard Area and the
limits of the sOO-year flood, including areas of the
sOO-year flood plain that are protected from the 100-
year flood by dike, levee, or other water control
9
I
.,:~,
I
Zone B
(continued) :
structure; also, areas subject to certain types of
100-year shallow flooding where depths are _less than
1.0 foot; and areas subject to 100-year flooding from
sources with drainage areas less than 1 square mile.
Zone B is not subdivided.
I
I
Zone c:
Areas of minimal flooding.
I
Table 2, "Flood Insurance Zone Data", summarizes the FHFs, flood
insurance zones, and base flood elevations for each flooding source in
the study area.
I
I
TABLE 2 - FLOOD INSURANCE ZONE DATA
Base Flood
Stillwater Elevation Elevation
Flooding Source 10-Year SO-Year 100-Year 500-Year FHF Zone (Feet NGVD)"
Long Island
Sound and
Transects 1-2 7.1 9.0 1 O. 0 12.4 045 V9 12-15
040 AS 10-12
Thames River
Transects 3-4 7.1 9.0 10.0. 12.4 045 V9 12-15
040 AS 10-12
Transects 5-7 7.1 9.0 10.0 12.4 045 V9 12-15
035 A7 10-12
Transect 8 7.3 9.4 10.5 13.0 045 V9 13
035 A7 11-13
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
Due to map scale limitations, base flood elevations shown on the FIRM
represent averaqe elevations for the zones depicted.
.'.-.:.
. ~
4.3 Flood Insurance llate Map
I
After flood insurance zones were established for the study area, the FIRM
for the City of New London was revised to incorporate the new zone
information. 'nlis map contains the official delineation of flood
insurance zones and base flood elevations. The base map was adjusted
using the more recent and accurate topographic maps developed for this
study (Reference 12).
I
I
I
10
I
I,
I
Ii
I
I'
I
I
I'
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
,I'
I
I
'I
I
...:.::.
5.0 OTHER STUDIES
Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the adjacent Towns of Groton and Waterford and
the City of Groton are being revised concurrently with this study to include
wave height analyses (References 16, 17, and 18). The results of the revised
studies will be in exact agreement with the results of this study.
6.0 REFERENCES
1. National Academy of Sciences, Methodology for Calculating ~ Action
Effects Associated With Storm Surges, Washington, D. C., 1977.
2. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Hurricane Survey,
Connecticut Coastal and Tidal Areas, Waltham, Massachusetts, May 1964.
3. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, House Document No. 478, "Hurricane Survey
of New IDndon, Connecticut", July 1962.
4. Dewberry & Davis of Fairfax, Virginia, prepared for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Tidal Flood Profiles for ~ Connecticut Shoreline of
Long Island Sound, developed February 1982 (Unpublished).
5. Dewberry & Davis of Fairfax, Virginia, prepared for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Tidal Flood Profiles for ~ Thames River, developed
February 1983 (Unpublished).
6. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Tidal Flood ProfiLes
for ~~ England Coastline, Waltham, Massachusetts, February 1982.
7. Richard L. Umbarger, Century Engineering, Inc., Personal COlllll1unication to
Craig S. Wingo, Federal Emergency Management Agency t concerning the
'analysis of tide gage data for New IDndon, Connecticut, April 23, '1980.
8. U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Developnent, Federal Insurance
Administration, Flood Insurance Study, City ~ ~ London, ~ London
County, Connecticut, Washington, D. C., November 1976.
9. Aero Graphics Corporation of !lohemia, New York, Aerial Photographs and
Aerial Plotting plates, Scale 1:12,000: City of New IDndon, New London
County, Connecticut, April 1980.
10. Geotronics of Monrovia, California, Topographic Maps ~ ~ City ~ ~
London, Scale 1:480, Contour Interval 1 Foot (Undated).
11. U. S. .Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, ~ London Hurricane
Barrier, ~~, Scale 1:1,200, Contour Interval 1 Foot (Undated).
11
I
';'\
I
12. Dewberry & Davis of Fairfax, Virginia, for the Federal Emergen<;:y
Management Agency, Topograp~~c Maps for the City of New London, New
London County, Connecticut, SCale 1:2,400, Contour Interval 4 Feet,
Developed November. 1982 (Unp~lished).
I
I
13. U. S. Department of the Inte=ior, Geological SUrvey, 7.5-Minute Series
Topographic Maps, Scale 1: 24,000, Contour Interval 10 Feet: Uncasville,
Connecticut, 1958, Photorevised 1970; New London, Connecticut; 1958,
Photorevised 1970.
I
14. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Users Manual ~ ~ Height
Analysis, Washington, D. C., Revised February 1981.
pi
15. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers; Galveston District, Guidelines for
Identifying Coastal High Hazard Zones, Galveston, Texas, June 1975.
I
16. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Study, ~ Height
Analysis, ~ of Groton, New London County, Connecticut (Unpublished).
I
17. Federal Elliergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Study, ~ Height
Analysis, ~ of Waterford, ~ London County, Connecticut
(Unpublished) .
I
I
18. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Study, ~ Height
Analysis, City of Groton, ~ London County, Connecticut (Unpublished).
I
I
I
.':.
..
I
I
I
I
12
I
;~
~
It''.'-
r<J!f
~,
,;J.l:!tl
,~
"""
I~~~.;
..
.
.--
-..,
-
1;:qo-
1-\'."" ~-
~:r~.,
~~
~'il
}fr
~<'i'
~-
li~
~M'~
.1,;;
. ~,
~
,<>/
J
-'
-
51
ij
..
'.
~
"'-~.'<."--"'.-
~.:-..
......
-~~"----I::- ----...~:"-,.-.--~..
"-':...
-
iii
-
-
-
........
, ,
Iii'~'>_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4-2 Coastal Construction Manual
:170, _.
70
,_..,B~ '__ eo
. ... '-" ~ ..--.-
1".... -. -..-....-..
i \
! -i
!.-..---..
....-.._.._.. i
~
I
fa
.
~
.
\
\
\
,
.-.....
. !............~..
i I --:- .....;.--
1'1110 <4
;; ~110
I. .0__
".-.-~-
SCALE 1 :20.000.000 "I
\ " e J , r (110' ~ I
. u .. , " , .' . .
80 90 100 -(S3-Ba'SIC win speed 70 mph .\speClal wind region
I I \ I
Notes: 1. Values are fastest-mile speeds at 33 ft.(10m) above ground for exposure i
category C and are associated with an annual probability of OD2.
2. Lln..r Interpolation between wind speed contours_Is acceptable.
3. Caution In the, use of wind speed contour. In mountainous regions of
Alaska Is advised. Source: ANSI A58.','9S2: F~u'. 1. peg. 36.
HAWAII: 80 mph
Figure 4.1. Basic wind speed in miles per hour, 50-year recurrence interval.
50 'Ill.. WltJt>5?ee;b ~ '35 ,.",,\..
leb \11- W\Nb~>i'eGll : 'OS. 1.\\: "\ ~.~ MI'\'
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
..,":"
I
I
I
'.
I
I
I
.,
I
.,:~.
EM 1110-2-1100 (partll)
Proposed publishing date: 30 Sep 2001
63 , I
~B I
; I
....... !
II>
...... :53
E I I
~ I
- <\8
::> I I
0 t- 3.600
w 43 I if
w I ~
D..
~ 38
Z I
~
w 33
-' l-f
5E
Iii 28
~ 23
~ IJ-
1B
13 I I
20 30 -40 50 60 70 80 go
DURATION TIME. t (s)
Figure 11-2-2. Duration of the fastest-mlle wind speed as a
function of wind speed (for open terrain conditions)
From FEMA Coastal Construction Manual Figure 4-1: UjO = 85 mph
UJOO = 85 x 1.11 = 94.35
VI = 94.35 mph
t = 3600 = 3600 =38.2seconds
U, 94.35
-
~ -
- - ...,.,.::.. --
.. ..
_r::_ __
EM 1110-2-1100 (Part II)
Proposed publishing date: 30 Sep 2001
1.8
1.5
1,4
1.3
2L 1.2
U3.eoo
1.1
1.0
D.B
1
t(mln) I
1 10 laD
I-l-I-I-I-I....H..I.I-I-I-I-I-H-H-I
t(hr)
10
I I H+H-I
..... ..
Ut 45
1'1. ~toO - 1.277+0.296 tanh {0.9 10910T)
... .-
"
" 2L _ -0.15 109lo H1,5 334
U3,""" J,600<t<J6,DDD
~
...
0.6
I
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
l(s)
Flguren-2-1. Ratio ofwlnd apeed ofanydurallon U,to Ihe1.hrwlnd speed U"..
U {45} 94.35 {45 }
--L-=1.277+0.296tanh O.9Iog,o- -=1.277+0.296tanh O.9Iog,o-
U3600 t U3600 38.2
94.35 = 1.296
U3600
-
- _l_
-
94.35
U36M = - = n.8mph
1.296
I
I
. -'.evation of Observed Wind
(served Wind Speed
r-Sea Temp. Difference
ration of Observed Wind
Duration of Final Wind
ttitude of Observation
ngth of Wind Fetch
Equiv. Neutral Wind Speed
~justed Wind Speed
"'ve Height
Wave Period
jind Direction
Iran Wave Direction
I
.~I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Input Parameters
WIND ADJUSTMENT and WAVE GROWTH
Zobs:
Uobs:
delT:
DurO:
DurF:
LAT:
F:
Ue:
Ua:
HmO:
Tp:
Wdir:
Theta:
33.00
72 .80
10.00
1.00
1.00
41. 00
22.77
72 .35
123.57
8.67
5.62
180.00
165.00
ft
mph
deg C
hr
hr
deg
mi
mph
mph
ft
sec
deg
deg
Wind Observation Type
Shore (windward)
Wave Growth Equations
---------------------
Restricted Fetch
Deep-water
Duration-limited
Fishers Island Ferry District
New London Harbor, CT
IOO-Year Significant Wave Height Determination
/ill = 13
Bl =80
Number of Radials = 9
"Deep Water"
Fetch #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Fetch LenlZlh (miles)
0.44
0.51
0.76
1.14
20.58
22.31
22.98
22.79
1.89
ControlIing Wave Height for WHAFIS 3.0
Hs x 1.6 = 8.67 X 1.69 = 14.65 ft
50-year fastest-mile windspeed = 85 mph
Figure 4-1 FEMA Coastal Construction Manual
100-yr windspeed = 85 mph x 1.11 = 94.35 mph
Figure 11-2-2, page 11-2-5 of the Coastal
Engineering Manual (CEM)
Duration for 100-year windspeed = 38.2 sec
Conversion to I-hr duration
From Figure 11-2-1, page 11-2-4 of the CEM
U,
- = 1296
U36<lO
9435mph .
U3600 = 1296 = 72~mph
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
.,:1
..
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 3-53.
Predicted random wave
d
H~ 0.5 .
o
(sea) setup on plane slopes for
Storm Surge Wave Setup
. gT2
L =-
. 211"
32.2.5.622 -161.9 ft
211"
H; = 8.67 It
H; '= 8.67 = 0.0536
L. 161.9
Figure 3-53 in SPM
Slope'" 1/30
S
-=0.031
H'
S = 0.031 .8.67 = 0.27 ft
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
':<:.
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 12
BULKHEAD DESIGN ANALYSIS
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.::.~.
Fishers Island Ferry District
CLOMR
~
Wave Forces on Bulkhead
Reference: Goda, Y. 2000. "Design of Vertical Breakwaters." In Random Seas and Design of
Maritime Structures. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. PIe. Ltd.
100 Year Still Water Level
+9'NG\ 1)
Pl""701 Jbtr
+lO"NG\TI
SWL:= lOft
Top of Bulkhead = TB TB:= 9ft
p@topofwaU-6891bftJ
Water Depth
ds:= 27ft
F - 12.138 !b.1l
12.2"
Force = 13.885 1b:ft
Significant Wave Height H:= 8.67ft
Peak Wave Period
T := 5.62sec
Depth from bottom of wall to SWL = Os
-17' NG\1)
PJ=490 Ib'tt
p,-3191b'l\'
Ds:= 27ft
Ib
W:= 64-
ft3
p := 0
Maximum Horizontal Pressure, PI' at SWL
PI = W(l+cos.8Xal +a2cOs2 .8)H=~
2
Hm:= 1.8.H
Hm = 15.61ft
g.r
L .--
0'- 2lt
Lo = 161.73 ft
dg
- = 0.1669 ds I L = 0.195 (SPM MANUAL)
La
ds
L'- -
.- 0.195
L = 138.46 ft
I
u1 := 0.6 + -.
2
(4lt ~)
sin+lt ~)
2
u1 = 0.69
Db is the depth at 5H from the structure
Db := 30ft
Page 1 of2
I
I
I
I
I
I
UI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OtIC:
U2a:= [(f}(1 - ~}(:~ rJ
U2:= min(U2a.U2b)
U2 = 0.01
2ds
u2b := -
Hm
P1:= ~ .(1 + COS(P))[U1 + (U2'COS(p)2)]Hm
"," , - [~ (' - ,..{:. :. J J]
P3:= u3'P1
Ib
P3 = 379.05-
ft2
Pressure at top of wall
~(SWL - TB) J
P := P1 - ~ ds '(P1 - P2)J
Force:= +.(p + P2)-(ds - SWL + TB)
Wave Trough at the Wall
Hm
- = 0.11
L
~
-=0.2
L
From Figure 4.9
p
....
wHmd.
From Figure 4.10
U3 = 0.54
P1
P2:=
COSh(2X :)
Ib
P = 689.05-
ft2
U2a = 0.01
":.::.
Fishers Island Ferry District
CLOMR
U2b = 3.46
Ib
P1 = 700.98-
ft2
41b
Force = 1.39 x 10 -
ft
.!..... = 0.45 S:= ~.0.45
d.
~ = 12 15ft I
From Figure 4.11
...!L = 0.49
wHm
P2:= w.Hm .0.49
Ib
P2 = 489.4-
ft2
0.45
Ib
P2 = 379.05-
ft2
Pmin:= w.Hm .ds.0.45
I 41b I
Pmin = 1.21 x 10 ft
Page 2 of2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
CLOMR
~
Wave Forces on Bulkhead
Reference: Goda, Y. 2000. "Design of Vertical Breakwaters." In Random Seas and Design of
Maritime Structures, Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. PIe. Ltd.
Mean Low Water (-0.9' NGVD)
SWL:= -a.9ft
Top of Bulkhead = TB
p tfj, top of\\-llU = 3-lO lb if
TS:= 9ft
+9'NGYD
Water Depth
ds:= 16.lft
-ITNGVD
P,=649Ib n'
-O.9'NGYD
Significant Wave Height H:= 8.67ft
F - 5,063 Ib.n
Force = 13.806Ib n
Peak Wave Period
T := 5.62sec
6.9'
Depth from bottom of wall to SWL = 0$
P,=3551b II'
p,=458Ib'n'
Ib
w:= 64-
ft3
Detennine Breaking Wave Height at this Depth
Ds:= 16.lft
p:= 0
Hm/d$ = 0.78 Hm:= ds.0.78 Hm = 12.56ft (New Hmaxl
Maximum Horizontal Pressure, Pl' at SWL
PI = W(l+cospXal +a2cOS2 i)Hm11-,
2
g.r
Lo:= -
2"
Lo = 161.73 ft
<Is
- = 0.0995 d$ I L = 0.14055 (SPM MANUAL)
l.o
ds
L'-
,- 0.14055
L = 114.55 ft
I
eLl := 0.6 + -.
2
(4" :)
sin+" :)
2
eLl = 0.794
Db Is the depth at 5H from the structure
Db:= 17ft
Page 1 of 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
CLOMR
0tJt
U2a:= [(f}(1 - ~){:~ J]
2ds
u2b := -
Hm
u2a = 0.0 II u2b = 2.56
u2:= min(U2a,U2b)
u2 = 0.01
P1:= ; .(1 + COS(l3))[U1 + (U2'COS(J>}2)JHm
Ib
P1 = 646.41-
ft2
",. , - [~ t - ,,,,(:. :. J J]
u3=0.71
P3:= u3'P1
Ib
P3 = 456.52 -
ft2
P1
P2:= CO~+X :)
Ib
P2 = 456.52 -
ft2
Pressure at top of wall
R:= 0.75.(1 + cos(J>)).Hm R = 18.84ft
(TB - SWL)
P:= 'P1
R
Ib
P = 339.73-
ft2
Force:= [(P2ds) + [(P1 - P2).ds'0.5]] + [lp.(TB - SWL)] + [(P1 - p).(TB - SWL}.0.5]]
Force = 1.376 x 104: I
Wave Trough at the Wall
Hm
-=O.ll
L
<Is
-=0.14
L
P
DUD
wHmd,
0.39
From Figure 4.9
Pmin:= w.Hm.ds.0.39
From Figure 4.10
~ Ib
Pmin = 5.05 x 10' -
ft
~ = 0.425 S:= ds.0.425 Is = 6.84 ft I
d,
From Figure 4.11
p'
----L- = 0.44
wH
m
Ib
P2 = 353.63-
ft2
P2:= w.Hm ,0.44
Page 2 of 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.;.
I
I
I
I
I
.','
Fishers Island Ferry District
CLOMR
~
Wave Forces on Bulkhead
Reference: Goda, Y. 2000. "Design of Vertical Breakwaters." In Random Seas and Design of
Maritime Structures. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. PIe. Ltd.
Critical Water Level
Deritical = Hma/O.78
Derftleal = 20 ft
SWL := 3ft
p @, top ofwnll = 606 Ibft:
\
.........J
+9"NGYD
Top of Bulkhead = TB
TB:= 9ft
Water Depth
ds:= 20ft
~ +3'NGYD
P,=8151b ft'
Significant Wave Height H := 8.61'l
F - 8.5921bft
~
0---
J
-17' NG\"D
Force = 17.6341b.ft
Peak Wave Period
q'
T:= 5.6:1sec
Depth from bottom of wall to SWL = D.
P,-l70 Ib ft'
p,~523 Ib ft'
Ib
w:= 64-
ft3
Maximum Horizontal Pressure, Pi' at SWL
Ds:= 20ft
p:= 0
PI = w (1 + cosfJXal + a2 cos2 i)H Jlli1.~
2
Hm:= J.8.H
Hm = 15.61 ft
g.,-2
L '=-
O'
21t
Lo = 161.73 ft
lis
- = 0.1237 d.1 L= 0.1612 (SPM MANUAL)
Lo
ds
L'- -
.- 0.1612
L = 124.07 ft
(41t d:)
"'1 := 0.6 +~. sinh(41t lis)
L L '_
2
"'1 = 0.748
Db is the depth at 5H from the structure
Db:= 30ft
Page 1 of2
.
.
.
.
.
..
.'..
.
.
.
.
.
.
':1
.
.
.
'.
J
>~
Fishers Island Ferry District
CLOMR
otJt
UZa:= [G}(I - ~:}(:~ J]
2ds
uZb := -
Hm
UZa = 0.068 uZb = 2.56
Uz := min( uZa . UZb)
Uz = 0.07
Pj:= ; .(1 + COS(P))[Uj + (uz.cos(P)2)JHm
Ib
Pj = 814.55-
ftZ
",. , - [~ [' - ,...(:. :. J]]
U3 = 0.64
P3:= u3'Pj
Ib
P3= 522.71-
ft2
Pj
PZ:=
COSh(2X :)
Ib
Pz = 522.71-
ft2
Pressure at top of wall
R:= 0.75.(1 + cos(P)).Hm
R = 23.41ft
[ (TB - SWL)~
p:= I - R ~'P1
Ib
P = 605.77-
ft2
Force:= [(P2'ds) + [(p1 - pZ).ds'O.5]] + [lp.(TB - SWL)] + [(P1 - P).(TB - SWL).O.5]]
41b
Force = 1.7634 x 10 -
ft
Wave Trough at the Wall
Hm
-=0.13
l
ds
-=0.16
L
From Figure 4.9
p
mm
wHmd,
0.43
Pmin:= w.Hm 'ds.0.43
~ = 0.45 S:= ds.0.45 Is = 9ft I
d,
31b
Pmin = 8.59 x 10'-
ft
From Figure 4.10
From Figure 4.11
P:
--'- = 0.47
wH
m
PZ:= w.Hm .0.47
Ib
Pz = 469.43-
ft2
Page Z of Z
.:,1'
-
\ ,
, ,
,
:
!
142
Random SelU and Duign in Maritime Structure!
directed offshore. Such a pressure may govern the stability of an upright section
against sliding seaward, the structural design of the front walls of concrete
caissons, etc.
The problem of wave pressure under a wave trough, in particular that of
breaking waves, has not been examined in detail. But as far as the pressure
of standing waves is concerned, the author13 has prepared a set of diagrams
shown in Figs. 4.9 to 4.11. These diagrams are based on theoretical calculations
using finite amplitude standing waves, with m~clifications introduced on the
basis of laboratory data. Figure 4.9 gives the total offshore-directed pressure
under a wave trough, Fig. 4.10 shows its lever arm length, and Fig. 4.11 gives
the magnitude of the bottom pressure at the time of the greatest offshore-
directed total pressure. Figure 4.11, for example, indicates that the negative
pressure near the bottom can become quite large even under the condition of
quasi-deepwater waves, if the wave height is sufficiently large. In comparison to
the onshore-directed pressure under a wave crest, the pressure under a trough
is seen to become larger than that under a crest if the ratio of the water
depth to wavelength exceeds about 0.25. This is caused by the appearance of
second harmonic pressure components of appreciable amplitude due to wave
1.0
0.9
~
-"= 0.8
: I ~~
~,
. . ~f
j~ 0.7
. - -.. 'll~0.2
~-
- . 0.6
.
- . \ \
.~
.....
. 0.5 0
- . q'?s-~'> <10
. >
> .
-~ 0.4
.
.~
o . I--
.- .
~ . 0.31--
. .
E . 0.2 VI- +-
._ 0
~~
...
0_ I-- VI--
zo
0.1 ---
ci;,
-
-
-
1
"
IdL 0.25
0.3
O.~__
0.5
0.6
O.~~_
1.0
2.0
o
o
0.08
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.10
Wave Steepness. HIL
Fig. 4.9. Calculation diagram for the total pressure of standing Waves under a wave trough.l~:<'i:~
~ -",'F.;".
-:.r; ~'''"',:.~y...:-::.,.....
, .0;....
. '.~
Design oj Vertical Brmkwater.
}
-=r.
-
, .
-
,.. -
,~ 'c',
f;. ~'_
i'. ~<'
.;<. if:.
--,~~,::.
;k
.~
il;
:~ ff.,.
~~ ~it: :
;;...
.,-
-~!'"
.;rC.
..-
t;'
1.0
-e: 0.9
~
"-
0.8
:;
-'
0':;
-Sf- 0.7
~.
3~.
E~
..( :;
. .
. .
: ~
..J~ 0.4
-0
:5... 0.3
.; :
. ~
~~ 0.2
:5~
Z._ 0.1
.........~
---
0,6
-
0.5
o
o
0.02
-,..~.
;"~_~'-l:.'v.. . .-
r
143
-- ~l~l
---~
0.05
0.1
0.5
0.3--
TO.
0.07
cR"
I 'rll
0.01
'0.08
0.10
0.06
Wave Steepness. HI L
Fig. 4.10. Calculation diagram for the lever arm length of the total standing wave pressure
under a wave trough.13
"
:::1'.:'.
1.0
0.9
~"E
~ ;
0."
E :;
~~
00
~r;
o .
.;0 ~
...l "=
. .
~o~
:: s';r 0.4
~~ .:
.~~ E 0.3
.-~
s...f-
.- .. u
~ " .
. . .
~~~
0.8
0.7
"
'" ~~!:!f
~...
~
I
I
\ \
0.6 \
l-
0.5
'\. "
0.05
~V
I
i\
,I
i
I
I I I
-....Pi. , iILl2
1----0:07 I' I I I 10.25
0.3
I 1011
_l- I 0.5-f--
., 1 11.0
'-' ,
L.--l-- -
0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
Wave Steepness. HI L
;
1
i
il
I
l-
0.2::;:;; L.-- L--
0.1 l-
o ___ L.--
o 0.02
'I;'
Fig. 4.11. Calculation diagram for the bottom pressure at the time of the largest offshore-
ward wave thrust during Wave trough.13
.~
:~;~.
...~:.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u.
u
I
I
I
I
I
..:';,::.
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
BULKHEAD DESIGN ANALYSIS
The structural stability of the bulkhead has been investigated with respect to the design wave
forces. It was determined that the wave forces were not the controlling condition in the
bulkhead design. Normal live load conditions govern the design of the bulkhead. As such, the
bulkhead will resist the forces, associated with the 100 year storm condition.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.,~~
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 13
TEMPORARY WAVE
BARRIER DESIGN
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I
I
..;:;~
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
TEMPORARY W AVE BARRIER OPERATION PLAN
Purpose:
The proposed top elevation of the bulkhead is +9.0 feet NVGD everywhere except in front of the
ferry ramps. The top elevation of the bulkhead in these two 20 ft wide sections is +4.1' NGVD.
This lower elevation is necessary due to the operational requirements for vehicles loading on/off
the ferry.
Temporary wave barriers have been designed to compensate for the lower bulkhead elevation in
these locations as shown in detail on drawing # 202013-01. The top elevation of the barrier is
+9.0 NGVD to coincide with the other sections of bulkhead. The wave barriers are not intended
to stop the flow of water. However, they will trip the incoming waves in the same manner the
original bulkhead will. The panels will be installed adjacent to the bulkhead. The panels have
been designed to resist the forces associated with 100-year storm wave conditions.
Descriotion:
The temporary wave barriers are constructed from sheet pile panels. The sheet piles will be the
same as those used in the construction of the bulkhead. The sheet piles will be held together and
supported by steel W section wales. . H pile stanchions in pre-cast concrete sockets will be
utilized to provide vertical support to the panels (see detail on drawing #202013-01).
Ooeration:
The Temporary Wave Barrier Operation Plan will be implemented when water levels in New
London Harbor reach an elevation of +4.0' NGVD. A tide mark for elevation +4.0 NGVD shall
be maintained on-site in a location that is apparent to Fishers Island Ferry District personnel.
Forklifts are available on-site for installation of the panels.
Remove the covers from the pre-cast concrete sockets. Insert the H-pile stanchions into the
concrete sockets. Install the wave panel with the wales inserted between the flanges of the H-
pile stanchions.
Personnel should be familiar with of the Temporary Wave Barrier Operation Plan and the use of
the temporary wave barriers. Installation of the temporary wave barriers should be practiced on
a quarterly basis.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.
,,,I
.
.
.
.
/1
.
.
"~I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Iir~ ~~,~ r"~I.I....'~\.' ,.:.~ II
otIt
_e(.l~Jr,.'II.r.:.'~I"'~I~(__
PROJECT ;:::IF f) - CL-O/V{ rz
':;'1:,
SHEET NO. I
JOB NO. 7~2u/~
JR-1
f/bE
3
MADE BY
CHKD. BY
OF
TASK NO. '2-
DATE 4/10 /D 2-
DATE i//~"/tl2-
SUBJECT
ntf1l.
W/fVr;- /Sfttt/l/t'lL-
;~EM~_:vJkJE F=OfLL6 - O,J b\JL--\t-l~ SlTl"3 oF-3 Lf(~ /:>2-- ._____
---ILi\J'DO ----.. .. - . ^~ I L-' P ILL ~ . t? $T1l-\ ~ T1 --.J ,- n ----- -.----
_~_______~y.. ___Wr:sv u ,_ -0 C::'... _ \ V 0, '.. ...._____________
.. u___.'._n__. ..
-(po<.> ps F=
---------1-"1
, :
~-----__ ___________ __._______.'.__._____4_____.__..__ ,.
-. -..--.-------.------'
_.__.~-- ----------.------
_n __~_ _~__.____________..._
.' . . ., . . .. ."
1'------ -______ _'_~ _*'._______ "__"_...__...... _ _,_._,_____.. __ ._. __ __.__,_____~___.___._._. ________,__'--__'__
, ,
-._._--.-.. h__ .... .-. ..,'-_______. '_+___.___..___... ___._____.__________ 0_.", ___...__
,------------- -----.----.-
-"35Sb =f~!'_=:::.:_=_===..:..__:..:=__========_== . ==
, ,
. ,
----,-- -_. --~_..._. ...--.-------------
__.___._.________._. __ __. n_ _ ___.._._.______._._._.._________._______
----_._-_...__._-~-_..~----_._-_.-- --- -. --.--... --------------..
---'--+4. \
"7 i 7~';SF-----= - ------~-=:==_==:==_-:- _n.. ---
._-----------. ----------~-_._-----------
--.----..( -.------------ ------ ..
---.., ---------------------
I, :; ! I
1'1:
" : I I I
,
I ; I; : ,-- _~ ---I-~--i __;_I-==AsSJME"'--SVl"l.sA.n.- e.
-~ --I"-~-~l::'-'---~--;:r:--. 'I
=~~~-~~-.~:~;;~j-~~;.~;;~J~~~ -=~==~~ ~~~-~~=~~r~~o;~~=~~~~~
--.. - -.-----------.--
-.------- ---- --------------.-
j I i
, ; ! I '
:'; j ; ! ;
I I ,
I I ,
, '
; t ;
, '
. ,
I
I I ,
I I I ~' i ; ! I
I~~ <;;r:;o.<:.TN(,
i I ! t ! 1 ;
---------..---.----------.-----
, . ,
I,
, , " , , ~,77\
I' ". -l~-'-
L' ~'k_iol__SE::c...1l0"";-' ., n~-
,'V . " _It o"l.'>-pL.-F________~I~il.6_.l..
! I I _ _;._. ~ _.___..____ . - :
1: I I Ii' .
I I
~ i I i
i
I I
: !
_'11~-:,---~ -. ,
--- - i
, : ! I 1-'--- ,
; _ .._~---- ;
, ; '- , I .
, 41- , , , I I
__=:4. ,
-- -'-- - -
, -- , . -
--- - ---- -.-.
- - ..-.. - - ... .. ~--'- - ---
--- --".'-'- - --
; I I
,-- .---_. " I . .
I! j-~-
----
, i .
, ;
tN: u.~IS-=
I I I \".L-F-
fl'
, ,
, ,
,
: : i
-
~FI.4oi) j>L-F_:...._____:.....~-~
__LL~_ _ _.
. I ~
~ I I :
! : ! ! I I ~
- ----.....--
,
-
.---- - ----...1
'-. ----- --_. - --.-,-----. - .-...- .. ..---.. -- ..-< - -.. ,. -.-- - ..
,
. h._. _.._
... __ _.__..,-,~ :'~-::=_l'-\~-,,"~ t42-;-(lP'jIS\( 4.~)~~- ~3,'011Ifit
z. . ___n_ _~~_:__'_::__=~=:::::'-
,,- '.... -t..SS-:.Mf:; --I=:"' = 'O~' I." h.. .. -Ac,';j --r -S-o 1/, \.....-ua.
r' I? '-l. I '"' ~,.....t'__ .~ -~I"'"
--,,---- '---------"1'00:::---' ~ ,-., JJE= WA.:;^ rJl. ",-,,-_..
.- ,.\t'\f:t' 1"i.. ."//__________.
-.. . - At-~w '7,)'(. of~STRt-)S, .. . ",---
'E~ t= \:n'lf- o,t.t:.>,f-?O ~<;I ::: tN JC~(
--:-t=!:-+----
. .
--------
,-...-..-.,.....-
I
I.
I
I
I
I
'J
I
I
I
I
I
I
"~I
I
I
I
.1 :
.'
I
":1:..
..l~ ~~,~ r".:-I.I....'~\,,',., II
otIC
3
_..J~l.ill.f~'~I......Ii'[--.
PROJECT FI FD - c.. /..- c) M fZ-
SUBJECT T/:::....M/J. . wffV~ /J.l1l/.rZle;--/Z-
.
SHEET NO. z..-
JOB NO. z..-o l... c! I :3
MADE BY J ,crv1
CHKD. BY /llJE"
OF
TASK NO.
DATE t/j,;)/" 2
DATE :-h, hI-
5' 1Le""Q =-
::: (Q'3 06 Fi.. Ii:? )-1< /2- /'!rr-
.. I
4-'-/, 000 /)S I
~ z,z,(., I'" 3
ti
~
==-~_.A1.!~~'(_ vSf,,:,"'"
---- - -'? s'2 .
-------1+\, 11-c.'t_ _.1_ -,-.~
I-IP 11...-,c'53'
$)C=~"'.<{ IrJ~_u
"DIL____":___:"_ _ _~::::.=~-:=.:.:.::::.::.=:~=
or-l-_S_\K.. .. "
f;~uc..~
12-\ -H<-1. l-J::_.:":_ 0_:_::':':::_'::'':::=':' _.:::::.===:::..:.
Z.-MIt, -= 0 . _ " __ ________
.. ASSllt-\b-~: ,,'::: -:_:::.:.=:::.::=====..:----- - =~
~- -'. . ......._-;--~._-_._-------_.-.--
:'33, ~'(o~ kcS'.~:.I?2--~-1,..::":"-'-=!?l?~"~f~:9~--
--.. - .. ..-.-- . ..~ ---._- _.------------------
"1<- =lli '2.10 Ib------..----'-------------
\ ' ",--.."---,---.--------
FerL fee.:)" f~rn-'Q-'JC -- :::-:::-:-:::::-==::::::::::=-=-_-=-:-
ro.,,,.i'..........- An =A. -=' .- -.t", 10 I\?- ---------- --,
c..." '" ,...., "'"""~" . -, I'"' ---..--.e-ll-SJ:'"
".:1000 SI - u_ _m_._
r f -.- ..-
fOiL All.." vJlt)E' \W __. :: :--_ - ::: ::: :::: .::
Co_tJl/rC-T \1-T == V'\ ~'!-' _ :::-I.(,_'~ ":__N."'~L_Q~~.. ..
11-\' - - -'. -------..,-..------
c.-t\1:; -u::::
~~l)',.J~
P.>~\;:') __ CrJ_:.$u t...14;T ,N.(l.~s:).:,:::t:::::=::::~_.::=::::=~~==:::
.tl') =: y\
S
,
<=' 12-, " z.
OS
~ lCp, t..10 .,. .}\? ,-//, =
,~~;i- IN';
~/I-':"r: 14L __====
.=.-O~:::.:=:
A S$"'Mf:'
TWO wt\I-ES
H1-~ .
ll,S
I 1
~\61.A.i\v(P NLeA. ~1.~)(IO :::
FoiL \..Owt::t1-- wA-\...lC '.
- 5(,"(Cp f!.F
, ,
20':"
1 -i70(SF
"ZS ,SF:. _
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1---
1
..I.::1.:.'~ r"~I'I".J.:.\,.,':.'.
0tIt
_e(.)~I."1II":.'~If,."'I~[__
PROJECT AFO~ CWM/Z-
. SUBJECT /C:;-'Yv11' wA-r;,::- Mfl/ll f;:'-rt-
":':~.
SHEET NO. '3
JOB NO. ZO '2-0 ( :<,
MADE BY J FI'-1
CHKD. BY /I ))E"
. OF ~
TASK NO.
DATE U/IO/DZ-
1 .
DATE yln/"L.
vJ':=- (tc'i:5f..,n/01'5Fj? Z-,,/ =' IrZo fJl-F
.\- J ~l .~ '2- . .......m....
_ " A 1"\ :: ~ '" '2-2, 7~O~Flb:::.:-. :.::'
10 \ ..~ .. -------------
'l'JA\)c:;~ - CotJT\,J v~
. MqOt:\.....
As '.
toll ~
AS$vM(
'Nc:a~'2...-1
A-sSVN\E:: f C: q.o ~r\-aT.s. FOr-
c..rtc--u:. (!,eNOlrJ b (l,~ ct:N
1.11:>\- ~'SI=' .
, <-I'
.----.---..\, ..-- -
:: '2-11 COu~IN" I\"- .-.
_, .. ... ... __ ___._n_
e.,,- - ';:'4/l.'c s.\ ...--.-. .-.----
r ~ 1:> - "1 lL-. .. .._ m. _ ___.m
S ltE:&= c,'~._t~~_m...m___._
S.::- 16.2.. 1",3 .::...: .-::'::::::::::::==.
~ A-f2-(L I-C:YL-
'tI"\..E:-~
. 'S =. ttoll/fJ....I.r:.t_.__.::.:::..::::.:.:
..----.. - I -I..
. .':t.
'H. . j
-
I
. .
:::1.'5 !
_ 'l\\qqt:\.-::As :_: -..:::: ::..::..7::.~_~---7.~~If'-7~!=~::.~
._u ... - - -f ~ ~ .J,' -Ii. .,/>- .. ... VI "='___--==-~G.r_KI
j;. . ~ .. on .::::: 'B-=-=-:::::-::::::::::
~ . ..--- .-..-.--------------.-
/-,..., L _____._.__._..______.__
. ....; f .' ........ _.__ _____.___
,
\ 0 'PAN €;i...-
tfCf sF
~
\
\
~--rqo ~r-
~..~ .M
\) S
c'11-a-~ WT
o~
A
A= '-1,,,\',>< 10' r=-
. 5l\"t
,
yJ k'\.. B;. '. '2-" I 0 )( "2- I F' u= ..-
"\C\k\... wT = "t.:s ~c \'0
. ~ v.i ~ ~ ~ r ~:~{[~C:~~~~~
1------1 "2-" .. .... -- ........
I.':i' (;.qvt:'ftJ.!i..
. ---..- .
-= g \4 ~ ,2. '1, HU__ -....
1.,0.7 jrJ)!H ~ \ti.L~?:~:~-~=:
wr;ff~' I/o I'SFX n f"F :=
4-1...D II?
'/'1~/
- OIL
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
.'.:;.c;;
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 14
RUNUP & OVERTOPPING ANALYSIS
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.....
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
<.t:.
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
RUNUP & OVERTOPPING ANALYSIS
The top elevation of the proposed bulkhead is +9.0' NGVO and the 100 year storm still water
elevation (SWL) is at +10' NGVO. Consequently, the bulkhead will be submerged by the SWL
before any wave action is considered. ACES will not compute runup and overtopping for
submerged structures. Therefore, this type of analysis was not performed on the bulkhead since it
is not applicable to this situation. In the case of the 100 year storm, the bulkhead acts as a
submerged breakwater and trips the incoming waves as they enter the property. The height of the
bulkhead relative to the upland elevations and the water depth at the barrier toe are included in
the WHAFIS 3.0 transect information in CHAMP. This program recognizes that the structure is
submerged d adjusts the flood zone boundaries according to the wave height that can be
supported by the surrounding ground elevations.
It should be noted that WHAFIS 3.0 output indicates that the VE Zone terminates at the face of
the bulkhead. However, as recommended in "Guidelines and Specifications for Wave Elevation
Determination and V Zone Mapping" for submerged structures, a 30 foot zone of VE Zone has
been mapped on the landward side of the bulkhead to allow for energy dissipation. This section
of VE Zone has an elevation of + 12 feet, corresponding to 3 feet above the crest elevation of the
bulkhead. The proposed ferry terminal office building will not be within the 30 foot buffer zone.
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
':.0::.
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, cr
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 15
WHAFIS 3.0
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.:.-~
I ... THE FOLLOWING MESSAGES ARE THE RESULTS FROM THE 100-YR ELEVATION INTERPOLATION FOR THE TRANSECT
- Transect: 1 Date: 4/11/2002
I
WAVE HEIGHT COMPUTATIONS FOR FLOOD INSURANCE STUDIES (VERSION 3.0, 9_88)
I - Transect: 1 Date: 4/11/2002
I PART1 INPUT
IE .000 .000 .000 6.400 10.270 13.900 5.620 .000 .643
.000
DU 14.000 9.000 1.000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .581
100
IF 16.000 9.000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.026
.000
IF 87.000 7.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.012
100
IF 177.000 7.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.007
00
IF 240.000 6.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.010
'I:: IF 358.000 5.200 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005
IF 1000.000 10.270 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .008
.000
100 ET .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
lRAGE END END FETCH SURGE ELEV SURGE ELEV INITIAL INITIAL BOTTOM
STATION ELEVATION LENGTH 10-YEAR 100-YEAR WAVE HEIGHT W. PERIOD SLOPE A-
ZONES
lIE .000 .000 .000 6.400 10.270 13.900 5.620 .000 .643
.' 00,
~ DUNE CREST DUNE CREST DUNE OR NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
RAGE
STATION ELEVATION SEAWALL 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
ZONES
IDU 14.000 9.000 1. 000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .581
00
END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
[RAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
NES
IF 16.000 9.000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.026
.,.,rOO
END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
AVERAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
INES
. IF 87.000 7.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.012
.000
I END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
AVERAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
INES
IF 177.000 7.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.007
.000
lRAGE END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 1 DO-YEAR SLOPE A-
(NES
IF 240.000 6.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.010
00
1 ~;:
END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
AVERAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
tNES
IF 358.000 5.200 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005
.000
lRAGE END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
IONES
IF 1000.000 10.270 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .008
000
I~~;~;==========================================~-~:-
.1 NOTE,
SURGE ELEVATION INCLUDES CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ASTRONOMICAL AND STORM TIDES.
1
1
1
1
1
,I
1
1
1
1
1
ul
I
1
PART2: CONTROLLING WAVE HEIGHTS. SPECTRAL
PEAK WAVE PERIOD. AND WAVE CREST ELEVATIONS
LOCATION
CONTROLLING SPECTRAL PEAK WAVE CREST
WAVE HEIGHT WAVE PERIOD ELEVATION
IE
.00 7.26 5.62
14.00 4.12 5.62
16.00 .98 5.62
87.00 1.07 5.62
177.00 1.25 5.62
240.00 1.24 5.62
358.00 1.36 5.62
458.00 1.59 5.62
558.00 1.84 5.62
658.00 1.83 5.62
808.00 1.17 5.62
908.00 .56 5.62
1000.00 .01 5.62
DU
IF
IF
IF
IF
IF
IF
PART3 LOCATION OF AREAS ABOVE 100-YEAR SURGE
NO AREAS ABOVE 100-YEAR SURGE IN THIS TRANSECT
PART4 LOCATION OF SURGE CHANGES
STATION
10-YEAR SURGE
NO SURGE CHANGES IN THIS TRANSECT
PARTS LOCATION OF V ZONES
STATION OF GUTTER
15.35
13.15
10.95
11. 02
11.15
11.14
11. 22
11.38
11. 56
11. 55
11. 09
10.66
10.28
100-YEAR SURGE
14.71
WINDWARD
LOCATION OF ZONE
I
..::~
PART6 NUMBERED A ZONES AND V ZONES
STATION OF GUTTER ELEVATION ZONE DESIGNATION FHF
.00 15.35
V12 EL=15 60
5.42 14.50
V12 EL=14 60
11. 79 13.50
V12 EL=13 60
14.59 12.50
V12 EL=12 60
14.71 12.37
A10 EL=12 50
15.50 11. 50
A10 EL=l1 50
524.88 11. 50
A10 EL=12 50
675.30 11. 50
A10 EL=l1 50
946.82 10.50
A10 EL=10 50
1000.00 10.28
ZONE TERMINATED AT END OF TRANSECT
I
I
I
I
I
'.'....1.
":"
I
I
I
I
I
I
"~'I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I .-
... THE FOLLOWING MESSAGES ARE THE RESULTS FROM THE 100-YR ELEVATION INTERPOLATION FOR THE TRANSECT
- Transect: 2 Date: 4/11/2002
I
WAVE HEIGHT COMPUTATIONS FOR FLOOD INSURANCE STUDIES (VERSION 3.0. 9_88)
I - Transect: 2 Date: 4/11/2002
I PART1 INPUT
IE .000 .000 .000 6.400 10.270 13.900 5.620 .000 1. 286
.000
DU 7.000 9.000 1. 000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 1. 059
100
IF 9.000 9.000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.223
. 00
IF 29.000 4.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.099
100 IF 48.000 5.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005
00
IF 238.000 5.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .007
,:: IF 345.000 7.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .007
IF 1000.000 10.270 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005
.000
100 ET .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
LRAGE END END FETCH SURGE ELEV SURGE ELEV INITIAL INITIAL BOTTOM
STATION ELEVATION LENGTH 10-YEAR 100-YEAR WAVE HEIGHT W. PERIOD SLOPE A-
ZONES
'.IIE .000 .000 .000 6.400 10.270 13.900 5.620 .000 1.286
00
. . DUNE CREST DUNE CREST DUNE OR NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
RAGE
STATION ELEVATION SEAWALL 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
ZONES
tDU 7.000 9.000 1.000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 1. 059
00
END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
[RAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
NES
IF 9.000 9.000 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.223
:.fOO
END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
AVERAGE
JNES STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
IF 29.000 4.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 -.099
.000
I END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
AVERAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
tNES
IF 48.000 5.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005
.000
LRAGE END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE BOTTOM
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR SLOPE A-
[NES
IF 238.000 5.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000 .000 .007
000
I ':';~
END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE
AVERAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR
INES
IF 345.000 7.100 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000
.000
I END END NEW SURGE NEW SURGE
AVERAGE
STATION ELEVATION 10-YEAR 100-YEAR
INES
IF 1000.000 10.270 .000 10.270 .000 .000 .000
. 00
~;~~;==========================================~~-~:-
I NOTE:
. SURGE ELEVATION INCLUDES CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ASTRONOMICAL AND STORM TIDES.
1
I
I
I
IE
DU
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BOTTOM
SLOPE A-
.000 .007
BOTTOM
SLOPE A-
.000 .005
PART2: CONTROLLING WAVE HEIGHTS. SPECTRAL
PEAK WAVE PERIOD. AND WAVE CREST ELEVATIONS
LOCATION
CONTROLLING SPECTRAL PEAK WAVE CREST
WAVE HEIGHT WAVE PERIOD ELEVATION
IF
.00 7.26 5.62
7.00 4.12 5.62
9.00 .98 5.62
29.00 .78 5.62
48.00 .88 5.62
181. 00 1.18 5.62
238.00 1.28 5.62
345.00 1. 70 5.62
495.00 1.71 5.62
595.00 1.50 5.62
695.00 1.14 5.62
795.00 .77 5.62
895.00 .39 5.62
995.00 .02 5.62
1000.00 .01 5.62
IF
IF
IF
IF
IF
PART3 LOCATION OF AREAS ABOVE 100-YEAR SURGE
NO AREAS ABOVE 100-YEAR SURGE IN THIS TRANSECT
PART4 LOCATION OF SURGE CHANGES
STATION
10-YEAR SURGE
NO SURGE CHANGES IN THIS TRANSECT
PARTS LOCATION OF V ZONES
15.35
13 .15
10.95
10.82
10.89
11. 09
11.17
11. 46
11.47
11.32
11. 06
10.81
10.55
10.28
10.28
100-YEAR SURGE
T_f"It""1lo'T'Tf'\tJ (\1;' .,,,t.n:'
C:'T'lI'1'Tnt..t "CO I':n"l"'T'e'g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"':'::~
7.71 WINDWARD
PART6 NUMBERED A ZONES AND V ZONES
STATION OF GUTTER ELEVATION ZONE DESIGNATION FHF
.00 15.35
V12 EL=15 60
2.71 14.50
V12 EL=14 60
5.90 13.50
V12 EL=13 60
7.59 12.50
V12 EL=12 60
7.71 12.37
A 9 EL=12 45
8.50 11. 50
A 9 EL=l1 45
912.53 10.50
A 9 EL=10 45
1000.00 10.28
ZONE TERMINATED AT END OF TRANSECT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 16
EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPERTY SURVEY
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDmONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
,..,
I
, .
I
~
I;
I
I'
F
J
I:
Ii
n
I-J
fJ
, I
IJ
'1
IJ
f]
II
I]
tJ
IJ
I
IJ
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 17
PROPOSED CONDITIONS PROPERTY SURVEY
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
'~:..
Ii
11
11
11
1:1
E
1'-:
I
11
I[]
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
. ATTACHMENT 18
oee DRAWING DETAILING
EXISTING FLOOD HAZARD ZONES
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
1,~:
I
I
I
11
Ii
I]
Itl
11
11
Ii
I,']
I
I
.J
II
Ie i
Ii
l.. ;
I,
._J
1"1
J
Ii
. j
I'
J
IJ
Ie!
II
_J
Fisbers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
New London, CT
April 2002
ATTACHMENT 19
OCC DRAWING DETAILING
PROPOSED FLOOD HAZARD ZONE
MODIFICATIONS
APPLICA nON
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
.~ ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
':~
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Leiter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 20
ANNOTATEDF~PANEL
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
.':''::;
I
I
I
I
...iZ
<0
:ii>
0<0:
0..
u<
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WINTIolROP
I
if
~i !
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
.~~.
Fishers Island Ferry District
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision
ATTACHMENT 21
CERTIFIED COPY OF PROPERTY DEED
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
New London, CT
April 2002
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
:.
I
51
I,";
l -
-'I-
I
I !
I i
12:13 FAX 860 276 8200
ROBINSON & COLE LLP
~~.
IilI 002
,
--....----.'!
j
--_.0_.___-
,
~..
IN TES'I'lMONr 'WHltRBQF. 1 h..... Mro\mto ..t Illy haDd and aUbtod tho .eal. of .aid Court :L~
lOP. thllll4.th da.y of ..Juno, A. 'D. IS'''.
Recos-dod, JW\. \4" 19s.4. at 10~'O A. M.
8. VlclQr Prlnc.
8. Vl=OR PRINCB
"'udg~ (SEAL)
~~_Clork.
TO ALL l"EOPLB TO WHOM THBU PREIlENTS liHALL COIlU. GREET1NQ,
XNOWYE,
That TilE, NEW YORJC. N2'W HAVEN AND RART'FORD RAILROAD COMPANY, .. Connectlcut
corporation of Now !lavon, CDnnocUcut, for" the ccmalderallDIl of ODo Dollak" ($1.00) and other val
uablo consideraUons received to Lt. 1:\1.1.1 aatlalactLon of TOWN OF sOVtHOL1>, a m\mlclpa\ CO.("-
. ,
poratLon located In lhe COWlty 01 suHo'Lk: and stato at: :Now York. DOES 1I1;;JIEBY REMISE, RELEASE
AND QV1TCLA1!,l \into said Town Of SQ1J.thold, lta d\lCc:...ore ami asellna forovor, f&".. from moJ.-
&"llo lion., an tho right. lItle. Into...'. clalm....d dem....d ""'ateoenr .... I'. the ....1<1 R~lea8o', I
hAs or ought to have In and 1.0 a.U.that cort..t.a. pteco or parcel olla.a.d eltuato, lying aAd bOlng In the
Clot,. &Ad County of Now Londca and State of ConncctlCld:, d.UneatecS and shown within yo\\ow linesl
on a eertaLD map att.ached heroto an15 made a part hereat antltled; " Now York Now Havoll " I
lfart.ford Rattroad
Off Leo of Engb1eor .. Real Eaal. Bune)'.
I..and In New London, Conn.
Octoli'OI" 19~3",. and bounded and
To Be Convey"od To Town of Southold Scale 1 Inch . 60 :Ft.
dosc.rtbod ... .follows:
.
BEO~(i at. a point at tho IDO.t veaterly eoraor at the pl'eml... horelD de.cribed. lIald
point bobll: d18~t 1.50 foot .outheaatad,. trorQ ~..tLOD zeolS I saS.33 of tho monwraontod Center l~r
of the railroad leadlllS from. Now 11""011 to Now LondOll.. la.a.urad Ilt right ansLos thoreto;
D '
Thence North 46 ~O' ~O" Baet In .. ltno paraUol wf.th aDd dlstant 150 feet eouthoa.atiSrly from
tho tangent of ...ld coAteI' lIDo and tho tangont prod\lced Dortbe....torl,.. IDO:Laured ..t rlatbt ans1..
thoKto, anc! boundln&: horth.Gotorl,. OIl ramalDlD&: rallroad laD~, 374.38 tool to a polAt, .a[d pom
belng oppoal.to a p~la.t. D.D. sald tansont produced, 128.28 feot Ilortheasterly frODl p.e. ataUOQ
201$9 f 42.4.3 of .ald coDtor 11no:
'Thence NO,l'th 280 03' 50" Zaat. boundlo.l oorthwelltody aa. remalDLDs I'a\lroad land. 379.81
foot to a polDti
Thence North 19032' 25u East. bou.aCllDlIf aol'tb.westorly GO ...malDlDC railroad laDd, 100.0
foel to a polnt dt.tant 290.35 foot .oatheaetert,.. frOm lb. Wel'eecUOIl formed by tho southoasted
\LD.o' of B::t..Zl.k Stroet witb tile eOWhwo8lor17 Uno of stato Stroot, _ lDoaaured alons oald eollthwc8
terly line of state Stroot:
Thence .).Q ~ Kcnoral .aUthoaatad,. dlrecUOIL, by .. cur.-. totbe .loft ha.yll1& o. .....d.tu. ~.. ~O
feat and boundlJLS Jlok"tUaatorl~ on. land DOW or formorl:r 01 Fl.or. lala.D.4 Ha"l;:atlOll. Compan,. .
26.6. feot to a point. the chord of ..lei carve havlaC'" \ez:acth of 25.38 toet and! bo..lnC South
..
\00 57' 23" E..t;
...-.. ....---- ._~_....._..
--
....
"
. 11.1~':::""-:'-=_
/
O~,'19/0.2
12:13 FAX
8:~_':~~~~.9__ '___n' ~ZNSJON :'~~_L~~,~"
, ,....
, ,
.'
-.-'-'- --..-- -~----';-.
,
I
'BI
!
I I
I
I
,
I
I !
I
-.-.. --.-.-
....-.
.'
ThenCe South. 500 2CS- 160. East, bounding northoasterly Oa said laAd DOw or fOnQarly of
Flshera lela.nd Navigation Company, 206. 0 18~t to a pOint;
Thence South ISO 33' 44" West, boundlnQ:' eoutheAsterly. OD said. land Of FI.hara lala.o.d Nav{ca.-.
U.OD Company" 30.0 feet to a point;
Thenea Sow.h 70026- US., 'East" bOJ,1.Gdlng northeasterly on .aId .land no", 01" (ormerl}" of
I
I I
i
.~ I
I I
i
i
i
I i
I
,
I
Fieher. Island Navigation Company, 227.28 re.t to ~ point IDthll!l CombLo.~ bulkhea.4 and pierhea.d I
Ilne oC the Thames 'Illver; .
Thence South 8~ 19' DO" West, aloaa: .8a.ld 4:omblned bl.alkh8a~ &Del plerhead 'U.n~, "'''7.17 feet I
to apOlnt;
Thonce South 570 Q6' 28n West, alona: aaideomblned bulkhead and plerhead. Uno, 801. 63.f:ee~
to.. point In th. dlvla,:n llqa behraan,land ....r.1n d.."rlbod and l....d of'UDltad st..t.. of Amerlca;/
Thenee NQrtb 38 12' :10" West, aloDS' _4 dl...latOll 1I.n., 432. IN reet to ~. po~ O.r place ot!
begln.u lng:
I
Containing 10.21 acre. more or 10".
All b.JA.rlltoga u.eed harelA aro I'eferred to a l..rue morldla.a thrOUCh V.. 8. B.. L_ Mark n on
CeDlral Vermant na'lwa,. ".hart. '. I
The praml"!.. above d.acrlbed a,:" her.by canveyad, .ubJect to e",lstlDB drain"",. eondltlon~'I'
Reserving to the 'Releasor, Ita eUCC.8.0r. ~ asatcn., the ute drab1., cuy pol.... py wire,
lee ba",. and that portion of Ite eroa."'B ""bin With allappurteD....ee. loe.....d on said premls.a. I
togethor. with tbe ..right to eoter aa1d premia.. for the PUl"pOBe of op8raU.a.g. ma1.D.t&lnlAg r.epa1riDC
d , " /'
an replaclbg Jl2.1d f:a.clUtlee..
TO HA VB AND TO BOLD tho preml808, With all the appu.ne.Dallces. unto lh. said Releaseo;
It. ."ccusors and ..aalg.. farov.r, ao that ".Itho.. It, tha _Id Jlel...or, Dor Its."ec.aaoalDorl
LIly other pel"sOQ. under It or them ehall hereafter bave any claim_ r~t or UU. tA or tbe prellll4iles
I
or any part thereol" but therefrom it la and the1 are by tho... pre..nt. "orovor barred &Ad exclllded.
except ... atore4Jald.
II
Ii
..1
::.'. !
";:: I
. I
11
,
Di WITN".B:SS WHE'REO~. Th. How'York, li.. Haven -.ad HanlON Railroad CoznPaAY baa
caulUld thelia present. to b. alp."" ill It_ ~.halt by O. T. CarltllchUl, n.. Secretary, hereto duly
aut.horl~ed, IUld Ua (:o.-pOr1t1. ..&1 to b. b."eUAto aUlz:ed lhl. 17th cia,. 01' Warch, A. D. IG54.
Till!: M<w YORK, Mrw HAVEN....ND H...RT}'01lD
RAILJlOAD COMPANY lm>AL)
By
G. 'l". Carmtchael
IMo...La.r7
SlKnod, aealed and dell.,.red
In the pre.ence of:
C. W: OwQn
T. 1.-1. P:l.raOn.
I ! Stat. a(Connectlc"t
I CC\1Qty 01 New Haven
I Clty ol New Hayen
'j
I ~:::
I;
)
) &8..
)
Warch 17, IOU
,. -,- - .., -'--~'--'--'~'''':..-,---
.. .- ---.-.-. ---. _....
. .
, .
--......... -.~_..
~003
\
,
...... ..
~
:,i.
-r-
...L
---.J.
"
j
UJ
...
'.\
.'
:...
,.,
:H
A
i;'
. ..
...
7~'F1J
...t . ",
.- Ii,
I .
j 'j .
J.~
. I
. I
!
-
,--
O-l.'llJ,'02 12: 1... FA4\: 800 275 8209
ROBINSON & COLE LLP
~oo.
_I
..~~.
,
---"- --..... ..----
,
,.
...
1
Poraol:Ullly appoarocl Q. or.' Carmlchael, SecC'otary elf no New York, New H:avoA -.nd Hart-
,
fo..d Ran~oa~ COIXpDlY, Dtper and aea\ol' of th. foregotng lsUltrwnont, &Ad aclcnowtedsod the 8aJ:no
to bo ht" free a.ct and clocd, and tIlo fro. act and deod of _Ld c:omp&.Dy, batore m.e,
Ever.tt S. Wn.OA
Notary 1 \lbUc \SEAJ.) ,
My Comml.alOll. expiro. Aprll \, \91)9
I
"
.J
I'
Recorded. JW\e 14., 19M at 2:25
~;j"____"TOWDCl.;k. .
K.
1
I
KNOW ALL!4'ZH BY THEU PRZSgNTS. THAT I, ..Joseph A. O"CODIleU. do bereby release
-.nd.dlachargo a eertata. monlPCo from Arthur H. Fletchor and. Rhoda A. 'Pletchor to .Joseph A.
O'Connell dated "US"- SO, \950 aDd rocorded lD. the 1.and It.carda Df tbe tOWII of New Loodcm
County of Now Londoa aud state of. Conaectlcw: l.n Vol. 24.8, at Page 139
In Witnoss Whereof. J baye boroUDto 80t my band aIUi 80al tblll 11th day of .rane In the year
of O\lr Lord nineteen hlm.drad aDd fLfty-fDUr
SLCned, Sealed and Dellv.rod
in the prea6nce of
:er.a.dtord Z. Ocogo.ry
1
'.
1
I.
Joaeph A. Connell
(L.S.)
'Frederic E. Feng'ar
state 01 CCIulGctlcut
.)
I 88.
.Jw1o 11 A. 1>.. 1954
1
~r
~ f,
County of "N~w ~0Il
Personally ~ppo..red
"~oph A. aCoano118tgner Ucs Sealer of tho for"~olDB IDlltrum
1
and acknowledged,the aame to be hi. fro. tLCt -.ad de.d, befor-:l'm.o ,
Freder1c E.. :l"8ng&l" .'
N_..,. PubIto (SKAL)
My Com.znt..toA Exptros April I. 1958
I,
Recorded. .:I\Ine '4, \1lM at 1:15 P. :M.
~, ~ TOWllCl...k
..........
1
...."
~
TOALL PrOPf..Z TOWH~ TJD:8B PftJrS8Nr8 BllALL COMB-----GRBBTlNG: . KNOW YE, ~
THAT W., ARTHUR B. 1rLBTCB~ll aDd'!Ulc:l)A A. PLETCHZR. botb 01 tM TOWD aDd CI)UD.t71~
. I
New Lou.doa., Stat. of Coruu,Ctlcut. forth. cOIlelderaUOA of the IRm o! Thlrty-flve Hundred , ~
. ...
($31500.0~)............ ..J)ollara l"ec.1Y'ed Co our lull .-a1~ct1QQ of THB BAVJNGS BANK OE' .NE'W1'"
LONDON.. CorporaUoa. lacotporated by tbe law. of tho stat. of ConnecUcut. havlac 1.1. placo at ~
buala.e.. t.n tho Town. and County of No'" London, lD said State, do S"Y., ..rant, b.....atD. ..n and ~
....
conttrm \mto u.. &aid orBB SA VDfGS BANE OJ' NEW LONDON that certain. tract oIlaDd. wlth tho ........
"
',I
I
1 ]
I
I
I I
L
I.:
1
bulldtncll thor.OIl eta.adt.Dc:. eltuated lA aal4 TOW'll of HoW LondOlll betns: knowa and d..lpate4.,.,.
. ,
Lot lio.. 8 and e OQ'.. pb.zl .nUtled. '"Plan. cd BulldLnc Lot. .t New LOMon, Conn.. be\cm&lns t.o.
.DenJ. L. Armatrong 1905... wh'lch pt&u. l. en 111e In the New Londou. TOVtIl Clerk". OUtc.*. sud
traet t. mO:t'e pa.rttcularly bounded ao.d. d..crlb&d .. follow.:
....
~.-
1_..-..~"":......,
/
..".
,.
I
45
I
I
,
,
c.
-
~
)
"
F
i
,
;./
."."
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~I
I
I
I
I
I
:~
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 22
INCREASED BFE
ACKNOWLEDGMENT LETTER
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
JOSHUA Y. HORTON
SUPERVISOR
Town Hall, 53095 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971.0959
F-,,"x (631) 765.1823
Telephone (631) 765.1889
OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 30, 2002
Dewberry & Davis LLC
8401 Arlington Boulevard
Fairfax, VA 22031
Attention:
CLOMR Manager
Management Engineering and Technical Services Division
Reference:
Identifier:
Fishers Island Ferry District
New London, CT
090100
New London Harbor, Long Island Sound
FIRM No. 090100, Panel 0001 C, Dated 08/19/85
Community No.:
Flood Source:
Map Panel Affected:
Dear CLOMR Manager:
This letter will acknowledge that, based upon the CLOMR application referenced above, there will
be an increase in the Flood Hazard Zone Elevations located in the nearshore area seaward of the
bulkhead on the proposed site plan for the new Fishers Island Ferry District Terminal. The existing
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), V-Zone (Elevation 12), will increase to V-Zone (El. 14). Landward of
the bulkhead, a portion of V -Zone (Elevation 12) will remain while areas of the flood zone
designated as A-Zone (ELI 0) will be changed to A-Zone (El. 12).
The increases in the Flood Hazard Zone Elevations are due to improved wave analysis methods
utilized for this CLOMR application. The increase in Flood Hazard Zone Elevations is not due to
the proposed structures and fill.
Sincerely yours,
// ~;-
J s~orton
upervisor, Town of South old
---
cc: Ocean and Coastal Consultants, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fishers Island Ferry District New London, CT
Application for Conditional Letter of Map Revision April 2002
ATTACHMENT 23
ADDITIONAL PROJECT
DRAWINGS
APPLICATION
FOR
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
For
Fishers Island Ferry District
Foot of State Street
New London, CT
OCEAN AND COASTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.