HomeMy WebLinkAboutDredging & Spoil Disposal Activity Analysis SC 1985
:w
~I
I
..1.
I
I
I-
I
;1
ANALYSIS OF DREDGING AND .SPOIL. DISPtJSAL
ACTIV," CONDUCTED BY SUFFOLK COUNTY
County of Suffolk, New York
\
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND
A LOOK TO THE FUTURE
.'.. .
I~~~ ..
I
I
I
1\
J
s.1Wk c...., "...,.. D.,.r..'I.
I. he Duniu. Office ..lIlIil.
'eteralS .e.Uial Hilha,
Haa""le, II. Y. 11788
Dr. Lo. E. 10".1...
D ir actor
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ANALYSIS OF DREDGING AND SPOIL DISPOSAL ACTIVITY
CONDUCTED BY SUFFOLK COUNTY:
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND A LOOK TO THE FUTURE
Prepared by
Suffolk County Planning Department
H. Lee Dennison Office Building
Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, N.Y. 11788
Dr. Lee E. Koppelman
Director
Arthur Kunz
Assistant Director
Report Preparation
DeWitt Davies
Lauretta Fischer-Key
Ronald Verbarg
Michael Volpe
Secretarial Staff
Penny Kohler
Edith Sherman
Jeanne Widmayer
Cartographic Staff
Tom Frisenda
Carl Lind
Anthony Tucci
October 1985
i
I
I
Peter F. Cohalan
Suffolk County Executive
I
SUFFOLK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
I
Towns
I
John F. Luchsinger, Chairman
Gilbert L. Shepard, Vice Chairman
Dennis Lynch
Samuel Lester
Sandra P. Triolo
Maurice J. O'Connell
Richard C. Larsen
I
I
I
,
George R. Gohn
Robert N. Martin
I
Richard Uard
I
Villages
Vincent A. \-lick
,
Lloyd L. Lee
At Large
I
Stephen M. Jones
I
Rev. Charles Swiger
Mardooni Vahradian
I
Lee E. Koppelman
Director of Planning
I
t
I
I
ii
Brookhaven
Southampton
Babylon
East Hampton
Huntington
Islip
Riverhead
Shelter Island
Smi th town
Southold
Over 5,000 Population
Under 5,000 Population
I
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
I
I
I
I
I
.
PETER F. COHALAN
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
LEE E. KOPPELMAN
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
October 23, 1985
Suffolk County Executive Peter F. Cohalan
H. Lee Dennison Building
Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, New York 11788
Dear Mr. Cohalan:
I
In response to your directive dated 1 February 1984, I am pleased to
submit to you the Department of Planning's report on dredging activities
conducted by Suffolk County. The need for an overview of County dredging
and disposal activity and evaluation of problems and potential solutions
associated with the activity was contained in your 1983 Annual
Environmental Report. The draft report issued 8 March 1985 has been
moditied in response to comments received from local municipalities,
Suffolk County Legislators and individuals, and as a result of site
inspections of each County dredging project by the Planning Department
during the past spring and summer.
,
I
I
The 195 dredging projects completed by the County, in addition to 1.1
other projects that were considered by the County but never executed, have
been analyzed to determine the extent to which the general public vs.
primarily private interests benefit from the work. It is recomlnended that
75 channel dredging projects within the County inventory be designated as
in the private interest, and that the County discontinue any involvement
with the maintenance dredging of these channels. It is also recommended
that of the 141 public interest channel dredging projects, 88 be
designated as high priority. Fourteen of these 88 Suffolk County dredging
projects are federally authorized and should be maintained by the Corps of
Engineers.
.'
,
I
There is a current as well as ever increasing need for local
municipal, County, State and Federal officials to develop sub-regional
plans for dredged spoil disposal in local waterways. The availability of
shoreline sites for spoil disposal will decrease in the future. In some
situations, availability of a site for economical spoil disposal is the
major constraint in conducting a project. To help develop solutions to
the spoil disposal problem, the implementation of a demonstration project
involving the creation of wetland habitats in a shallow water environment
is recommended.
I
I
I trust that this report will provide valuable input for future
policy decisions by the County on its dredging program.
,
t
I
LEK:DD:pk
~1~~0~
Lee E. Koppelman
Director
VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
HAUPPAUGE, L.t.. NEW YORK 11788
(!516) 360-!5192
iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
tetter of Transmittal................................................... .iil
List of Tables........................................................... v
List of Figures.......................................................... vi
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . vii
1.
Introduction............................................................ .
1.1 Purpose and Scope..................................................
1
2
2.
sis of Suffolk Count
epartment 0 u
................
6
6
2.2
Criteria for Determining Whether Public or Private Interests
Benefit from a Dredging Project.................................... 9
2.3
Analysis of Dredging Projects by Town.............................. 15
2.3.1 Babylon.... ......... .......... ... ...... ................. 16
2.3.2 Brookhaven.............................................. 20
2.3.3 Eas t Hampton............................................. 25
2.3.4 Huntington.............................................. 28
2.3.5 Islip.......................... .........................31
2 .3 .6 Ri ve rhead. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 36
2.3.7 Shelter Islantf.......................................... 39
2.3.8 Smithtown............. ........... ... ......... ........... '39
2.3.9 Southampton................... ................... ....... 44
2.3.10 - Southo1d................................................ 49
2.4
Suffolk
2.4.1
2.4.2
County Lands Used for Dredged Spoil Disposal............... 53
Inventory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53
Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 54
3.
Future Issues Associated with Suffolk County Dredging and Spoil
Di810sa1 Activity....................................................... .
3. Scope of County Dredging Activity..................................
3.2 Need for Dredged Spoil Disposa 1 Sites..............................
3.3 Pollutant Removal..................................................
3.3.1 Duck Sludge...............................................
3.4 Alternative Methods for Dredged Material Disposal..................
3.4.1 Habitat Development.......................................
57
57
59
61
62
66
71
4.
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1 Classification of Suffolk County Dredging Projects................
4.2 Mechanisms for County Recovery of Costs for Private Interest
Dredging Projects.................................................
Spoil Disposal Options.............................................
4.3.1 Sub-regional Plans........................................
4.3.2 Habitat Creation Demonstration Project....................
Preservation of Selected Marine Habitats...........................
Channel Dredging and Spoil Oisposal Guidelines.....................
74
74
74
76
76
77
77
78
4.3
4.4
4.5
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
80
Appendix A:
Federal and State Navigation Projects in Suffolk County.....A-l
Appendix B:
Channel Dredging and Spoil Disposal Guidelines..............B-l
iv
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1
10
11
PAGE
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Babylon...................................................... 18
2
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Brookhaven................................................... 21
3
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of East Hampton............ ... ........... ........ ........... .... 27
4
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Huntington................................................... '29
5
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Islip... ...............0............0....0.....0... .......... 32
6
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Riverhead.................................................... 37
7
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Shelter Island............................................... 40
8
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of SmIth town. ............................ -0...................... 42
9
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Southampton.................................................. 45
Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Projects Within
Town of Southald..................................................... 50
Suffolk County Property Formerly or Presently Used for Dredged
Spoil Deposition........ ......... .... ...... ....................... ... 54
12 Suffolk County Dredging Activity 1960-1984........................... 58
13 Alternative Dredged Spoil Disposal Options........................... f,7
14 Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Project Evaluations by Town....... 75
v
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
PAGE
Suffolk County Dredging History - Project Analysis................... 7
Suffolk County Dredging History - Volume Analysis.................... 8
Boat Ramp at Terminus of Daniel Lord Rd., Town of Shelter Islan~..... 11
Boat Ramp at Terminus of Cedar Point Ave., Town of Southampton....... 11
Parking Area at Terminus of Cedar Point Ave., Town of Southampton.... 12
Parking Area at Terminus of Daniel Lord Rd., Town of Shelter Island.. 12
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Babylon.................... 17
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Brookhaven - (North)....... 23
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Brookhaven - (South)....... 24
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of East Hampton............... 26
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Huntington................. 30
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Islip...................... 34
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Riverhea~.................. 38
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Shelter Island............. 41
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Smithtown.................. 43
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Southampton - (West)....... 47
Dredging Project Locations Within Town of Southampton - (East)....... 48
Dredging Project Locations l?ithin Town of Southold................... 52
Aerial View of Indian Island County Park in Riverhead"" Depicting
Dredged Spoil Sites......... ........................... ... ........0.. 56
vi
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
----------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The staff would like to thank the following individuals who provided
information and comments pertinent to this study.
Suffolk County Department of Public Works
A. Barton Cass, Commissioner
John GuIdi
James Hunter
James Carioto
Suffolk County Department of Parks, Recreation and Conservation
John D. Chester, Commissioner
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Sy Robbins
Suffolk County Council on Environmental Quality
James Bagg
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Gordon Colvin, Director of Marine Resources
David Fallon
Fire Island National Seashore
Donald Weir
United States Army Corps of Engineers (New York District)
Dr. Dennis Suszkowski
John Tavolaro
United States Army Corps of Engineers (Baltimore District)
Glenn Earhart
United States Fish and I/ildlife
Tom Sperry
vii
I
I
I
1. Introduction
In response to the initiative contained in the Suffolk County
Executive's 1983 Annual Environmental Report, the Suffolk County Dept. of
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Planning was directed to prepare an analysis of navigation channel
dredging and dredged spoil disposal activity conducted by Suffolk County
government - either directly by the Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works
(SCDPW) with its own equipment or by private dredging contractors funded
by the County. This report provides historical data on Suffolk County
dredging activity, and discusses important issues involving the conduct of
dredging and spoil disposal in the future.
Commercial and recreational boating activity is an important facet of
the marine-oriented economy in Suffolk County. According to the New York
.
State Bureau of Motor Vehicles, there were 50,533 boats registered* to
Suffolk County residents in 1984. An additional 3395 boats were indicated
as having Suffolk County as their primary county of use. Approximately
one-quarter of the 331,742 boats registered in New York State are found in
Nassau and Suffolk Counties. Additional commercial vessels, as well as a
substantial number of transient craft registered in other states, also
util.ize Suffolk County waters, especially during the summer boating
season.
Boat usage in the Long Island area has resulted in the demand for
navigation channel access, as well as the establishment of various support
industries. A network of Federal, State and County navigation channels
I
I
I
I
has been developed in Suffolk County waters; some channels provide general
navigational access, while others provide access to only a small area and
benefit a limited segment of the population resident along the shoreline
adjacent to such channels.
*Boat registrations include all inboard, outboard, inboard/outboard boats
and those sailboats (about 80% of all sailboats) capable of carrying a
motor.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
While no economic impact analysis of the recreational boating/marina
industry in Suffolk County has been conducted, it is generally believed
that the economic activity associated with the industry is substantial.
On Long Island as a whole, there were 346 commercial marinas in 1982, with
28,735 berths (Brown, 1984). It is anticipated that as the population
increases, boating related activity will also increase. There is
apparently space at existing marinas in Suffolk County for an increase of
2000 - 4400 wet berths; this represents an increase of 14-32% in the wet
berths existing in 1983. Brown (1984) also indicated that the
opportunities for marina expansion are generally greater in the Peconic
Bay area than elsewhere on Long Island. During the period 1972-83, the
Peconic Bay area experienced a 28% increased in berths as compared to 8%
for the north shore and 4% for the south shore of Long Island. The
investment in boats is also high. Using various assumptions, the Long
Island Regional Planning Board (1984) estimated that the total value of
all registered boats in Nassau and Suffolk Counties was $800 million in
1982.
The subject of dredging and dredged spoil disposal is not without
controversy. Questions are continually raised about the cost to the
County associated with its dredging activities, the extent to which
channel dredging should occur, as well as the environmental impacts
associated with the projects themselves. The cost of dredging has risen
dramatically in recent years. Additional maintenance has become
problematical, and the pressures of coastal development have resulted in
serious implications for dredged material disposal options in the future.
1.1 Purpose and Scope
This report includes an overview of Suffolk County dredging activity
with the objective of providing info~ation and analyses that can be used
2
I
I
I
I
I
to develop management policies governing this activity in the future. In
this regard, criteria have been prepared to enable the screening of
projects to determine those that have public vs. private benefits.
Long-term issues, e.g., the need for new options for the disposal of
dredged material and the dredging and disposal of duck sludge, have also
been identified.
I
I
The scope of the report is limited to dredging projects conducted or
funded by Suffolk County for the purposes of navigation, tidal flushing or
pollutant removal. While the design requirements and environmental
impacts of specific channel dredging projects have not been evaluated,
I
it is useful at this point to summarize the ecological effects of dredging
I
I
I
and spoiling on the marine environment.
Horton (1977) reviewed the physical, chemical and biological effect.
of these activities. Physical effects on estuarine environments
include:
a. increases in turbidity at both the site of the dredging
and disposal site;
I
b. changes in topography of the bot tom; and
I
c. changes in mechanical properties of sediments at the
dredging site and the spoil disposal location.
Topographic changes, such as increasing the cross section of an inlet, can
I
I
produce changes in tidal range, currents, shoaling/scouring patterns, and
salinity levels in back bay areas (Dowd, 1972). The "most critical, yet
least understood" chemical effect of dredging is the potential
I
I
relaobilization of contaminants (petroleum, heavy metals, pesticides,
organics) that are sorbed to the surface of fine grained particles that
typically settle to the bottom in harbors and coves (Horton, 1977). Spoil
disposal activity can depress dissolved oxygen levels in the water colll'nn
I
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
and increase the concentration of nutrients. Biological effects include
the obvious destruction of habitats, e.g., wetlands, spawning grounds,
grassbeds; and the direct burial of benthic, sessile organisms, such as
oysters and mussels. More subtle biological effects include the chronic
impacts of suspended sediments on filter feeders, and the potential uptake
and concentration of released contaminants through the food chain.
The environmental impact analysis procedure utilized by the Suffolk
County Council on Environmental Quality provides the vehicle for
individual dredging project evaluation. Generic guidelines for channel
dredging and spoil disposal are included in this report to aid in this
evaluation.
Other than categorizing channels according to public or private
interest, no attempt was made to assign relative priorities for the
scheduling of dredging projects because of two factors:
1. There is no way to accurately predict, given the information base
available, the shoaling rates of different channels. ~is will
require the conduct of additional surveys of channel conditions
over time that could be compared with historic surveys to
calculate rates of shoaling. Storms can greatly alter conditions
and subsequently wreak havoc with any schedule that could be
established. Hence, there will always be the need to base
priorities on existing conditions in the field and the extent to
which navigation is impaired.
2. Schedules are established on a year-to-year basis given
legislative decisions relating to the appropriation of funds for
dredging activities.
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Suffolk County channel dredging system does not exist in a
vacuum. It is part of a compleK system consisting of Federal and State
channels as well. AppendiK A contains a list of the Federal and State
navigation channels in the area, along with recommendations contained in
the Long Island Regional Element New York State Coastal Management Program
(LIRPB, 1979).
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2. Overview and Analysis of Suffolk County Dredging Activity
2.1 Suffolk County Department of Public Works Dredging Authority and
Historic Activity
SCDPW records indicate County involvement in dredging activities
began in 1948. Figures 1 and 2, prepared by SCDPW, graphically portray
the total number of Suffolk County dredging projects and the volume of
material dredged on an annual basis. Both charts show the yearly extent
of both contract and direct county dredging. Direct county dredging did
not begin until 1956, when the County purchased the dredge "Shinnecock."
The total number of both contract and county projects conducted
annually during the 1980s is comparable to that of the mid-1960s, when
aredging activity in Suffolk County was at its peak. However, Figures 1
and 2 clearly illustrate that while the number of dredging projects has
remained fairly consistent, the annual volume of material dredged has
decreased dramatically since the mid-1960s. The reason for this decline
in the volume of material dredged is due to the changing nature of
dredging projects. Most of the projects undertaken by the County in the
1940s, 1950s and 1960s were for channel creation, while those performed by
the County during the 1970s and 1980s were for channel maintenance, and
interface dredging of some shoals at the confluence of navigation channels
and larger bodies of water. Generally, channel maintenance, as opposed to
channel creation, generates only a small amount of dredged spoil.
Pursuant to Section 801, subsection (7) of the Suffolk County
Charter, the SCDPW has been assigned "full care, custody and control of
all waterways, and county owned or leased waterways equipment, boats,
dredges and all materials and equipment appurtenant the reto. " SCDP\~.
pursuant to subsection (2), also has "charge '1-nd supervision of the
design, construction and alterations of docks, marinas, parks, preserves,
6
-------------------
Figure l:
~
~
SUFFOLK COUNTY DREDGING HISTORY
~ ~ ..,
!!! I!! ~
--Project Analysis
~ ~
~ ~
&l
!!!
~
~
24
22
20
18
~ 16
b:l
...,
~ 14
q:
" ~ 12
!::i
~
10
-...J
~
~ 8
6
.,
2
0
NISSEOUOGUE PURCHASEO MINI-DREDGE PURCHASED
I
, I
SHINNECOCK SOLO
j I NISSEOUOGUE SOLO,
I
! J !
,
\
/ \ /
i ( \ ,
, \ ,
I I , V
\
, \ i
! I , J
\
I
SHINNECOCK PURCHASED I \ I I'
I I "
II , \ I /
I \
! j',ll \ j \ /" ; I !
COUNTY PROJECTS ____ I I \ ! \ 1\ 1 '. I
~if,j M\ I \ : r \ I \
CONTRACT PROJECTS, I 1\ f
/ ! ! ~\ \J V
/\ If\. I I
\
/ V \: / \ N /
IX
!!!
~
~
~
,
12
~
PROJECT
~
~
~
~
ANALYSIS
CONTRACT (HYlHIAULIC)
COUNTY (HYDRAHIC) - -----
&l
I!!
~
!!!
------- ------------
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Figure 2: SUFFOLK COUNTY DREDGING HISTORY -~ Volume Analysis
~ :g i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
!!:! !!l I>l !!:! !>I !!:!
~ ..... ~
2400 ,- f
_' SHINNECOCK SOLO
NISSEOI.IOGI.IE PI.IRCHASEO _
2200 ! ,
^ I
1\ ,
2000 / \ ;
,
SHINNECOCK PURCHASEO i " \ ,
~ ,.
1800 ! : f
Q; I
~ , I
i ! I
1600
!:::? I , I
~ ' COUNTY i : I
G PROJECTS I
1400 . f'~ I ,
~ I
i: I MINI-OREOGE PURCHASEO
00 ~ I I I
1200
:::) I \\;' j j I NISSEOubGI.IE SOLO !
~ , I I
t....: \, ! ! I 1 I
1000 I '~ i: I I
~ I /I
I \1: I !\ ,
~ 800 : J :
II I' I \ ' \ ,
:::) II '\ , \
-...J " , I \ , ,
~
600 ; "J \ ,
CONTRACT_ ~ \
PROJECTS _________ ! " I \
400 , \ VI " \ I
/ ,
\
r I
200 .. ^, "-
\/ '\J V ~ \; '-.J "'_
I I
0 V ______-
~ ill ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::l
!!:! !!:! !!:! !!:! !!:! !!:! !!l
VOLUME ANALYSIS
CONTRACT
COUNTY------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
beach erosion projects...." In addition, subsection (8) gives the SCDPW
"charge and supervision of all topographic, hydrographic and land surveys
made for the county." Thus, it is clear that the SCDPW has primary
responsibility for Suffolk County dredging activities.
Suffolk County can, pursuant to Section 807, enter into contracts
with any town, village or district within the county and charge for
services, such as dredging, including pro-rated overhead. Pas t prac t ice
in regard to dredging activities reveals that Suffolk County has not
charged for these services.
2.2 Criteria for Determining Whether Public or Private Interests
Benefit from a Dredging Project
There has been much debate in recent years concerning whether or not
a specific channel dredging project provides benefits to the County
population at large and, hence, is in the public interest, or whether it
only benefits private citizens that reside adjacent to a project site. It
is a premise of this plan that future construction and maintenance of
navigation channels by the County be considered a legitimate public
eRpense only if the dredging project is without question in the public
interest. Suffolk County should not allocate funds for those dredging
projects that rio not provide 8eneral public benefits.
Criteria must be developed to distinguish between those projects
providing predominantly public vs. private benefits. Since the key issue
is the distribution of benefits associated with dredging activity, it
'nakes little sense to distinguish dredging projects on the basis of
whether or not they occur in a natural waterbody or tributary, or in one
that has been artificially carved out of the landscape, i.e., a canal.
The benefits can best be understood by determining the usage pattern an1
9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
accessibility of a channel to the general public. Therefore, land ~ses
and water dependent facilities that are associated with a particular
channel location provide the means for distinguishing if a partic~lar
project is in the public or private interest.
A dredging project would be deemed to be in the public interest if
the project supports the following types of uses and/or facilities:
a. Publicly-owned marine facilities, e.g., mooring areas, boat
basins, marinas, docks, boat ramps. Boat ramps need not consist
solely of paved asphalt. They can consist of concrete (Fig. 3),
CCA treated l~mber, gravel or crushed stone (Fig. 4) extending to
mean low water. The parking areas associated with these
facilities must accommodate at least six cars with trailers and
can be a smooth grassed area, dirt, crushed stone, pavement or .
concrete (Fig. 5 & 6). In short, the locality must have made (or
established a date to make) some modest improvements to permit
public access to channels created and maintained with public
f~nds. A public mooring area within an enclosed embayment must
have within its proximity a p~blicly-owned parcel of land
fronting on the embayment in question to permit p~blic access
(e.g., parking for automobiles and space to per'nit the storage
and/or tie-up of dinghyies).
b. Marine commercial uses, e.g., boat yards, ship repair facilities,
commercial fishery docks and product transfer sites.
c. Industrial, transportation and ~tility uses, e.g., petrole~m
product transfer facilities, ferry terminals, power plants.
d. Instit~tional ~ses, e.g., education and public safety
facilities.
If)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fig. 3. Concrete Rwnp Loea ted At The Terminus Of
Daniel Lord Road Adjacent To West Neck Creek,
Town of Shel ter Is land. Note Also The Sign
Identifying The Ramp As A 11Tolt.;n Landing!!
I
I
_.~ ~,?'- ~.~~:.=5~~~0-~7
. . ~. '~'..>r.~\
.3r~'~,L :
. '.. ,-:....
...'0. -
.~. :::~}
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fig. ,1.: Hard Packed Stone Rmnp Locat(\d At "The
Terminus Of Cedar Point AVenlJe Adjacerlt
To Noyack Creek. Southampton TO\\'tl
I
11
I
I
I
, "
it:.:....
~
~.. '-',
~
~
~,
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fig,S:
Road End ,\ssociated Ivith Ramp Pictured
1'1 "1' ,,. 1 \:()'e ThaT ']"'crc '10 S,I.P-t="j' C1' p'nt
1 f'. ,"-" -t, ,'L. ,<" J l . -' ,. ,.;.. _ . ~.. ,
PaT'king Space For Anproximately Six To
Eig:ht .-\utomobiles ]\'ith Boat Trailers
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fig. (l: Ro:trt End \';";('i,.:Ldt.e.d \\!ith Hamp !'ictured T'"1
Fi~~. ,\'~;Ln" \ote The :\\:ai lability Of
Pnrkin,~~ rOt It Least Six \utonohiles With
Boat Trai 1 '-'f.:
I
12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e. Recreational uses, including boat livery stations, party boats,
charter boats, marinas, and yacht clubs that are open to use by
the general public.
A channel dredging project would be deemed to be in the private
interest if it did not provide direct access to or service any of the uses
or facilities mentioned above. Hence a dredging project servicing only
shoreline homeowners or a group of homeowners in a civic association, the
membership of which is controlled by a residency requirement, regardless
of the nature of the waterbody in question, would be considered to be in
the private interest.
Although a channel dredging project may be in the public interest,
public funds should not be used to dredge within privately owned
facilities that are served by the dredging project. Public funds should
not be used to maintain privately owned boat slips or basins. Thus, it is
the responsibility of the marina owner to maintain adequate water depth
within the facility and it is Suffolk County's role to maintain adequate
water depth up to the facility provided there is a suitable spoil site
available. In addition, the source of sediment contributing to shoaling
conditions within a channel does not confer responsibility upon a
particular governmental entity to fund dredging activity.
Projects listed in this plan as not meeting the public benefit
criteria should be subject to additional review by the Suffolk County
Dept.of Health Services to determine if dredging will prevent or alleviate
a public health problem, e.g., excessive mosquito breeding. The public
benefit criteria developed for this plan center around the provision of
public access to a particular water body. It ,Rust be recognized, however,
that a legitimate public benefit will be realized if channel dredging will
13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
prevent or reduce the risk of a public health problem.
There are no appropriate public health standards that can be applied
to justify dredging of creeks for flushing purposes. If a public health
problem is alleged to exist in connection with a waterway, and it is used
as a justification for dredging, then the Suffolk County Dept. of Health
Services should be consulted to certify the nature and extent of the
problem, and whether or not dredging is an appropriate solution. The
Dept. of Health Services should review the Dept. of Public Works' annual
proposed projects list focusing their review on projects identified in
this plan as not meeting the public benefit criteria. Should the Dept. of
Health Services certify that the public health will be protected by
dredging. then the particular. project or projects will serve a public
purpose. It should be noted, however, that Dept. of Health Services
certification is applicable only for the particular year the channel is
proposed to be dredged. Once dredged, the Dept. of Health Services should
re-certify the need to dredge in future years.
In order to aid in the allocation of limited funds, channels nredged
by Suffolk County and determined to be in the public interest have been
designated either high or low priority based upon relative channel use as
determined by the number of slips and moorings located on the channel. If
there was a total of at least 100 marina slips and/or moorings on a
particular channel, or if the channel serves transportation or
institutional uses, it was assigned a high priority rating; if less than
100 slips, etc., the channel was assigned a low priority rating, as far as
County dredging activity is concerned.
Other types of dredging projects have been conducted by Suffolk
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
County for purposes that are peripheral to channel navigation. Open water
shoals, i.e., shoals outside of navigation channels, have been dredged to
improve general navigation, and fill has been obtained from navigation
channels for the purpose of beach nourishment and shoreline construction.
Such projects would generally be considered to be within the public
interest because of their broad scope.
2.3 Analysis of Dredging Projects by Town
Since 1948, the SCDPW has completed approximately 200 dredging
projects throughout the 10 towns of Suffolk County. The towns with the
greatest proportion of projects include Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven,
Southampton and Southold. Nearly 85r. of the projects and 75r. of the
yardage dredged occurred in these five towns. Over 95r. of the dredging
projects were conducted for the purpose of channel navigation - the
remaining 5r. were undertaken for pollutant removal (duck sludge) or to
increase flushing action.
Suffolk County dredging projects have been executed both by SCDPW
staff and equipment, and by private contractors under the direction of
SCDPW. The County owned dredges "Shinnecock" and "Nissequogue" were in
operation from 1956 to 1967 and 1962 to 1973, respectively. A mini-dredge
was purchased by the County in 1978 and is still in operation. The
following tables summarize by town the dredging activity undertaken by
Suffolk County since 1948 - the earliest recorded date on file with SCDPW
indicating dredging projects executed by Suffolk County.
Using the criteria developed in this report, the projects have been
categorized as either in the public interest or private interest. In
addition to on-site staff review of projects during the spring and summer
of 1985, sources of information used include Boating Almanac Co., Inc.
15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
---.-
(1984) and U.S. Army Corps of Sngineers (1975).
2.3.1 Babylon
SCDPW has undertaken a total of 28 dredging projects since 1949
within the Town of Babylon. Figure 7 shows the location of these dredging
projects.
It has been determined that of the 28 Suffolk County dredging
projects executed in the Town, 15 meet the public benefit criteria (Table
1). The following dredging projects are in the public interest and all
but two are considered high priority projects:
*&nityville Channel
&nityville Creek
*Carlls River
*Copiague (Tanner Park Boat Rasin)
*East Fox Channel
*East-West Channel
*Great Neck Creek
*Howells Creek
*~eguntatogue Creek
*Oak Island Channel
Strongs Creek
*Unqua North-South Channel (Current project also includes six spur
channels - Meyers, Fleming, Gardiner, Parkhill, Hoover and
Unqua Canals - that do not ,neet public benefit criteria and
should not be maintained at Suffolk County expense.)
*West Babylon Creek
*West Gilgo (part of the &nityville Channel)
*\,oods Creek
*High priority dredging project
16
-------------------
I
,
I
I
COUNTY 'j
,
OF_j
NASSAU : _ ~
II North
I Im,ly.lIl,
I - ,
"
,
i I __--r
town of hunting ton / \ ...__--,..-------/ "
..--..~,
---
___---- I
L ' L--~--------- .'"
~--~t~;- -1----- - i-
: . ,
I '
A- /~
Wyandanch 0 P k I
"" ar .
/
/
I
./
I
(......
I
/
\ "
I
I--'~'
Norlh Babylon
'own of is lip
/- -rj
I '-
l ~--
I
I
I
q
BIBYloN
II
/
,
,
==/
,
,
/"!
e
(J
IMIIYVlllE
,
II
f..,
--
$000
,
,: &,24 _ _ ,/
. -" B.23
: B.l0
f B.27
~~/;> ~ .() o.;>~ ~
~:Q V ~ ~
~ '0 B- a\7Q \j
~j;l2 " ~ 'i) c-c::J~
..:~p ":l
i!;2 _
=F --
,
Dredging Project Locations
TII. of Babylon
County of Suffo'k - New York
Gre of
Sou t h
Bay
"
Gilgo
Oak B,ach
OCEAN
,
1
~:.i
~
I
. PllnLiC T'\Tlmsr PROJI'CT '
ATLANTIC
* ,'R;V\TI' j'iTI:I~IST I'ROJI'CT
17
I
Table 1: Sum",,,ry of SnUo lit r:''Hmty Dredging P1"oJect~ ...Ic,111... To"," o~ Babylon
Types of Water
OependentFacllltes
I
Project thlllll!l
AnIttyvllh Cha"Tlel
tdp.ntH1Clltton D:HU
No. Oredged
(91)4
1984
22R,OOO
52,000
(;ubtc YHdg Method of Spoil
~~ ~~~
Uptilnd nn
IleltcopterI'I.
Amltyvllle Creek
I
.....lty Harbor
I
I\rlllusltenlUnlcaCanal(a) 8-4
(Frederick. <.anal)
I\raca Canal(.)
lIayv1ev Canal ll-ft
(Village ~f Babylon)
I
Carlls ll.1ver(b)
I
Coptague
(Tannin' PInk
Boat BfI.'1tn)
I':ut Fox\.hannel
I
Ent-West Ch.ll.nnel{b)
Gund Can..l
Greu Neck Creek(b)
I
Hovel Is Cnek(b)
t....gano Canal(c)
I
'ltdW81' Canal
Neguntatogue Creek
I
Oak Island Channel
P"lIIequ8 ClI.l\lI.l(a)
I
Santa Barbara Canal
Santapogue Creek(b)
Strongs Creek(b)
I
Sun"y Point CAnl!l1
Tombart Canal{c)
I
Unqua ~orth- !\-2~
5outhChannel(d)
I
',jest IIsbylonCreek(b) 11-25
\.Ie~t Canal 11-26
Wnt Gllgo II-V
I
woods Creek(b) II-Z'J
'-I
,-,
'-J
,-,
H
'-8
H
8-10
II-lt
8-{z
II-t)
8-14
11-1)
8-16
8-17
II-t!!
11-19
II-ZO
8-21
ll-ZZ
8-23
1949
l'1H
1'164
1'172
1968
1'168
1'80
L957
t'ln
1916
1'l1l2
22Z,OOO
24,1)00
1'1,600
2,100
Upland on
llel(copterIs,
lIay be...c"
nourh"ment
2,500
Upland on p.:-lv,,"te
property
Connect~ !':allt-West
Channel to State
Iloat Chsnnel
YI\cI".t club iii Yllcht
~ervlce
AdJllcent t'lTanner
PIHk, hut not 'I"eoi
fo.:-docklng
Mone
None
"".
21l111r{nall," yacht
club, 1100 viltase
boat ~11pl
Hunlclpat bo.t bllsln
at Tanne.:-ParkIItth
bOlltlng ramp
Connects F.ast-Wut
Channel wtth State
80atChannel
Par.ltels:'llalnland
~rorel (ne (1'1 TOIm
of Babylon
Mone
41118.:-1n85
T"nrier Pk, - martna
and hOllt ralllp
No fllcttlttes
Upland onlndtan
ro.
Upland on prtvllte No fllct 1ltles
butldtng lot
~o. o~ SUp..!
)oIoorlng.
"
""
None
No"e
~Io ne
None
III
104
"
'"
~In "e
lb2
104
"".
NO",~
1,140
"
No"'!
"".
~o"e
'kine
~;"'H'
II'
I ~O
'<""e
"
90
RalllpsIi-P"rkt"8
Capacity
!f<i"lt. Puh t l~
l!enefttCrtterla
L972
1972
2,500
Upland onprlvate
property
Upland On prtv"te
property
Upland lit
l!ergenPolnt
Upland on
Tanner Pk,
Uph"d on
Ne~eras I,la"d
Upland 0" I!ergen
Pt., lndL~n Is"
andTannerPi!.rk
Upland onl!et'SenPt,
Upland on Indian
Ill.
Upland on 1'a",,"'r
l'k.
Upland onl"d!a" 5111ar{"aS, vlltage
ls. s11p', and tOIm
bn...t r>lmp
Upland on Gran r.onnects East-West
[.'I, 'I"d Oak [s. r.hannel to Stat",
Elo'lt Channel
Upland on prtvate Va"e
property
Upland on Ind1an h. NOM
Upland on 8ergenPt. None
Upland on lIergen 1I0at yard and baIt!
Pt. tllckte shop
Upl"nrl
1'an"e ~ pk.
Upland n" [ndlan h. None
~one
22,000 uphnd nn Z '1Il'1rtnas, ~ ~<Iche
HeLleopter h. cluh, <I"d ;l ft~ht"g
Qt.1tLon all ""
~I", f r"" ka t Uf k r; r .
'"
Vp.~
I'''''
Cl,600
1'168
(See l!-lO) IJpl""d onllergen M.\rtnaiI"d2
Pt. ftshing ..tilet,,"S
None
v",
1'l68
(Seell-tO)
1,000 Ul'l",flfl 0" T"nner pk. ~one
~o"e
'"
1957
39,000
L911)
l"~Z
11'1,000 up1"nd CnnnectsF."qt-l,/eqt
fl...ttcol'cer (q. Chlln"el t<lSCHe
8oll.tr.hllnn...l
~ne
"
1951
1962
196)
19(,6-
t'~o'i8
ltO,OOO
240,000
8'JO,OOO
Z,lOO,OOO
1968
1'178
(See I!-to) Upla"d on fhrt"a
29,non i1eLLc.,pter Iq.
~Io "e
"
1974
196!!
18,000
(See 11-10)
'lone
-"
19MI
1981
(See ll-lO)
14,000
16,000
15,000
L,noO
"".,e
v.."
1969
1984
I''''
1977
'1,000
Tanner Pic..
l'inear"
Ye"
to9,OOO
115,000
)40,000
2,500
I''''
2,000
(See 8-10)
(See 8-10)
'"
v""
3,000
\969
L'lIl2
L'I!l4
1ft ,000
~,(}no
"^
Y.,
No"e
'/0
"".
Vcs
Tanner pk.
15I1c!H"I
Y..
"',.
"
'lone
'00
Ve"etl"nShores
Park - 150 cars
Ye,
~A
VC'i
'lone
~IO
'kI"e
"
"o"e
"
None
Von
'kJ"e
"
'.Jurle
"
'lone Veg
('I<\t"
~h""nel
only)
None '{es
'lo"e 'I"
'lh 'f,...
AmltyvtlleVtLlase Yeq
lj""I\ch - 2(}Oc"rs
I
(a)AraC3, Palllequ8 and Annllflk.emu.ntr.1I Canals were drertged I\S o"e project (" 1'l72.
(b)Great Neck, Howells, Santapogue, Stronss, \.lest 8abylon, 1,/00<19 Creeks ".,d C"rtls Rlve~ ",ere dred~ed !., CO"J"nr.eLo" ",ith F.ast-loIe..t I':h'ln"el In 1'~"'1I.
(c)l..ugano Ii. Tombart Canals _~e dredged a8 o"'e project tn 1'l69.
(d)Unql,la North-South Channel t"C Ludu ,,(x 'pur channels also: 'Ieye~", Ftellltng, C"rd{"'e~, p,.rkhlll, Iloover Ii. 1)"'1"'" r."",,,ls,
I
I
I
18
I
I
The projects listed below are in the private interest:
I
I
A total of approximately 4.7
Hidway Canal
pemequa Canal
Santa Barbara Canal
Santapogue Creek
Sunny Point Canal
Tombart Canal
West Canal
million cubic yards of spoil have been
I
Amity Harbor
Annuskernunica Canal
Ar aca Canal
Bayview Canal
Grand Canal
Lugano Canal
dredged by Suffolk County in the Town of Babylon since 1949 - nearly 45%
I
I
of this material resulted from the dredging of the East-West Channel in
1966-1968. Another 45% of the total town volume of spoil dredged by the
County came from the creation and maintenance of navigation channels that
I
cross the Great South Bay and connect the East-West Channel with that of
the N.Y.S. Boat Channel. The remaining 10% of dredge spoil is a result of
I
dredging activity in mainland canals and creeks.
Spoil ~aterial dredged from the south shore creeks is generally a
I
mixture of sand and mud. Spoil material from channels within the bay are
I
I
I
I
I
all sand. Publicly owned bay islands and mainland waterfront sites, in
addition to many private upland sites adjacent to dredged creeks and
canals, have historically served as dredged spoil disposal sites in
Babylon. :lajor publicly owned dredged spoil disposal sites include Bergen
Point, Indian Island, Tanner Park, Helicopter Island and Nezeras Island.
With the exception of the Suffolk County owned Indian Island site.
all of the publicly owned spoil disposal sites are at or very close to
I
I
I
19
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
full capacity. Privately owned lots that are adjacent to maintained
creeks and canals, and that are suitable for the receipt of spoil are
increasingly difficult to find along the highly developed shoreline in
Babylon.
2.3.2 Brookhaven
Since 1948 the SCDPW has undertaken 37 dredging projects within
Brookhaven Town (Table 2). Two new projects proposed for 1985 are also
included in Table 2. Approximately 9 million cubic yards have been
dredged; of this, 2 million cubic yards of duck sludge were dredged for
the purpose of "pollutant removal." The remainder of the material
includes sand and mud which was dredged to create and maintain navigation
channels. Figures 8 and 9 show the location of dredging projects within
the Town. Future maintenance of navigation channels in the Forge River,
Seatuck Creek, Sea tuck Cove and the East River will require removal and
disposal of duck sludge deposits. Dredging such spoil material poses
significant environmental and disposal problems. Eased upon the public
benefit criteria in this plan, 29 projects within Brookhaven TO'<n meet the
critieria and thus qualify for county supported dredging. ~ineteen of the
29 projects have high priority status. Spoil material in most projects
has been deposited on upland si.tes in close proximity to the navigation
channel. It should be noted that approximately 1.1 million cubic yards
were dredged in Narrow Bay adjacent to Smith Point County Park and used as
fill to create a parking lot. Thus, there is no further need for dredging
in this area except to !1lSintain the Intracoastal Haterway as necessary.
Howells Creek in Bellport was dredged in 1985 to protect the public health
and should continue to be dredged only if the Suffolk County Dept. of
Health Services makes a similar determination in the future.
20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 2: su_ary
of Suffolk. County Dredging Pt'ojecU .Wi'lt~ln ToW'll of 8t'ookhavt!!o
Identification Datu Cubic Yards Method of Spot! Type. of Waul'
No. Credited Dredged Disposal Dependent Facillte.
!'rolect Naill
Atrollkonk Creek
Abets Creek.
IJeaverd._ Ct'eek
Bellport Belich
Ilellport Rarbor
Boy tan La"!
CrystllLBeach
navis Park.
flre Island Pines
Forge Rlver
Great Gun Beach
Rarteove
HomeCreek(a)
llollell.Creek(b)
John!!lNeckCreek(c)
LlttleSeatuck.
C.:eek(d)
811.-1
811.-2
BR-J
BR-4
BR-S
BR-6
BR-1
BR-!1
BR-9
BR-IO
8R-II
1l1l.-12
BR-lJ
BIl-14
SR-IS
SR-II)
Lonl SR-17
Creek(s)
~lI"tlc Beach SR-If!
Yacl,t Club
Msttuck. Creek BR-l'J
(HeUs)
!-foriehe. InLet BR-20
and Northwut Cut{e)
Me. Stnal Ib.rbor 8R-21
Mud Creek
Mud Creek
(IJe9t Sentll)
(lceanBa.yPark
Old Neck Creek
Orchard Neck Creek
Patterequa.h Creek
Poosp.tuck Creek(e)
Selltuck Cove(d)
Se;ltuck r.reek(d)
Senbl: Creek
Setauket Harhor
Slu'",p P",n Creek
S..lthPolnt(f)
BR-22
8R-2)
8R-24
BR-25
8R-H.
BR-21
BR-2B
BR-29
BR-)O
BR-H
BR-]2
BR-3)
BR-)4
19&8
19&9
125,000
&2,400
Beach nourhhftnt Charter boat and
>:Il!.rlna
Dredging reque!!ted Upland
Upland Martna 55
19&5
1969
1979
1974
1':180
1972
1':180
1980
19&5
19&8
1':16':1
1':1&7
19&7
19&4
1':165
163,100
137,600
22,500
5,400
3,000
76,000
29,800
2,800
265,':100
125,000
62,400
135,300
150,000
Dredgl"R reque!!ted
112,400
45,946
1966 382,100
1970 49B,900
1972 )97,500
1973 575,300
1967
8/82
1/82
1953
1958
1966
1969
1973
L978
L9'76
1978
19M
191'12
1963
1949
1965
1973
1961
1966
1967
1966
1970
1972
1973
1974
19!i6
1970
1972
1973
1974
1959
1963
1952
1963
19M
U57
1961
150,000
9,500
30,400
747,300
365,700
677,900
151,000
1)5,000
218,500
54,000
4,800
3,500
1,300
lUI,953
18,900
HO,200
174,100
L21,700
100,300
150,000
382,700
498,900
397,500
575,300
l!i5,400
382,700
49i;l,9()0
)97,500
575,300
165,400
69,100
119,000
42,300
138,400
1,400
809,100
J55,300
Marina
Beach nouri9hlaent Ferry and doclulge 20
Upland on John Village docking and l27
Boyle Island ferry
Upiand and bellch None None
nour19hlll<!nt
Beach nour19hment HOlleowner'1ll Q9oclation
dockage
Upland on barrier town lIlarlna 214
UpLlnd on barrler Boatell, ferry servlce
Upland on barrler Town IIUIrina and a 115
and upland on boat club
IllalnLlnd
On beach Town marinl!. 84
Upland on barrler 2 lIlarlnas ;1M 112
and on beach town dock ROO rallp
Ocell.n 9urf Marina on HOllIe Creek 20
No. of Sllpllf
Hoorlnl!;l
15
150
Upland 01'15, C.
ShlrleyHarlna
None
Beach nourlshment Hltintaln fluahing None
(bay)
None
Ocean lI11rf
I"leean surf
Ocean surf
Oceall surf
None
Ocean surf None
Upland 'f;lcnt club
Upland HOllleowneu asaoc.
1II;lrt"a (prlvate)
Beach nourl,hlllent General navlgatlon
and bay island
Beach nourtshllll!nt Martn", ftshina
station, Yllcht club,
"nd boat yartl
Upland MarIna
Upland on barrier MarIna
Beach nourlshment MarIna "nd ferry
terminal
Oc:ean !lurf MartlUl and ramp
Ocean surf
Upland MarIna
Upland None
Ocelln surf
Sane
Oceall lIurf
Ocean surf
Ocean surf
Oceltn sllrf
Ocean surf
BOllt rallpon
Se;<tuck Creek.
2 marInas onF.ast
Rlver
Oc:ean 9urf
I"lcean surf
Ocean surf
Ocelln 'urf
Ocean surf
Iloat ramp on
Seatuc:k Creek
Upland on harrIer 2111arln"a
1'1 land
Martna
Upland
2""rlnall
Constructlon of
parklng tot
r...n..ral
navtgatlon
21
None
None
100
100
NA
412
400
ISO
40
IRO
"
None
None
))0
41
JOO moorlng!!
and IO'lllps
"0 sllpll
<A
RlIIIIpl 'Puktrc
Capacity
None
None
None
None
,-,
None
None
None
None
2 rallps
None
Town rallp
None
None
None
None
,-,
...
R_,
Rallp
Ramp
(No off-Hreet ~rklng)
'{one
Town ramp at
mouth of Seatuck
Creek; Town dock
and ritlllponEo\!Jt
R1Vler
Town rallp at
;nollth of Sea tuck
<::reek.
<A
Meet9 Publlc
Benefit Crltl!'rla
Yoo
Yoo
y"
r.,
Ye"
"
'0
Yo,
Yo,
Yo,
Yoo
Yo,
r.,
'0
'0
'0
,.,
Yo,
No
Yo,
Yo,
Yo,
Ye..
r.,
y"
y"
"
No
y"
Yoo
Yoo
'ie"
y"
'fe, (only for
thematntf'nance
of the Intr"COil'lt,l
\.lateNay)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 2 (Cont'd): SunlllUl:ry of Suffolk County Ot'edglng .prO'jecu Withln Town of Bt'ookhollven
!dentlflclItlon Date, Cubic Yard. Method of Spall Type, of Water !oIo. of SUpai Itppl & Parking Meets Publle
proieet Nallll No. Dredged Dndlled Dhpoul Dependent Facll1tes Moortnll C.paclty Benefit Criteria
Stony BfOOIt Harbor BR-15 19S8 l81,SOO Belich nourhhlllent J lDarlnas and a A< least )00 y"
1965 207,100 publlt ......rlna SltPSllnd
l<:lRO U"OOO 140fllDorlngs
SlIlI" IUllet' BR-J6 1962 407,900 Upland Town ramp None R<llllp, 2Jc"lr-. V"
Tuthill Cov. BR-)7 1965 196,100 Upland )lIIadnll" and.ll III Ita..p y"
Callst Cuard Stutan
WAter hland BR-3B 1962 102,400 Beach nour19hlllent None y"
Wills Creek(llI) BR-)9 1961 150,000 Ocean !!lUff None None Nonl! Yo
(a)Hollll!, Lons, Pooapattlck and Wllls Cl:'eek! wel:'e dl:'edged alone pl:'oject in 1967.
(b)'t'he Suffolk County Oept. of Health Senicel hili determined that Medging Howeth Cl:'eek wal necellal:'j' In ItHI5 to pl:'otlct the public health.
{c)The Suffolk County Oept. of Health Sel:'vlcel hal detel:'lIined that it la neCellal:'Y to ...alntain the llIOuth of Johnl Neck Cl:'eek to a depth of
approxtlllately J feet helow ...ean low watel:' in ol:'del:' to dl:'ain neal:'by mosquito hl:'eeding al:'eaa.
(d)l.tttle Seatuck and Seatuck Cl:'eekl, Seatuck CO" and E~Ult RiveI:' lIel:'e dl:'edged alone pl:'oject fl:'Oll 1966 to 1.971.
(e)Horiehe_ Inlet hi a fedeully autl1ol:'tud pl:'ojeet.
(OThe {ntncolllul Waterway is .... fedeully "uthol:'ized pl:'oJect. That ponton which ia located tn Nul:'ow Bay wal dl:'edged hy Suffolk County
In 1957 and 1961 fol:' the pUl:'poae of obUining fill to constl:'uct II pal:'king lot at Smith Point County Park.
22
In
In
1
n
n
n
1 !
U
n
u
r
I..
"
I..
"
lJ
f'
<
L.
p
U
f'
ij
P
lj
n
U
fl
U
..
u
- ,
u
!II ,
...
, ,
U
Smrthtown
f ast Setau~ e:
Bay
.
"-
-&/\
.:!:Y ~.
,
\
K
,
\
,
\
,
\
,
\
,
\
South Se!3u~et
\
-1
\
\
\
'-
-
:"wn of ,mlfht0wn
'-
I.,
-=:"-----
L
BR.21
.....
.....
"
"-
\
\
/
.-'
,...-
7
fllrmillg~1Itp
-
Mollmlle
----
---"~
-----r~
ION G
.....
S,und B",~
Miller Place
,
\
,
,
"-"
-
.------
-~..- ...--.-
Medl",d
I S I AND
SOUND
"
Rock, P,m'
,
Middle Island
Il
\
\
\
SCrdlJA HeIghts
23
,_c_
. SHORfHIM "
.. , ,~ -, '
I
[as' Shore~am
Ridge
'"
,...-
I
I
-I, W3d"g Rim
,
,
@
scole
6000
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Brookhaven [North)
County of Suffo'k - New York
o 6000
feet
fown of ,iverheod
,
\
,
\
,
\
"~\
I) .
\
.. t;
~.. ,
,
,
..., \
l
.
\ ~
.t,
~L
....,...,.
BrookhavenNationallabnratlJ"
.
,/'/ .,.-
~.
...
/t-: - ~
~
-
. PI.HI. Ie [\!rYEST l'iWJ!T!
* PPT\',\TL I\TFlU<~T PH.(}.il:l~T
----
-......
I
.-==i====
.. ,-- I
.
I
.
I
,
I ~
I
I
J
II
;1
.
. I
.
I
.
I
"
... I
..
,
southampton
...
-
I
n
n
r.
in
In
' ,
I j
1
I
n
L
I
I
,
I
; !::JJ----'--
~~....~
.
"
lj
@
feet
"
ti
scale
6000
o
6000
"
~J
f1
U
town of Islip
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Brookhaven [South]
County 01 Suffolk - New York
n
U
Yl
11
..,
. !',UBLl C j\TE!~CST rl~(),JJ("i
u
# ,
i'FI\\Tl: I\TmISI I'PO.lLCT
u
~,
u
'~ ~
u
.., ~
u
r '
~
..
~:''''''fb'-:,.~,_ C'.-'
1-.u..,,_r ""'.:
HoltSVIUe
,..,..- '~'\T'
I
'''.
\
\
:;
North P,lchog"
Patekague Boy
G rea t
So v t 1'1
Bay
Yaphank
-....
"
'''co
,.
I
- -".
''''16
~l'>
>>,(
tx<o~v
"
",
.,
I
"
I
Medtord
;
- .".'"
-".-
,/"
,
North \ Bellport
24
\
"
-
...
.,~
AT 1 ANT I C
southampton
..
~..
OCEAN
I
,
I
,
I
,
I
,
I
,
\
,
I
iBR-24
'.
--!pee.
8IJPk
Greal
So IJ t h
Bay
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
I
I
I
Following is a list of dredging projects within Brookhaven Town
determined to be in the public interest:
I
*Abets Creek
Aeroskonk Creek
Beaverdam Creek
*Bellport Beach
*Bellport Harbor
*Davis Park
*Fire Island Pines
*Forge River
Great Gun Beach
*Hart Cove
Home Creek
*Mastic Beach Yacht Club
**Moriches Inlet
*~t. Sinai Harbor
*Mud Creek
*Mud Creek (West Senix)
*Ocean Bay Park
*Old Neck Creek
Orchard Neck Creek
*Seatuck Cove
Sea tuck Creek
Senix Creek
*Setauket Harbor
Sheep Pen Creek
**Smith Point
*Stony Brook Harbor
Swan River
*Tuthill Cove
Water Island
I
I
I
I
The projects listed below are in the private interest:
I
Boylan Lane
Crystal Beach
***Howells Creek
Johns Neck Creek
Lons Creek
Poospatuck Creek
1Hlls Creek
Little Sea tuck Creek
Mattuck Creek
Pattersquash Creek
I
I
I
2.3.3 East Hampton
All of the six Suffolk County dredging projects located in the
I
Town of East Hampton and shown in Figure 10 meet the public benefit
I
criteria (Table 3). Three of the six channels are considered high
priority projects. From 1977 to 1978, the County dredged the federally
I
authorized navigation channel in Sag Harbor. The COE should be
responsible for the future maintenance of this federal channel. The
I
I
*High priority dredging project
**High priority dredging project that is part of or extension of federally
authorized project
***The Suffolk County Dept .of Health Services has determined that dredging
Howells Creek was necessary in 1985 to protect the public health.
I
25
I
n
n
n
"
u
,..,
~j
,..,
.' ,
u
r
u
r1
lei
~
lJ
n
lei
P
lJ
southampton
n
U
rl
U
r,
u
n
U
n
U
r'
U
p
U
f1
U
.'
./
./'
./.
./.,/,/
../
./
/
.
/
/
.
/
.
/
.
I .I
'I /
Northwest
-,-.,Tti:5------1 Harbor
Sag Harbor
SAG ".
HIRBOR
\ -...
,
town
of
\
\
,
I"por'
~
I
,
--~___'
---~-----------
~---
17
Wainscott
~
-
,
-r
tI
Gardiners Bay
"
t"
(l
.
.
I
~
~
.
.J
'"
Co
Gardiners Say
Nopeague Bay
Napeag"
ATLANTIC
------
r/
p/
;
Hither Hills /
//
------ ~
Harbor
OCEAN
26
---
810 c k
For' Pond Boy
-
Dredging Project Locations
Town of East Hampton
County of Suffolk - New York
. POP, L T l~ 1 \"fTPEST fllHI.TLCT
I s I an d
* PRT\".\TJ-' T:<Tr.;~FST i'!~(Ur:CT
Sound
~
/
~
~
/
/
I
- Imaga,sett
Montauk
b
..
I
Table ): Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Project. Wit"'!" Town of I!:a.t Hampton
lde"tlflCAtlon Date" Cublc'i'l'ds Method of SpoU typel of ....ater No. of Sllp,,1
Project Nue No. Dudged Oredged Ohposal Dependent FacUltes Mootings
A.csbonacRa1:'bor EH.-l l'J5'J 205,000 Beach nourishment 2 tovn boat l:'/Il'1lpa None
1965 74,000
1971 H,aOO
1976 30,000
Lake Hontauk. EH-2 1949 40,000 Upland on s.c. TOIm cOlIImerdat '"
19;9 100,000 parkland and fhhery dock, lefty
1974 65,000 be",ch nourishment te~inal to Block
island, 12 lIIarlnal
and charter boat
operation., ,,~
b~' ump
NapeaguIII Harbor EH-) 1961 )42,000 Upland OR H.ick, To~ boo< fIllip No.,
Northwellt Harbor I':H-4 1961 357,000 Modified tnlet town boat nllp No..
1965 49,000 orientation and 'M Infom.11llOortng
1971 18,000 placed .poll on
barrlet' spit
Sag Harbor(a) EH-5 1977 40,000 2 upland ,ite. Oll !torage fac:iltty, JOJ
(Part II) 1978 39,000 yac:ht c:lub, c:ounty dock,
2l11ar1na., and village
rallp and boat buln
I
I
I
I
I
Three HUe Harbor
EH-6
1958
191;1
1965
1974
1915
82,000
35,000
106,000
83,000
90,000
643
Seac:h nour1.hllent
on both tlde. of
inlet and upland
site on Harina La.
10llarlna., t01frl
cCllll_rdal H.hin&;
dock, 3 town boat
rall.p sit.., .ltp.
at county/town
hcUlty
I
I
(alSag Harbor 18 a federally authorhed projec:t.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
27
I
I
R8IIIp.&Parking MeeuPubllc:
Capacity Slmeftt Criterh
Shlpyar<l Lane - '(es
5 car.
La:n<llngT.'lne-
5 can
We.t Lake Or. - '(e.
10 cart
Laty Point Park '(ell
lbrthwest ta1'di"3
Rd.
Y..
Marlne Park - 'i0
cars
Y..
GannRd. - 'iOcars, '(es
Hands Cnek
[.andlng - 15 carl,
Three MUe Harbor
Park & I)ock - 'i cars
I
I
I
remaining five Suffolk County dredging projects within the Town should be
maintained by Suffolk County. The six projects are listed below:
I
Acabonac Harbor
*Lake Montauk
Napeague Harbor
Northwest Harbor
**Sag Harbor-Part II
*Three Mile Harbor
I
The Suffolk County dredging project in Lake Montauk is a spur channel
I
running from the federally authorized channel into Coons Foot Cove.
I
~early 1.8 million cubic yards of material have been dredged by
Suffolk County within the Town of East Hampton since 1949. The dredged
I
spoil material is all sand and can be readily used for beach nourishment
purposes. Although past practices show that dredged material had been
I
placed on upland sites bordering the Suffolk County projects in Lake
Montauk (Coons Foot Cove), Napeague Harbor, Sag Harbor and Three Mile
I
Harbor, dredged spoil resulting from future maintenance of these harbors
I
I
can be utilized for beach nourishment purposes.
2.3.4 Huntington
All of the four Suffolk County dredging projects in the Town of
Huntington are in the public interest (Table 4) and their locations are
I
shown on Figure 11. Huntington ~arbor and Northport ~arbor, both of "hieh
I
I
have been dredged by Suffolk County, are federally authorized projects
and, in the future, should he maintained by the COE. The other two
Suffolk County projects--Centerport Harbor and Prices Bend (north end of
Sand City at Eatons Neck)--should continue to be maintained by Suffolk
I
County. Huntington Harbor, Northport Harbor and Prices Bend are
*High priority dredging project
**High priority dredging project that is part of or extension of
federally authorized project
I
I
28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Tltlte4: SUIlIlI.lIry of Suffolk County' Dredgt,,! Projects Withtn TOlin of Huntington
l"'entlflcatlon Dates Cublc't'ards Hethod of spotl Types of Water ~o. or Slips! RanplI t. Parkt"8 fleet! Puhllc
Pt'olect N._ No. Dredged Dredged Dhpaul Dependent factUres Hoortncs Capacity Benefit Criteria
Centerport Ha'l'lXll: 11-1 19\8 214,500 Bellch nourishment lmarins 20 None '1''!5
1981 70,600 I!lt 2 sites lo
19'58, .od l sice
(S..ndClty) lo
1981
Huntlngton llarbor(a) '-2 1962 411,700 Leveled harbor '" Over 12 publlc ,od '" sllps 7 ralllp' ,..
,. depth ,,~ private fllclHtles m 'lIOorlngs
shore to shore
Northport Harbor(.) '-l 1962- 1,]510,500 s. c. dredged 21'1arln.., ,. y.cht III slips None Yo.
(96) southward fro" club, lo~ dock and lOO llIOorlngs
COl!.project '" bo.t slips
boat yard and
placed spoll on
1st.1'd 1n harbor
Price. Bend '-4 1958 169,200 Beach nourt~hlll8nt Hobart Town Belich l ra..plat lOW ,..
(North. end of at West Beach bOllt rallp park. - 450 cars
SandClty)
(a)Baeh Munthgton Harbor and No-cthport Harbor are federally authorized project!.
29
-------------------
[ 0 N G
IS [ AND
SOUND
,
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Huntington
County of Suffolk - New York
~~"'.~ Hunhnyfon Bay
lJ "-<"--~"
,
["lUll <:: N ec~
Il0YO HARBOR
scale n
-- --
6000- """""""--- -
-
o
,
SprIng .
Hot hor \
,
,
\ ~ Cold So"o~ H"hol
Y:{':
-t
I
\
\
'\
Cold
Huntington
S'dIIO" ,J'
"-.'
~~GreeOi"n
\
""
~
-
Ilw,od
town
feel
-
6000
:'
\ I
,~y
,
,
\
,
,
-\
,
,
\
,
,
-\
,
,
\
,
,
\
/
/
/
Comm.ok
I 01
'-
f smlfhtown
,
I
,
I
,-
/
.-
COUNfY
:, Hlifllll1i)lJ!i
0," Hills
OF
~
I
/'
NASSAU
,
I
J!
. I
Hall Holl"w HI!!s iJ I C'--~
-~--I I
--I
\ l. _1------;/---,-
_:-. \1 ~ _------ I
\ M--:-'---\~
: '_-'- I
~----,
~
--
-
town of ,::>Iip
. '111,1
! \Ti:I,:1 -.;'1 1'1~(l.lU:'l
town ot bobyion
* i'I,']\ \'1'1.
T\'iL:;I>~T 11!{(\.ll.C"!
30
I
I
considered high priority projects.
Approximately 2.1 million cubic yards of material have been dredged
I
by Suffolk County for the four projects in the Town of Huntington since
I
1958. Over 95% of all the yardage dredged by Suffolk County in the Town
occurred during a five year period from 1958 to 1962. With the exception
I
of Prices Bend, dredged material from all of the Suffolk County projects
in the Town contain considerable quantities of mud and mud mixed with
I
sand. The spoil material obtained from the Suffolk County dredging
I
projects at Prices Bend and Centerport Harbor has been used for beach
nourishment. A spoil island was created in Northport Harbor with the
I
dredged spoil obtained from the Suffolk County Northport Harbor project.
The spoil material resulting from dredging activity in Huntington Harbor
I
was placed back within the harbor itself.
I
2.3.5 Islip
Within the Town of Islip there are 29 Suffolk County dredging
I
projects, and requests for eight other projects (Table 5). Figure 12
shows dredging project locations. Two of the 21 projects that ~eet the
I
I
public benefit criteria--Browns River and Orowoc Creek--are federally
authorized projects and should continue to be maintained by the COE. Tl,e
remaining 19 projects that meet the public benefit criteria should be
I
maintained by Suffolk County. Only two of the 21 public interest projects
listed below - Riley Creek and SCCC Boat Basin - are not considered high
I
priority:
I
*Atlantique
*Barrett Beach
*Bay Shore Marina
*Brightwaters Canal
**Browns River
*Champlin Creek
*Homans Creek
**Orowoc Creek
*S.C. Marine ,'{useum
*S.C. Police Marina
*Port O'Call
*Quintuck Creek
I
I
31
I
I
1'",bl.5: Su_ry of Suffolt County DudSt"1 Projects IItcht" to,", of {slip
I Identiflcatlon Oaus Cubley,rd, Method ofSpoll Type. of Water '0. of SUps' R_fMI . !'.Irklrc Meet' Publlc
Pt'olectM.- lt~. Dredllled Dnd..d Oi,poul OaDendent hcll1tu Moor!n.. r..apaeltJ' 8eneflt erttert.
"rnold C"nal I-I 1976 2,200 ~;lY b,uch "'", ",one !'lone '0
nourl,hlHnt
Atl"ntlque!Seaftre l-l 1961 60,400 IJpland dlspoul Town beach and 1" '" vA
I 1916 3,600 on town h..ell !lIlIrlna, 10_
ferry service
Awlll. Creelt I-l Orl!!dlln, "lone 'Wne "lone '0
Requested
lI..rt'ut !leach l-4 196t tl4,700 Upland disposal Town bin.en "nd " '" y"
I 1914 14,000 0" town belleh ....ar1n.. 10_
rerryservlcll
lIay Shon iUrtna(a) l-S L959 2)4,400 Spoil uud as town drin_, dacu ,H1 ~"ph Ave. Dol' Yo,
fill for what ",' rallp: 511larln..1 an:! RitIllp - 100
ls now parlc.ing y,,-cheelub. cars
I are. at Bay
Shor.!tarlna
Brlck Kl1n Ceeek(b) H 191] 14,100 Upland ,1te 10 '0 tactlltt.. "'"' ~on. '0
the ",e.t o",ned
by La S.dl.
14.tlltary AcadellY
I Bright".Uu Canal 1-7 Deedg1n. 'JUlag. of !rightvatefl ZJ6 'fone y"
Reque.ted anchorag.
8rowns lHver(c) t-O 1970 1,000 S,C. dndged Ferry to Fln t.land, '" La"', F.nd Marin. y., 'bul
'l.orthvard troll CO! tOW'l't boat ,Hp., not north o.
project and pheed "rurin.. Ft!dt!l'd
I ,poll on adJacent project)
,-,pland
Chaflplln Creek t-9 1957 122,200 Upland on Seatutk To,," boat !I11p. " Chlllplln r.uell Yo,
1980 to,300 Pl'es.rv. 1'loclt- Pi cars
I Connatquat River {-to 1964 220,300 Upland northo! 1 10_ boat rallps, 441 Graat Rlver'1ll!1, y.,
Shore Dr. and at tounty bo" sllp. Dotk - 20 tan
"pproache, 10 Great Rlver'lll!l.
bridl' by Snapper Pal'lt- 24 tan
1M
Oavisoll Laloon t-ll 1984 4,100 say beach "'"' ~ona ~olle '0
I nourish_lit
e:ut say Canal [-12 19"3 ~, tOO Bay beath None ~one 1I0ne '0
L984 3,200 nouri,hllent
Fatr "arbor t-I] 1981 29,500 Seach nourt.hllNllnt noCUS. '0' terry and SA y"
I boat.
erand Canat(d} t-14 None I./one "'"' '0
Green Creek I-IS 1979 2,000 Upland .ite !tarin.and fbh1ns 111 None y"
1980 4,1)00 to the la.t ,tatlon
I Homans Cre'!!lt {-16 1964 26,900 Upland ,ite, To,," lMuIt .Up' .... 100 Ooubla boet r...pat y"
1975 ~,500 10 (h, we.t boat 'l'l!.lIpl town bulkhe>ld on
1980 4,100 wi, of creek - ~()
19"2 L,OOO car,
hllp Tovn Pool(e) t-17 t978 2,400 Upland on tovn Salt-vater pool '" '" '"
I (rut I.Up) perklna lot .lnd
then truckad
avay
K.lth Canal [-18 Dndging None ~one '""' '0
Reque.ted
I S.C. /'Iarln. MUS.UII [-19 1972 1,400 8.ach nourlshfllent S,C. '1artna !iuseu.. For......eu.. \lone y"
1974 7,000 M lsland to .....e vessel,
1981 ..00
L982 400
1983 '00
Oroorot. Creak(c) [-20 Dudstn, 6raarlna., town bo..t 101 '1atlLeSt. "lock .... Yes
I ltequut.d. ,lip' and boat "'''111' ltalllp-l0 car,
Pollel MarIna 1-21 1979 J,900 8eae.h nourishllent S.C. Pollce "'ari'le " RarlIp "-t S.C. l'.rlt v"
1980 '00 to the west BureAual\dS.C. P!lrk. East :<h.rtn" 19 '"
1981 '00 East'1.rlna dl!lrepatr
I t982 1,000
1983 1,400
1984 1,900
port O'CaLL [-22 O,..d!ling Dock for to"," t",rry 88 '""' y"
Rlllu..ud ,ill'S
I Qulntuck Creek t-2J 196H~2 153,600 Upland site .,ow T,,1oIft boat dIp. ,... '" flotU'l.1'lem. y"
uged a. 1O~ boatIng u,oe. Park- 2]J<:lr,
parkIng 10'
Riley Creek {-24 1964 6,900 Spoil used as boat yard 1I0lle y"
flU for!a,
Shore'1,rln.
I ,pit
I
I 32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
table S (Cont'd): SllIDlllary of Suffolk County Dt'edgtng f'roJec:U Within town of blip
Identification D...te~ CuMe: Yard, Method of 5 poll Types of Water ~o. of SUp,,' RlUIIpI & Pukin@ Meets Public
Prolect M.a. ,.. Dredged Ond~ed Ohposal Dependent Fadlltl!!s Moorlnlla Capacity Benefit Crlte'C'h
Saltdn 1-25 1981 1,800 Be"c:" nourishment Yacht dub and '" Ye"
dockage f.. fl!!rry
",' hoats
SCCC Boat Buln(O 1-26 1979 1,485 Upland around Used by SCCC ull1ng y"
hastn and graded club for Instructional
purposes
Secatogul!! Canal 1-27 19!12 l,ZOO None None "one ,.
Snakehl11 Chllnnel(g) 1-28 1965 )46,100 Created bay Connec:t. !!l9t-We!lt SA '" Yes
1973 '1),900 Island and Channel with State
e:lltended another Boat Channel
TaI11...1a" L.agoon 1-29 198) 2,800 Baybe.ell None None 'fone ,.
1984 600 nourishment
The Hoorlngs(b) 1-)0 1976 2,000 Beach nourishlllent None None None ,.
1980 4,)00 on town park ,.
1982 2,600 the east
t98) 1,400
1984 3,200
Thorne Canal t-31 19R2 '00 S..y beach None "'one N'one ,.
nourishment
TImber Point County 1-)2 Dredgtng Martna 180 y.. y.,
Park-Ealt Marina Requelltad
truell Cruk(b) t-33 t916 1,700 Upland lItte ,. None "'one None ,.
1978 2,700 the west
1979 3,200
L980 1,800
1981 1,600
1982 2,000
19R) 2,200
1984 2,000
WUlets Creek 1-)4 Dredgtng None None None ,.
Requested
l./aglltaH canal t-J'j 19'14 600 8each nourishment None None None '"
to the welt of
entrance
WampulII Lagoon 1-)6 1984 2,900 Seach nourishment None None None ,.
Wnt IIUp 1-)7 1981 3,800 Upland on Good Town boat sUps !)' West hllp Reach y"
!iartna 5al1l. Rospltal .'" ramp arJ:! Mart"a - ISO can
.'" then removed
hy tovn
{a}Say Shon Marina project Indudel Watchogue and Pentaquit Creeks.
(b)the Suffolk County Dept. of RealCh Servicel has <IeCemlned that lC is neceSSlIry to _lntai" the llIOuths of Brick l(11n Creek., troes Creek. and the
Moortnga to a depth of approdmately ) feet below !lean low ",..tel' in order to duin nearby mosquito breeding are...
(c)!rovns R.1ver and Orowoc Creek are federattl' authorhed projects.
(d)Tovn requelt for dredging of Crand Cand Ifas utisfied by Suffolk County Ifith rellloval of obstruction frolll WlIterway.
(e)lslIp town Pool proje<:c is in the publIc interest, but criteria developed for this dredglng plan do not ,apply to thh project. Maintenance of the poot
should be the responsibl1tty of the tova of [sUp.
{OAlthough project "'l!ets public benefit criteria, it I\IaY be in the County's belt Interest to locste club activIty at other nearby County h.dl1tl~.
{g)Snakehill Chlnnel 11 no longer maintained by Suffolk County, boaters should "OW use Dickerson or Oak t.llland Ch..nnel lmltesd.
33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Islip
County of Suffolk - New York
, . 1'[ [,I Ii '\'111(1'1 P:' ~
* j)]ll\'~ ri ~\'I"I ['1"";'1" i11'1)"1/1
" .... \., . ,\ .....,
I
@
scale
feet
6000
o
6000
s. ....,,_,'P
,-
/-3 .
* 1-20
'-7 . '-5
. .'-24
t-ll'~ 1-34 \:,\ ' *'-n.
";fll,~* t.36 I ~37" ,
\2~.": *~*' * '-1
, "-35'-271-12 1-18
* 1-31
~9."23
*'-30
*
'-17
34
'-14
*
*'-6
'-10-' ,
''if''> tL
..,,)...... NI{{lI. >d\o'
. '-21 '-32
" .-
c$\\\
,~J0 ',. .
"\ .." "
-::
'-0
1-15.,
',~~,'
"~""'~
'-19
'-28
.
, I,
town of brookhu''''i'
/-8
.
.
. '-26
'-22
1-25.
"-16
,
'-13
.
1-2
.
.~",.
I
I
*Connetquot River
*Fair Harbor
*Green Creek
Riley Creek
*Saltaire
S.C.Community College Boat
*Snakehill Channel
*Timber Point County Park
(East Marina)
*West Islip Marina
Bas in
I
I
The projects listed below are in the private interest:
.'
Arnold Canal
Awixa Creek
Brick Kiln Creek
Davison Lagoon
East Bay Canal
Grand Canal
Islip Town Pool (East Islip)
Keith Canal
Seca togue Canal
Tahlulah Lagoon
The Moorings
Thorne Canal
Trues Creek
Willets Creek
t,ags taf f Canal
l,ampum Lagoon
I
I
Since 1957, nearly 1.8 million cubic yards of spoil have been dredged
,
by Suffolk County within the Town of Islip. Approximately one-fourth of
the yardage dredged by Suffolk County within the Town of IsUp resulted
I
from the dredging of Snakehill Channel, which crosses the Great South Bay.
I
Snakehill Channel is no longer maintained by Suffolk County. Boaters
should now use Oickerson or Oak Island Channels instead.
I
,1ost of the material dredged from channels crossing the Great South
Bay and from the mouths of creeks in the Town of Islip is clean sand.
I
Material obtained from the dredging of boat basin areas on the bay side of
I
Fire Island is all sand and historically has been placed upland on the bay
shore of the barrier island. A mixture of sand and mud is generally found
I
in south shore canals and creeks that are periodically dredged to maintain
navigation channels.
I
Fill obtained from the larger :uainland dredging projects such as Bay
I
I
Shore Marina and Quintuck Creek has been used to create town owned parking
and recreational facilities. Sand from Snakehill Channel '.as used to
create an island and extend another island in the Great South Bay east of
Captree Island. All of these upland locations are no longer viable
I
I
*High priority dredging project
**Iligh priority dredging project that is part of or extension of federally
authorized project
35
I
dredged spoil disposal sites. Spoil resulting from maintenance dredging
I
of canals and creeks is either deposited along the bay shoreline as beach
nourishment or placed on adjacent upland disposal sites. The availability
I
I
of upland disposal sites has rapidly diminished within the Town,
particularly in the more highly developed western half.
2.3.6 Riverhead
I
I
I
,
The SCDPW has undertaken 9 dredging projects within Riverhead
Town since 1948. One new project has been proposed for dredging by
Suffolk County in 1985. The projects are listed on Table 6 and can he
located in ~igure 13. Approximately 2.5 million cubic yards have been
dredged; of this quantity 1.8 million cubic yards were duck sludge. The
remaining 700,000 cubic yards consisted primarily of sand with some mud.
Based upon the public benefit criteria in this plan, four projects within
I
Riverhead Town have a public benefit and are considered high priority. .t
should be noted, however, that although there is a public henefit derive~
I
from dredging the Peconic River, it is a federally authorized project and,
as such, should he dredged by the COE. Spoil composed principally of sand
I
I
was used for beach nourishment, whereas duck sludge and mud were deposited
in upland diked sites.
Following is a list of dredging projects within Riverhead Town
I
determined to have a public benefit:
I
*East Creek
*Hawks Creek
*Meetinghouse Creek
**Peconic River
,I,
The projects listed below are in the private interest:
I,
I
***Dreamers Cove
:1errits Bay (Peconic River)
l1iamogue Lagoon
Reeves Creek
Sawmill Creek
Terrys Creek
I
*High priority dredging project
**High priority dredging project that is part of or extension of federally
authorized project
***The Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services has determined that dredging
Dreamers Cove was necessary in 1985 to protect the public health.
36
I
:1
I
it
,
! ,I
i
I
II
I
II
I
II
II
I
j,
!I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t.ble 6: s...-ry of 5uHolk County Dredstn" Projects WIthtn town of IHverl'te.d
Ident 1 ~ teat ton D.us Cubic 'l'ard. Hethod of Spoil typ.. of Water No. of SUpaI RaIIp. & '"rUre !'leer. Publle
Protect M... ". Ouda.1I Dudaed Otapoul Dependent f',1c1l1tu Moor1na. CoIll'.clty Ikon.He erlt.rl.
Ore....n CoyeC_) '-I DudStnl 50 ft. of dockase.tt !bn. ~nfl '"
Reque.ted ",ote!
East Creek R-2 1960 305,900 B,ulen to,,", ...rln. 77 ~. Y.5. Soat 'oo
196\ 10B,700 noyrt,"".nt, Rallp. 1110 Car,
19115 35,600 fo~erly
1975 38,1300 llpllnd
1981 4,300
198) 4,300
Itawka Creek ,-) 19"6 ]0,800 Beach 'tatht h,utn Inn ~n. 'oo
1915 1,500 nourilhll.ent
1982 t,300
1(8) 1,300
L91'l4 2,500
MfI.ctr,ghou.. Creek ,-4 1948 123,100 Upland on Marln. I" ~n. 'oo
1961 11,000 [ndbn [sland
1915 249,500 County Park
(duck sludgl)
'1lrriu 81y '-5 1961 82,)00 lJpland on louth !)cu:.k&ge, "
(Peconic RiIIlr) $Ulof River pollutant 'C'I1lIOval,
."" nlvilatlon
'11all.olu. l.agoon '-6 1966 11,400 Seach nourtsh"lnt 1fonl ~nl No", "
191'i 2,100
L979 L,OOO
,,'" 2,200
19A1 L,OOO
L9A2 500
L9A] 1,:100
19A4 2,300
Peconlc Rtver(b) '-7 19M 160,200 lJpland Yachtclub,docka.1 None 'oo
1970 6l6,)OO in downtown Rlv.rh.ad,
'1.rin. propol.d
Ite.vel Cr..k(c) R-8 lIJ65 708,600 lJpland It..taurant dock 10 ~one "
(dock .,.,li. <ltnt"l)
Sa....1l1Cr..k(c} R-9 1965 708,600 Upland ~on. "." "." ,.
1'erry. Crnk(c) R-IO 1965 708,600 Upland "'." son. ~o"e ,.
(a)Th. Suffolk County Dept. of Health Servtcu has dete'C'T'lllned that -Ired,t"g Drll.!I.rl Cove "'II ru!ce"ary tn L911'5to protect the publ1c health.
{b)Pecontc Riv.r (I I federally authorited. project.
(clReeves, S.....Ullnd 1'erry. Creekl Wl!!re dr.dged u one project Ln 1965,
37
-
I
I
I
scale
I 5000 feet
0
5000
I
"'
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
J of brookhol'en
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
\
,
I
,
(l~ \
"VI
.
(\
\/
,
\
bD ,
\
,
~\ 'own 0/ '0
,
\
,
\
,
\:(/
,
//\
.' ,
lONG
, S l AND
SOUND
Ho.lhillle
Roanoke
'Ha[":f, R:w
\
\
\
I
- -
'"
o
"
)
;/ \
-
R.6-, ./"
r- L./ '"
C3
GI.'" , p.; .' 1"0'.'
Calwton
U ::: knl
/
.
I
c::='
7
,
/
,
/
~ ~\
i'l
Q~\~
t!, tl
\~
. II
I It:l
\~ ~
~'
'--.-
~
~
()
. -
. ,.,' , ".
1'1, ,.\ 'j
!,:.wn of _cuthampton
* ','-\'
, ':,-:- :'i'i1.fj ('"]'
'~DC
/
/
to>'ll11 o! h'0(;~hcVf'r1
Dredging Project locations
Town of Riverhead
County of Suffolk - New York
I
/'
/
--_J
\
38
Peconi,
Boy
,
I
I
2.3.7 Shelter Island
Since 1955, SCDPW has undertaken 9 dredging projects within the
Town of Shelter Island. One new project has been proposed for dredging by
Suffolk County in 1985. The projects are listed in Table 7 and their
locations illustrated in Figure 14. ApproKimately 800,000 cubic yards
I
I
I
I
have been dredged. The spoil material is principally sand and includes
some mud. Based upon the public benefit criteria developed in this plan,
five projects within the Town of Shelter Island are in the public interest
but none are considered high priority.
Following is a list of dredging projects within the Town of Shelter
Island determined to have a public benefit:
I
I
Coecles Inlet
Congdons Cove
Dering Harbor
:1enant ic Creek
\,es t Neck Ilarbo r
The following projects do not meet the public benefit criteria and
I
thus do not qualify for County supported dredging:
I
Chase Creek
Crab Creek
Dickerson Creek
Gardiners Creek
Smith Cove
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.3.8 Smithtown
Since 1953, SCDPW has undertaken four dredging projects within
the Town of Smithtown. The projects are listed in Table 8 and their
'Iocations illustrated in Figure 15. ApproKirnately 1.5 million cubic yards
have been dredged. The material dredged consisted primarily of sand and
has been used as beach nourishment. All four projects, which are listed
below, are in the public interest and considered high priority:
*Long Beach
*Long Beach Boat Basin
*Nissequogue River
*Porpoise Channel
*High priority dredging project
I
39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fable 1: SUlIIllIary of Suffolk County Dredging Projeets io/tct\lI'I Toom of Shelter {,hnd
[dentlftc.uton nates CubIc Vards Method of Spall Types of !4atet No. of Sill's! !l;alllps & Parkl"'8 M..et'l l'ul'>ltc
Project Nasa ~o. Dredged DUdRea Dhposal Dependent Fac1l1te' Moorings Capacity Benefit erlterla
ChueCreek 51-1 19f1O 100 Upland l1aintain flushing "
Coeeleltnlet 51-2 i966 14],200 Beachnoutl,h1llflnt Marina 55/10 ~one y"
Condo"s Cove 51-) 1965 48,900 Adjacent Iloekand rallp Ra!l'lp ",
1966 151,000 9ho1:'ell".
CrahCreek(a) 51-4 1976 tO,OOO Beach Matntatn "
1983 4,300 nourlshl'llent flushlng
Derlngllarbor SI-,) 1966 18,200 neposic in deep ZftI"rlnall 25/25 '~p ",
portIon of harbor
Olck.euon Creek 51-6 1982 100 Upland ~la lnt /I (n flushing <0
GardlneuCreek 51-1 1919 5,100 Upland l1atntaln flu'hing "0
Menantte Creek 51-13 Dredging Ralllp Ralllp y"
Requested
5!1ltthCove 5t-9 1966 35,900 Beach nourhhment None None None "0
West Neck Harbor 51-10 1955 8,000 Beach nourlsh!llent 2 ramps 2 UlllpS y"
1960 H3,500
1965 19,400
1916 18 ,~OO
SliD 17 ,400
(a)The Suffolk County Dept. of Hell1th Servtce. h89 tfete~{ned that -tredgtng Crab Creek 11'11' necoetl!lary ln 19,115 to protect the p1Jbttc health.
40
-------------------
town 0' Joufhold
\S.
~
./"-
,'" /#JI "
,/ /"'.. \
,. ,../Greenport Harbor \
. / /' \
/// ../.. \
./ ,.
.../.. SI-5.. \
./
;' \ SOOO
,'------ .-' ............
/ -.....~ ............ 0
, ............
\ ~... ""
'\.
'\.
,
Gard!ners\
\B a y
,
\
/
,
/
,
/
,
/
,
/
,
, /
\ .../'
\ ,./
, \
\ I town of east hampton
, \
. I'I/BUC T'iTI'Rl'\ I'IU1JI'CT '
* l'RJ\'\TF ;'iTFIZl'S\. I'IHUI'CT \
,
\ ............J
, ...........
\ ...........
...........
............
."
,
Southold \
Bay
,
\
,
\
,
\
SI-,
,
\
,
\
,
\
,
\ Shelter Island Sound
I ____-----...,
""-------- \
,--------
.
Ccedes Inlet
SI.2.
~
~
\ Smith Cave
r
~
~
town of southampton
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Shelter Island
County of Suffolk - New York
c
41
I
Table iii: 5ul,1l1llllry of Suffolk County Dredging ProjectlJ Within Town of S<1tthto,,"
I
Identification Oat'!' CubleYard, 'Iethodof Spoll Types of Waul" 14o.<'lf Sllpsl Ralllps&Parklng ~eets Public:.
prolect NlIm. No. OredKed Oredud D1sposal Dependent Factlltes HoorlnRs Capacity Benefit Criteria
Long Beach S-l 1958 ~84."OO Beach nour!sh.....nt 1'tartna 12~ ",oarlng" 1 fmp y"
(back bay)
LongSeach S-2 1C1S) 44,100 Beach nourishlllent !ilIrln. l1l)sllp'J 1 r~n1p y"
Roat Ba,in (back bay)
Nls!lequogu.Rlver S-l 19M 165,QOO Beac:h nourhl'llllent Salt ar1d taekle f,n<1loorl"8'1 Pt'tvate f'WP ''','' 'res
1966 L40,700 !tatlon, yacht ",unlelpal ra"lp-
Ll/AO 56,000 club 50cau
porpoise Channel S-4 1'J51 Ileach nourhhlllent Publ1c.lIal"ln.... 170/12S 2raJllps Yo.
yacht club, arx!
pl'lv"telllarlna
I
I
t
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
42
lfJO). MeN - lflollnS lO Aluno,)
UMOlql!WS '0 ..01
SUOIII:l01 l:lafoJd JUIJpaJO
')v
~
-""""
Et i..1"Ii'lJi!,i 1.~;I:i ii" I! );],1 *
o
1..111\);j.i [,S 1;1 1.I.\i lJ !~III,I .
'-
.",.
-'
, --"
" )
~
-------------------
, j
\'
b,o'
'" '\ Jf
\.t,_>05,Jlif'
,~
?' .
-~ ~..~~.,-
,-
z.S
. ~
lY'
~.
"
.
"
/ '\
I
,,-'\1"-" )
r't~!1 'i e-s
.
'~."",
.F
^ V 8
NM01H1IWS
I
2.3.9 Southampton
I
I
I
Since 1960 the SCDPW has undertaken 43 dredging projects within
Southampton Town. Another 7 projects have been proposed for dredging by
Suffolk County. These 50 projects are' listed in Table 9 and their
locations are illustrated in Figures 16 and 17. Approximately 6.8 million
cubic yards have been dredged. The spoil material is principally sand and
I
includes some mud. Based upon the public benefit criteria developed in
this report, 31 projects within Southampton Town are in the public
I
interest. Sixteen of the 31 are considered as high priority dredging
projects. Although Suffolk County has periodically dredged portions of
I
Moriches and Shinnecock Inlets, it should be noted that they are
I
authorized Federal projects, and thus should be dredged by the CaE. The
principal spoil disposal method is beach nourishment; upland spoil
I
disposal is the next most common disposal mode.
There is a possibility that continued maintenance dredging of Pikes
I
Beach Channel could further weaken the barrier island west of the groin
I
I
field at Westhampton Beach and exacerbate the already severe erosion
problem in this area.
Following is a list of dredging projects within Southampton Town
dete,rmined to be in the public interest:
I
Beaverdam Creek
Cold Spring Pond
*East River
Fresh Pond
**Intracoastal ponquogue
Mecox Bay
*Mill Creek
*Moneybogue Bay
*North Sea llarbor
Noyack Creek
Pennimans Creek
Penny Pond
Pikes Beach Channel
**Ponquogue Bridge
**Potunk Inlet
Quogue River Dock
Red Creek Pond
Reeves Bay
*Sag Harbor Cove
*Sag Harbor Part I
*Sag Harbor (Upper)
Sebonac Creek
*Shinnecock Bay (Commercial Docks)
*Shinnecock Canal
*Shinnecock Coast Guard Station
**Shinnecock Inlet
*Smith Creek
Speonk Pt. Canal
Tiana Beach Channel
Heesuck Creek
*1<ooleys Pond
I
I
I
I
I
I
*High priority dredging project
**High priority dredging project that is part of or extension of federally
authorized project
1,4
I
<r.bll~: Su_.r",. of Suffolk Count;' Dudll.., Project. ..,t~tn TI)"" of Soutll..pun
TYlMII"t'Jater
Dependent fac:llttu
I
pnleet If...
Ben.rd.. Creelt
Carter. Cru,k
CluloLlne
I
Cold S1>dn~ Pond
I
Dave.Creek(a)
EutRlver
hr Pond
I
1"1.IICr..k
Fruh ,,,rut
I
C"onere.lt(h)
[I\tr"o:.o.'tll-
1"""quol,,"(e)
I
'I,collh,.
(["let)
!it~H. Pond
I
llUI Cruk
1-lonllyboguIBI"
~onh S.. K,rbor
I
I
~oy.dt Creek
i'JgdensPofld
.1
'ayn..Creek
'e..nt_neCrl.k
l'ennrPond(d)
PhUlp Cr.ek(e)
I
tdenttHeattol\ DatU Cubfe. Yard.
'10. Oreda:itd On<l..d
SH-t 1969 129,100
SK-2
511-1
'>11-4
SH-~
Clr..dglnl
Requested
Oredltlng
'l.eq"eHed
\964 iZ4 ,~OO
196' 29 .~OO
l'l7t 23,900
\9H 28,)00
\9112 :'11,000
19~6
\02,000
l'Ietho<lof Spoll
(ll,poul
~'Iln au..t
~e.o:h
nour1.,hent
'Jpland
SR-6 (5... 8R-)0 for dUdgl" hlttory)
B..eh.nourt,t".ent
SH-1
SR-"
SH-"
SH-IO
SIl-\1
SH-t2
SH-Il
SH-14
SH-\ ~
SH-16
SIl-17
SH-l~
SH-19
SH-lQ
Ple~,on. Canat(t) SH-2J
SH-2t
SH-22
Pikes Beaeh SIl-2~
Channal
I
Pine Neek SH-25
PonquoguaSr,(e) S1I-26
Potunlttnlet(el SH-27
I
')uancuekCreek SH-Z6
')uo"ue Rt~er Ooek SIt-29
Red Creelt Po"d(g) SIt-10
I
Reeves ~ay S1!-lt
I
SagllarbotCova(h) SIl-lZ
Sill na~bot (Upper)(ll) SIl-l)
~ag Hat!>or Part I 311-H
I
I
I
1961
1969
1915
1980
196t
1962
1961
1964
Dndlltnl
Requested
1915
191'2
1965
1966
1960
1960
\971
1917
19"l
1964
1971
\975
\l60
1981
1962
Sial
9i81
1984
1969
1966
1<)60
1965
:968
1966
:lredllnll
Re<1uested
11,000
lH,II00
14,100
2,700
1,000
",SOO
1,JOO
4,100
101,;00
11,100
45,.00
l05,4oo
ll,400
1110,100
27,100
13,700
I'J8,tOO
18,300
47,SOO
B,OOO
31,900
2,900
",S00
22,.00
\S,800
1)10,900
J'I,2oo
221,100
131,100
lU,lOO
Zn,60!)
19"8 120,800
1911 61,100
1981 n,rM
1172 14,000
1111 10,000
19M H9,2QO
1%6 40J,ir)0
1965 70,~OI)
1964 91,100
1911 lr'l,2flO
1975 l0,ZOO
1981 ",100
191\2 1,,'lOO
1981 J,:'(11)
1967 1.,100
1967 lJS,lOO
19,<,0 111,1110
1960 III,l00
196; :!SII,QOO
0eeen,urf
Beaeh
nourtsh.."t
Sueh
nourlsh..."t
S.aeh
nourt,h..."t
Seae"
nourtsh..ent
8eaeh
nourlshlllent
had' "outtshlllent
and ~ud
8eachnourL.htlle"t
&eaehno"rl.h...nt
"eeansurt
U,land
6eaehnourlsh...ent
Upland on l>ilrrle~
)lart"a
~on.
~one
~.rlna
'000'
To"", doek and rallP,
..nd:! ....rl"&I
"lone
"Iona
'1ona
"lone
r~nerd
n..~llj:.tlon
'lona
(ulntahl nuehlnlj:)
'lone
l 'l..rlnu ~nd
~"cht club
2'1lartnll.
~llrlna
Zpubtle rallp.
~one
'lone
Vtllag.ramp&.
~'leh t C lul>
'hrlna
'lone
6eachn<>nrl.hment 'lone
'lone
bach nOurl~h",ent '1""10
6r{d~e 'lnd barrter I~tr'eoutal
t.land .....l~"'.~ance ;;atar....,
il.epalr ~f barder h~''leoutd
t.l~nd ''';,Her"a,.
'Jpl.."d "Io"e
BeACh Murt.h..ent 10ek and nrap
3e~eh n<>urhhrllent TOIIII Honing
d<>ek
'Jpland 1 .,,~rt~u
:.Jpland <; ....rlnu
'Jpland ''II...rlna.
45
: 'urtna.., bo.t
y~rd, !llehe e Lub,
and olt te!"lltMI
'1o,otSHp./
~oorlnlls
10
'lone
'lone
"
"Ion..
2)0
'lone
'lone
\5-l0!'100rlnIS
'lone
'Ion..
1~5/10
\J}
DO
"lone
'Ion..
'lone
'lone
"
'lone
~Jo ne
'I"ne
'lone
~lon.
1;-10
.".,orlngl
'1
'"~
,.,
1>5
~_pS &. Parktn(
CapaclCr
"lone
'lone
'lone
'lone
'lone
il.arllp
"Ion..
'lone
Publte Aeee"
f,-10c"r,
'lone
'lone
~-p,
Searcap..elt,.
b..p
~-p
2ril",ps
,-lOears
'1nne
'ione
R....p
,-lO
'lone
'10~"
'IOn..
'1<>ne
'lone
'lone
h"'p
~a"p
6elr
'Ion"
~1IlIp
Ralllp
'lone
f'lUt. PubUe
8..nefttCrlterla
,,,
'0
'0
Yes
"
y" ~
"
'0
,,,
"
'0,
Ye~
"
'"
."
Yn
y"
"
"
'"
Yes
"
'0
'Ie.
"
~e.
."
"
Ye,
'Ie.
'let
Ve~
Yet
Yo,
I
I
fA"le" (Cone'd): ~w'1IlI4r., of S"ffaLlo; COllnty Dtedllnll ""''''Jeo::r.. W(...,,(n 1'oom "f ~o,,[h~.pton
IdentIfIcation Ofttu CuMo:: V~rds ~e[hod of Spoll typesofl/ater ,.. .. Hips' Rnpl & PukLng Me..t'P,,"l!c
p.."jete ,,- No. Dteducl Or"dud DL.~sa1 Dependent "aclllt". MoorlnllS CapaCIty Beneftt enterl"
Sellon.cere'll Sll-)'i 1<l5!l \tO,ZOO !eachnourlsl1_nt r4chtcl..b Ralllp ,.,
1961 'i~.1(JO
1968 51,;00
198t !,<IQO
SkLMecock Bay SIl-)fo t948 ~O,2no Seach Murt,,,...."t Co...ettL.l dock. Vel
(CIJfII.....claLDock.1 19';6 14),400
l<ln 1'6,lOO
1.980 ~2 ,500
ShlnnecoekCsnal SI{-]7 19fo6 In,200 hach "o"...I,"_n.,. r:ener41 nav!gatlan ~..,
1961\
Shtnneeock e.G. SH-18 1971 15,100 Beach "o"...1,I"wn.,. roast ':uard 5tu!on ,.,
StatIon
Shinneeo<:.lt t"ler(l) Sf\-H l<l51 110,500 Such nourl,h'u!lt r.eneral ~a"{~at lon ". ,.,
1968 27<1,JOO co.....r<:.
1969 ltJ,iJOO
19/1 250,900
S..lthCreek 5"-40 19'<'8 3'1,200 Bea<:h nourlshment 4rll&rtnaa "', Yu
5peonkPt, Canal 511-41 1990 'i,OOO Upland, be.ch Publtc " 'iOcars ,.,
..ourt~h,"ent dockag.
prapoud
SpeonklUnr 5H-42 19,<,1 119,000 'opLand llon. 'lone 'Ion. '0
1964 l39,9DO
5toneCreek(e) SK-4J i9'<'6 n2,600 Uptand on>'"rrl.r 'lone \10'" 'Ion.. "
5yt...an Royal ".....! S!I-44 Oredgl"g 'Ion. 'Ion. 'lone '0
Long'leekal...d.(b) Req...ested
TL.na hach Channel S!I-4S 1962 t14,1r;O t:pland M ~rrt&r TLanll ~e"cl> 'Ion. 'lone Vu
lslllnd ..d beaeh ToW'nPark
"o...rl~l>....nt
TtMIlr:ove(j) 5H-46 Ored.l!ltn.l!l ''lee..n s...d 'lone \lo"e 'lone ,.
Req....sted
'oIus...ck Creek(a) SH-41 1966 In,r;OO Uy>t.nd ) ",artnu " lI""t 40 Doubl. ~'''p, ,.,
, parkt"8 'p"eu
"dtICre.Ie(dl SH-4B 19M IH,lOO ae.cl>nourtsh...nt 'Ion. \lone \lone '0
lIetuls Cana1(f) 5H-49 Oredglng 'Ion. 'lone 'Ion. '0
Requested
\lootey. Pand SlI-SO t964 210,800 aeaeh nourlsl>..ent '1llrlna Vl(l!20 Y,,~
L9,<,1 15,200
lH2 12 ,~OO
1.97'i l2,OOO
197'1 3,.'00
1'180 6,100
,/8t 1,000
6/81 1,900
198J 11,100
~ 9 84 6,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(a)Weesuck and O""U Creekl 'lera dredged u on. project ln 1'166.
(b)Goo.e Creek and Sylvan Roy'll Ave.!Long 'leek Uvd, Canal. \lould!le dredged", one proJ~et.
(c)l'onquogue aftdg. and Potunl( Inlet project, are part 'If t>'.. lntracoutd lIater....,. ....nlet! L. a federally autllorhed project.
(d)l'enny Pond and lieU. Crule llere dredged u one project Ln 19~8.
(e)l'h1 Llp ~nd Stone Craek. \lere dredged ~o~ett!er U onll project tn t'l6(,.
(f)l'lenona andlletzel. Canals>lOuld be dr""lIed u one \lroJect,
(lI)8y tenllt' of ZO A.u'l:uat 1985, TO\ln Truate.. agreed to crea~. 'lH 'trut l"'rl(tna ~o acca,""'od.ce at lent" Car!.
(h)Sag Ilarl)or Co"e and Sag !lerbor (1)ppllr) ..ere dradg.d u one project Ln 1"''<'0.
(L)Sl>inneeoek tnlet tl a federally autt!ortud project.
(j1Th. SuffoLk Co"nt.,. a.pt. of lI.alth Ser"leu has ~etllrflllned thu tt 1,. neeeuary to ~efllo"e .,ortton. of .hoals aa n.eded ~o
" depth ot approllllllat.Ly ) f.et b.lo,", ",ea" toW' \later In nan. Cove Ln order to dratn nearby ~o'quLto bre~dlnll .Hen.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
46
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Southampton [West]
County of Suffolk - New York
towr
.' ...
,1, I.
*
.. ],' " .
j ',..
· SH-6
SH-8 *
SH-23 *' * SH-3
SH-49 *, . * SH-42
SH-41
SH-24
.
.
SH-l
SH-15
. . ..
.
SH-27
SH-28 *
SH-29.
SH-18
*
47
SR.44
. ** *SH-1O
{If .31
.SH-47
SH-22 SH-5
SH.43 ** * SH~5
SH.20
.
5H-46 *
5H-30
.
SH-37 .
.
SH-37
*SH-2 5H-4D 5H-48
.*
.
5H-21 . SH.38
5H-45 SH~l1 ~ · 5~'26 5H-36
· .SH-39
.
ft}t}f
-
6000
.v_.'"
.-=00*-
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dredging Project Locations
Town of Southampton lEast)
County of Suffolk - New York
" '>. \" 1,.,Pe
. ,1T'T"",' ',:'H'":!>,';i. .......1
'L'. "..,.' . ..
~ * ':1
,':;' [',": :': :-.;'" ;,., li.('"
SH.37 .
SH.4
.
.
SH.37
SH.7 *
*
SH.13
SH.39
..
SH.35.
.'
f~~,
-
6000
SH.9
SH-50 .
SH-16 .
.
48
. SH-17 SH-14
.
.
SH-12
SH-19
*
S8-32 . SH-34
.
.
SH-33
I
I
I
The projects listed below are in the private interest:
Carters Creek
Club Lane
Daves Creek
Far Pond
Fish Creek
Goose Creek
Hiddle Pond
Ogdens Pond
Paynes Creek
Philip Creek
Piersons Canal
Pine Neck
Quantuck Creek
Speonk River
Stone Creek
Sylvan Royal Ave./Long Neck Blvd.
Tiana Cove
Wells Creek
Wetzels Canal
I
I
2.3.10
Southold
I
I
I
I
There are 26 Suffolk County dredging projects within the Town of
Southold. Two new projects have been proposed for dredging by Suffolk
County in 1985. These 28 projects are listed in Table 10 and their
locations are shown on Figure 18. Application of the public benefit
criteria reveals that 22 of these projects qualify for publicly supported
dredging. Seven of the 22 are considered high priority dredging projects.
Two of the 22 projects that are in the public interest--Sterling Basin and
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l1attituck Creek--are federally authorized projects and should be
maintained by the COE. The remaining 20 projects that are in the public
projects are listed below:
interest should be ~aintained by Suffolk County. The public interest
*High priority dredging project
**High priority dredging project that is part of or extension of federally
authorized project
Broadwater Cove
Brushes Creek
Cedar Beach
(Suffolk County Community College)
Corey Creek
Goose Creek
*Greenport R.R. Dock
(now a commercial fishing dock)
*Gull Pond
*James Creek
Jockey Creek
Little Creek
Long Creek
(part of Mattituck Creek)
I
I
49
**Xattituck Creek
*'1i11 Creek
New Suffolk
Peters Neck Pt.
Richmond Creek
Schoolhouse Creek
**Sterling Basin/Greenport
Town Creek/Harbor
"est Creek
;;est Harbor - Fishers Island
(spur off Federal project)
*Wickham Creek
I
rebl.IOl S,,_r., or SuffolkCDU"t.,!)redlt~1 Projecc,..,t,thlnTo..... of Sourl'told
I
tdlll\tlHcntol\ Datu
prolact ~... '10. ()red..d
8r...d...Cu Co",,(a) 5-t tO~6
t 97~
t~~l
I
8t'"."..Creek
I
Cedar!ucll
(5.C.CCI_nlty
Colta.a)
I
C"re.,Cr"ek(b)
I
Oa,.1'0"4(<:.)
O"eplfCllotCreek
I
futCreelt(a)
I
(;old.llltl\ Inhr(d)
(S.C. Parkland)
Goo" Cru,k{bl
I
Guenport RR flock
I
Cultl'CI....
AallaCreek(e)
I
J.....Cre"k
I
JockeyCre"lt(,,)
LlttlaCrnk{bl
I
I
I
l.onsCreek
(pllrtof!laCtltuelt
Cruk)
""tttt"c1tCruk(f)
I
I
I
I
'-2
19~6
191~
191'1
1980
19111
Lon
Pll4
H
19H
19110
198t
1982
19113
19154
H
196)-64
1967
1912
1981
1983
t9ll4
H
Oreds{nl
1I.equnted
H
1964-I!ioS
L912
l'HS
197&
1980
19S0
1982
1983
(Jut,,)
('(ov.)
H
1966
1916
19112
1917
19110
U82
s-'
s-o
n59
1967
t""8
1916
$-LO
1'18)
S-tl
loH
1060
1910
1970
19111
1919
1980
19111
11'<;4-65
IH9
19110
l1111
S-Il
S-1)
19~9
1959
1976
S-l5 1961
1968
lH5
\916
11711
1919
1980
(~ay) 1'1l1t
(S,pt.) 1'IlIt
1'1112
('1a,.) (911)
(""8') 1983
('lay) 1'1114
(""1.)1984
5-t4
S-t6
1167
s-11
1955
C"bte '/"ards
Dud..d
414,400
LI,')OO
10,200
116,400
7,;00
5,1)00
L,1oo
~, 1100
L,SOO
4,1100
12,400
L,900
9,700
1,71)0
1,700
1,900
345,600
2),'100
7,600
to,200
1100
3,;00
24],500
n,lOO
4,1)00
L4,OOO
5,000
LO,OOO
11,.1100
6,100
4)4,'.00
11,000
lO,200
1,000
),700
~,OOO
~6, 700
1';,200
t1,IOO
6,000
11,iOO
177,200
13,500
2'1,fJoo
2),)00
1,'lOO
17,.00
~ ,200
11,)00
212,500
),000
6,700
9,400
23,200
9l,400
9,,)fJO
5\,000
3,100
5,000
40,000
4,000
5,000
!,400
2,.00
;,500
',000
2,400
2,)00
2,400
'<;,000
Il,OOO
1,596,400
'laellodGfSpOtl
DtlllOn1
'o....erl, "phnd
01'1 2 IHas, nGV
!Ie."hnourlsh..,nt
to the....t of
LnLet
Typea Gf '.laur
Oel/and.nt Faetltt..
Martna
lIe..chnourlsh"'lIt 'Iartlla
Gn both sid., of
Lnl.c
Buch nourt.hm.nt '1artn.TechnoloIJY
toth.....C Oepe, ofSCCC
FGrs.rty',plalld Il.a,.p
and IIG., beach
nourt.llllll!nt
'fOil.
aeachnGurt.hlHl\t
on both .Lde, of
Inl.t
'1"01\.
,0Mllerlyupland '1ona
on2.lt.., '\0'"'
baachno"rtsh""lIt
to tlle"ut -:of tnl't
Beachnourt.hOlellt 'lOll'
FOMllarty',plalld Rallp
by Bayvl.., Ava.,
110., boIach nourlsllunt
OHshon dtopoaaL Co..,..rclal fl.hery dock
slu betve'lI
Gr.'l\porc slid
OertlllHari:>or
lIe.ch 1I0urt,h...nt To,," beach. doc'dnland
betveenGullFolld boat rallp'
.nd SterHlI1 8...111
Beach nourlsh_nt \/,.,lIe
totlle.a.e
.o"l"ll.rly upl..lld 2 '1Iartllu
to the eut, 1'1""
beacllnourl,hlllnt
on bGth stdea of
Inl.t
8ea"hnourt.lllleIlC 'larlna
toth.""le
S.achnourllh...nt
On botll ,tduof
tnlet
~a...p
-Jpl4l1d ,It"
'i.stt-A.i'l.sr ~~rlna
L. it lnt.r~ect ton
", 'Iaultu<:k Cre.....
.\ndLonIlCre.lL
3"arln,ual\d partt
H.trlct bo..e .ltpl
.\1'1<1 ra..p
50
'1"0. "fSLlpl'
'1oortn..
"
"
'1"01'1"
'1"011.
'1"011"
~on.
'lon,
'lone
1I._p.4Parkt/lll
Capa.t.ltl'
...
~O!.e, P"hllc
,-.,.Ht CriterIa
'..
'.'
yO!.
~on~
ve.
'm,
6<:ars
Yes
'lOll.
""
'l"olle
""
'l"Gn.
""
'l"one
"'
'101101 !I.'llIP
6 "an
Appro~. 12 'lone
c,,"'lHrc:lal
fL.lll111 ~"sat.
L.\....dGcktn.
hdUtyat
~anhu'at
AVI. Park
"".,
I!I')
"
'Ion.
"
,"
'I...
",
noubla r...pat Yes
~anhiu..t Ava.
Park. 25IJCHS
'l""e '10
~;uIlp. at VtLI.\~.. Yes
'IarLne.-,f"'.\ttlt"ck
....t ~ ero"". 'tan ltllck
'la ~lna
'lone Yes
!l.a"p
6csrs
Yes
""..
<"
~a..p at ~..d ,.-,f
cn'..... "n "l~d te
lI.d.
v..
I
r~Dl. to {Co"c'dl:
5u.....ry of Suffolk r.ounty llndllnl.Prgjecc! \ll~1l1n 1'0,," of Souc:llold
t1~' of \luer
Dependent flcUltU
ldentlft<::&tlon [let., CubleY,rd.
No. Dudud CudI'd
"l'ethod (If Spall
Dl.oo..t
rJphnd GO tstend 3...rton
to tllewesr
I
Protect If...
'llltCruk
I
'ludCreelt(al
~ev SllHolk
I
P'HIU Neck P<:Ilnt
I
Rtc:h....ndCrnk
Schoolho....Cn.k
I
SterllnIBuln(f)
(Gre.npan)
I
TownCuekl
Harbor(e)
IIUt Creek(b)
I
'''",nll.rbol'
(FI!heu tstand-
channelconnec:tlnl
toy"denl project)
rJtckh...Creek
I
I
S~l8
s-t9
S~20
s-zt
S-22
$-23
s-Z4
S-lS
$-2&
$-21
$-2l'l
196]
1968
1915
\919
[08t
19,0;6
lHI')
lolll
"r..lOO
2,700
",000
~.OOO
~ ,500
~l4.~OO
\1,000
lll,200
Fo......rlyupland 'lone
o,n 2 .Leu, "OW
b.ac:hnoutl.hlllent
t<>th."ett of Inlet
4,000
L,500
L,oJOl)
2,000
),]00
\,000
\ .~OO
8uch nourl,h....ftt ~".t rup
1)1\ to.... !)e~<:h to
the.o..ch
8e'<:h nourll~ftI.nt
on both Ildu of
lnlet
hae~ nour1sllrTlent
For""rl,...ud
..etlandSb,.
cellltlry.no"
llse"-ekstde
I)f lnltc fl)r
beaehnourlsll..ent
8e...ehnourl,II.."nt
to tlle..elt
B.lelo nOllrt.lI_nt
on both sldel o:.f
lnl't
IJsed ho~per ':w!.rRe
..<>dd"..pedat .ea
Belich no"r1.h_nt '1arln,
to th...elt
~ar1n'
~on"
~artna
~ ..ar1n,,! ..nd
.atl1"ltlub
'1lrl".n,"r"Oll<:lIl)f
creek a"" .o....u..p
onblY
Raftlp
'to. .,f SUp.'
:-Ioorlnu:
''I
~one
"
~"ne
"
'"
;0
~on"
1"
!I......P.I,Ptr...1n.
CI.Plc:lt'l'
Ralapltl'l)rt.,f
~Upt ~1r1na
'1ol\e
'1e..SllffolkT".....
ra:op
r.,,,,,ralllp
10 esn
!'.ved r"l.d.t"" nllp
~onl
'<on,
fl)und,r.l.;>ndl""
Plt. c..p (I)n
bl.'I'- 25 CHI)
,~,
'" can
Soae,.l./tS 'hrbor
'1utl\a ramp
'IeetlP',bI1<:
hnlfle Crlterta
,..
'0
'..
'..
Vel
h,
,,'
",
,..
'(u
,..
I
(I)!rodwlt,r COVI. 'Iud Cruk nd hst Crnk ....r. dred.ed II on. prGJect l" U66. 191r, ~ 19~2.
(b)By leeelr of e July 19S~, To,," BOlrd 19rud tG ~rovldl publl<: .\ttu," eo Corey. Goose, Llule .nd :,o'Ut ':te"k,.
(enhe Suffolk COllney Oept. of Kealtll 5.rvleel h'" dle.r"l"ed that It 11 I\IC:esUry to ....tl\uln the ..outlll I)f 0.11 P"l\d .'nd Kilts ~r".k to a ~'pel,
of a~pro:dllltety ) feet hollow "un 10.. "I.tar In ordar to drall\ nUlrb, !mO.~utto breedll\' Hell.
(d)Tlla Suffolk r;oul\ty Oape. of KeaLth Sar..lcet h.. dete",Lnecl that dredging I",oldSlllth {I\ht ...at '.-Cellar{ I.. lqll~ to pr'H..~t t~a pllbtlc hult!l.
(8).focke, Creek and To..n Creek/Har'lor...n dred.ed U onl prGJect 11\ t'J~q and 1916.
(f)'lattHuCk Greek and St8rlln, Sa~tn ar8 ~ederdly ."thorl~ad ~rGJe<:t..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1971
\'Hq
lUO
1911L
19B2
19B)
I'JB4
LlredgtnS
Requut..,J
l'J~9
19..,"
l'l(,7
1'112
('16)
1'176
123,000
62,800
25.100
S,'lOO
U.JOO
12,000
l63,900
129,200
12.000
t'H'J
1'Jr,)
1976
1 q~'J
ln9
1916
2l,200
'J).~OO
9,000
92,500
9.000
2.QOO
4l,ll)0
t966
1916
19112
1971
1966
1972
1979
l'!IlL
l'J1I2
(911)
lq84
~e. lOO
10,000
1....00
1,71)0
2.200
1,'11)0
I. ~Ol)
51
n
n
n
~ I"'-
m
Dr!en/PI
~
lIttl, Gull Is
.
LONG ISLAND SOUND
n
li
Greal Gull Is.
fast ManDn
"
lJ
LONG
GREfHPURT ()
I
(
~
Dredging Project Locations
,./ r \ Town of Southold
/ / \ \ County of Suffo'k - New York
? \
l \
. 1'1IBLTC )V\1:REST )'Jli}J[CT
u
""V'<
\ \ I'-> ,/ ,
U ,'/
\ ~"".'"
, "'''''~
\ ~.'
\, . ,.'-
"
/\ -
/ l ~
\
/\-::~
D
~
~
IS LAN 0
~.
CutchD~ue
Greenporf ;..----
orbor /'"
,./'
,./
,./'
-~ // ,,-:<
, 'f
j/ .
S.J8,-._ . " .
I '" -,' / ;'
/ "/ /
, /
\
,
\
,
\
,
\
. ,ft.'
\.It'S'
\ ."
, ~
\
,
\
,
\
.
\
town of shelter island
* PH n'\TE I:\TFPEST PPJUECT
r
u
\
\
n
i.J
n
lJ
J
I
\.' /~~/
/\-_/
....
n
i.J
~\
/
-------
P
lJ
"
,
~
~
/
"-
- ,J/
'~--
,.
l.i
n
lJ
"
~
\
,
H 0 'f
~
I
I RObl"S
\ iSland
\
\
,./.----
../
../
/
/'
/'
/'
/'
,./
./'
Pecon!c /'
,./.
/" Boy
,./
//
.,./'
/
,./
I __~_~_
---~~--
S.13
Harbor
"
-""
__~~--~~_M~-~----__..SE!LEf connecticut
--~~--~~ ~ state oT,ie;-;,~~--a___
--..~ -"~----"-,
''''.
'", /
"y'
.=
~ ;i!
<=I~
ii;
.",
.
I
..
q
F i 5 her s
Is/and Sound
f1
U
q; /\
,
,..~....._._.._---...
-'-- -----------_._~
lown uf 'outhomprcn
Block /sond Sound
rl
U
,1.:1
\
G, ," ,1:
! " t tie
\
,
P f.' '.0;'; (
f'
U
\
---
52
FISHERS ISLAND
~.
I
I
I
The projects listed below are in the private interest:
Dam Pond
Deep Hole Creek
East Creek
Goldsmith Inlet
Halls Creek
Mud Creek
Since 1955, approximately 4.8 million cubic yards of spoil have been
I
I
dredged by Suffolk County within the Town of Southold. Nearly 1/3 of the
yardage dredged by Suffolk County within the Town resulted from the
dredging of the federally authorized navigation channel in Mattituck Creek
I
I
I
in 1955.
All of the material dredged in Southold is sand and/or gravel and is
sutiable for beach nourishment. Although some upland disposal sites were
used for the placement of spoil from dredging activities that occurred
back in the 1950s and 1960s, all of the projects now maintained by Suffolk
I
County, with the exception of West Harbor, utilize dredged spoil for beath
nourishment. Dredged spoil from the Suffolk County West Harbor project,
I
which is a spur off the Federal channel, is dumped at sea through use of a
I
hopper barge.
2.4 Suffolk County Lands Used for Dredged Spoil Disposal
I
I
I
2.4.1 Inventory
An inventory was conducted of County owned properties which have
been used in the past for dredged spoil disposal. A total of 17 sites
were ident Hied on County property that contained dredged spoil according
to either the New York State Tidal Wetlands Map Series or the Suffolk
I
County Soil Survey. Discrepancies were evident between the t..o sources of
information, as shown in Table il.
I
I
I
53
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 11: Suffolk County Property Formerly or Presently Used for Dredged
Spoil Deposition
TOTAL ACREAGE
OF PROPERTY
DREDGED SPOIL ACREAGE
NYS Tidal
Wetlands Map
Great South Bay Islands (incl. Helicopter
Island)
Indian Island (Babylon) County Park
Bergen Point County Golf Course and
Southwest Sewer District
Gardiner County Park
Timber Point County Golf Course
West Sayville County Golf Course
Sans Souci Lakes County Preserve
Smith Point County Marina (Shirley)
Smith Point County Park
Cupsogue County Park
Shinnecock Beach (West) County Park
Northwest Harbor County Park
tlontauk County Park
Cedar Beach County Park
Indian Island (Riverhead) County Park
Riverhead County Golf Course
Peconic River Wetlands
740
83
125
68
253
231
226
218
273
167
1,059
220
475
676
1,063
68
274
156
40
6,222
o
3
o
4
14
o
35
o
13
o
2
o
54
o
8
3~
S.C. Soil
Survey
190
12
202*
o
45*
o
o
57*
137* part.
48
12
27
7*
12* part.
63
35*
20
~
*Sites which have been (or will be in the near future) landscaped or redeveloped.
2.4.2 Analysis
A review of the sites identified above was conducted with
assistance from Commissioner John Chester, Department of Parks, Recreation
and Conservation and lIr. Jim Hunter, SCDPW, to dete=ine the status of
these sites and their possible future use for dredged spoil disposal. The
following four categories describe the status of each County site and
possible uses in the future.
A. Dredged spoil sites that are completely
developed/redeveloped and/or where more spoil
deposition is not recommended:
Bergen Point County Golf Course
and Southwest Sewer District
Gardiner County Park
Timber Point County Solf Course
54
I
I
I
West Sayville County Golf Course*
Sans Souci Lakes County Preserve
Northwest Harbor County Park
Montauk County Park
Indian Island (Riverhead) County Park
Riverhead County Golf Course
Peconic River Wetlands
I
I
I
*Dredged spoil material can continue to be deposited on a small area of
the spit in concurrence with maintenance dredging for the !larine Museum.
B. Dredged spoil sites that have additional
capacity for spoil deposition:
I
I
Great South Bay Islands (including Helicopter
Island)-limited capacity
Indian Island (Babylon) County Park
Smith Point County Marina (Shirley)
C. County property where beach nourishment is
possible:
I
I
Smith Point County Park
Cupsogue County Park
Shinnecock Beach County Park
Cedar Beach County Park
D. County property where rehabilitation of
dredged spoil disposal sites is
recommended:
I
I
I
Smith Point Park
Indian Island (Riverhead) County Park
Previous disposal locations at Indian Island (Riverhead) County Park are
shown in Figure 19.
I
I
I
I
I
55
I
//
,;/ f'''
,.
,\<,,~~\
a-.
\of. f..
,t I (.
. ~~~
..",~~' .: ,- ~fS".} ,{~,.' - '.. ., ~
...,:.1 .., _ -.. ,.. ~
> _ ..:,. .. '" . ,', .
":.. ;!_9>.f ,-.. . - J'.. - .
.':( . "',} ':.~.~~ ".: .,
"'56 .
"t '" iil
...-
...
J
" "
---.---..-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. Future Issues Associated with Suffolk County Dredging and Spoil
Disposal Activity
3.1 Scope of County Dredging Activity
Dredging activity, measured on the basis of total cubic yards of
spoil material dredged, peaked in 19~6. The total quantity of spoil
dredged was approximately 4,600,000 cubic yards. The average project size
was approximately 207,000 cubic yards. By 1984 however, the total
quantity of spoil material dredged decreased to approximately 163,000
cubic yards and average project size decreased to about 4,400 cubic yards.
Twelve projects were completed each year prior to 1980, whereas the
average number completed each year from 1980-1984 was 30. These numbers
reflect the changing nature of Suffolk County's dredging activity from
channel creation to channel maintenance. The data also reflect the
decline in space available for spoil disposal.
Dredging activity during the period 1955-1975 involved the creation
of major channels, such as East-west Channel, Forge River Channel, Swan
River Channel, the Northwest Cut at Moriches Inlet, etc. When major
projects like these were completed, the type of dredging activity shifted
to maintenance dredging, i.e., dredging a shoaled area usually at the
luouth of a creek to facilitate navigation. Thus, the scope of such
projects has decreased from hundreds of thousanrls of cubic yards of spoll
material to less than 20,000 cubic yds. (in many cases much less) per
project. Average project size for each year from 1960 to 1984 is listed
in Table 12.
57
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 12: Suffolk County Dredging Activity
1960-1984
Year
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
;10. of
Projects
7
11
13
6
17
21
22
16
10
9
4
8
11
10
6
16
17
5
7
17
31
25
26
32
37
Average Project Size
184,018
202,046
279,321
355,905
140,890
153,307
207,020
116,649
95,335
112,447
455,193
27,706
56,856
150,711
57,342
37,723
14,349
8,223
43,036
6,919
8,047
7,947
6,632
7,972
4,412
As can be seen, average project size exceeded 50,000 cu. yds. for 14
of 16 years between 1960 and 1975 inclusive. Average project size from
1976 to 1984 was less than 10,000 cu. yds. for 8 of those 9 years. In
addition, many spoil sites or potential spoil sites have been either
filled or developed and tidal wetland regulations have precluded the use
of other sites. Therefore, a lack of available spoil ~isposal sites will
be a limiting factor on future dredging activity.
It is not anticipated that many new navigation channels will he
created. The few that may be created will probably be confined to the
Gardiners and Peconic Bay area, because shoreline development pressures
58
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
are intensifying and because the spoil material (sand) is suitable for
beach nourishment, thus alleviating the need to find suitable upland
disposal si tes.
3.2 Need for Dredged Spoil Disposal Sites
Past practice in regard to dredged spoil disposal had been to deposit
the material on upland sites as close as possi':lle to the navigation
channel being dredged. This disposal method minimized dredging costs. In
some cases landowners welcomed the placement of spoil material on their
property as a means of creating developable waterfront land. Population
density adjacent to many creeks was significantly less in the 1950's and
1960's than it is today. Thus there is less land available for spoil
disposal today. Owners of sites that are available for spoil disposal
are often faced with stiff opposition from nearby residents who fear
unsightly piles of foul snelling material. Clean dredged spoil consisting
mostly of sand has been depos ited on beaches as beach nourishment. This
disposal method is used in the Gardiners-Peconic area and portions of
Shinnecock and Great South Bays and the north shore.
Spoil disposal in the Towns of Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton,
Shelter Island, East Hampton, Southold and Huntington is accomplished
almos t exc lusively by beach nourishment. Upland disposal is utilized in
approximately one-fourth of all projects in Brookhaven To'NO. Of these
projec ts, four are likely to requi re regular maintenance. Personnel at
Suffolk DPW estimate that disposal space at each of these sites is li'aited
to two addi tional rnaintenance dredging jobs. Thus, 3 iven a "aintenance
interval of 5 to 7 years, there will be no upland disposal sites for
dredged material by the year 2000. This agrees with estimates provided by
NYSDEC personnel.
59
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Approximately one-third of all projects in the Town of Babylon
utilize upland disposal sites for dredged spoil. Currently, all disposal
sites are filled to capacity with the exception of Indian Island County
Park. By 1995, there will probably be no upland disposal sites available
for dredged material in the Town of Babylon.
Approximately one-fourth of all dredging projects in the Town of
Islip utilized upland disposal sites for dredged spoil. However, all
major upland sites have been filled. ,lore reliance is now being placed
upon bay beach nourishment as a disposal mode. This option has a major
disadvantage in that spoil deposited on the beach between two creeks may,
be transported as littoral drift back into the creeks. This in turn may
necessitate 'Gore frequent maintenance dredging, thereby increasing
dredging costs.
60
I
I
3.3 Pollutant Removal*
I
The removal of "polluted" marine sediments is sometimes performed to
protect water quality or improve bay bottom environments. Polluted
I
sediments found in Suffolk County waters that have been removed by
dredging include organic-rich sediments found in harbors and coves and
I
duck sludge deposits.
I
Oils/grease, heavy metals, and pesticides are typically found in the
sediments of harbors that are adjacent to commercial or industrial uses,
I
or that receive large volumes of urban or agricultural runoff. The actual
extent and severity of such contamination is not known. Bay bottom
I
sediments are generally believed to act as a sink for such pollutants,
e.g., heavy metals adsorb to fine sediment part icles. Physical and
I
biological action, however, may mobilize metals back into the water colu~n
I
or introduce them into ecological food chains. There is no evidence that
the removal of polluted sediments is necessary to protect water quality.
I
I
However. such sediments, when encountered during navigation channel
dredging, should be managed at confined disposal areas, ,,mere physical,
chemical, and biological (vegetative) techniques can be used to prevent
I
I
the return of pollutants to the waterway.
Further investigations into sediment quality may identify the
presence of pollutants other than heavy metals that may warrant removal,
although toxic industrial effluent discharges have generally been rare in
I
Suffolk County, and new discharges are prohibited under the Federal Water
I
Pollution Control Act and similar New York State pollution laws. If,
however, the removal of toxic deposits is determined to be necessary to
I
protect water quality or marine ecosystems, or if they are encountered
I
*Some of the material in this section is an updated version of that
contained in Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board (1979), pp. 33-36.
I
6l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
during other dredging operations, then precautions should be taken to
minimize the impact of removal and disposal operations. These procedures
should include the use of siltation curtains to control turbidity. If
possible, removal operations should be performed during late fall or
winter to minimize impacts on active biological systems. Spoil should be
handled at upland or confined disposal areas, where pollutants can be
contained (stabilized) or removed.
3.3.1 Duck Sludge
The duck ranch industry began on Long Island in the 1880s. The
need for access to water for ranch operation resulted in the growth of the
industry in the Center ~oriches-Eastport and Riverhead areas where sites
along tidal creeks, coves and streams were available. There are currently
20 duck ranches in Suffolk County with a total annual ;:>roduction of
roughly 4 million ducks. The annual gross income from the sale of duck
1neat and duck by-products is about $20 million.
The highest concentration of duck ranches in Suffolk County today is
along the Horiches Bay shoreline (Suffolk County Dept. of Planning, 1982).
The status of existing duck ranches and whether sites now or formerly used
for duck ranch operations will be available for other types of development
in the future pose important coastal land and water use issues.
Host duck ranches dischar3ed lmtreated wastes directly into
tributaries until 1965; at that time New York State regulations made
mandatory the installation of primary treatment facilities (sedimentation,
aeration, chlorination) by 1968. The enforcement of wastewater dischar3e
regulations and the decline in the number of duck ranches since the late
1960s resulted in a substantial redu~tion in the volume of effluent
entering local waters. Although efforts to curb waste inputs into
62
I
I
Moriches Bay since 1965 have been successful, sludge deposited on creek
beds prior to state regulation remains a potentially significant waste
I
disposal problem.
Duck sludge deposits are associated with existing or phased-out duck
I
ranch operations on tidal creeks and tributaries in local waters. ~reas
I
where such deposits are likely to be encountered are identified below
(Redman, 1980):
I
8rookhaven Town
Great South Bay
Mud Creek
Carmans River
I
Moriches Bay
Forge River (and tributaries)
Terrell River
Tuthill Cove
Hart Cove
Little Seatuck Creek
I
I
Southampton Town
I
Moriches Bay
Seatuck Creek
East River
Speonk River
Bushy Creek
Tannersneck Creek
I
Hecox Bay
I
I
Riverhead Town
Flanders Bay
Peconic River
Peconic Lake
Sawmill Creek
Terrys Creek
i'1eetinghouse Creek
I
I
The volume of sludge in these creeks is significant. A 1968 field survey
I
estimated that over 7 million cubic yards of sludge were deposited on
creek bottoms tributary to Moriches Bay at that time (Suffolk County Dept.
I
of Planning, 1982). This volume of sludge would fill the 12 story H. Lee
Dennison Building in Hauppauge 25 times. Deposits are allegedly 3reater
I
than 10 ft. thick in some areas. The high organic content and fine
I
63
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
grained texture of duck sludge make it an unsuitable substrate for
shellfish setting and growth.
Recent deposits of duck sludge or other organic-rich sediments may be
a source of bacteria and nutrients to the water column. Duck waste is a
concentrated source of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and biological
oxygen demand (BOD). The organic content of duck sludge deposits is
typically higher than that of naturally occurring muds in the south shore
bay system (18% vs. 10%). Nutrient release from duck sludge in the form
of ammonium (~H4+) has been measured in the Carmans River, which is
tributary to Great South Bay (Suffolk County Dept. of Planning, 1982).
When disturbed by raking, the NH4+ flux from the sediment increased by
two orders of magnitude (100 times). This indicates the importance of
physical disturbance in increasing the release of nutrients from sedimen(s
to the water column. Such disturbance would be of special significance in
the dredging and disposal of duck sludge deposits.
Conclusive data do not exist to establish whether or not the old
sludge represents a bacterial or nutrient source to the water column (Long
Island Regional Planning Board, 1979). Botulism could still be preserved
in the sediment and pose problems during disposal (Tom Sperry, U.S. Fish &
Wtldli fe Service, Upton, N. Y., personal communication). It is possible
that the bulk of nutrients has been leached upward through the sludge by
groundwater movements; however, this transport is undocumented. Furthdr
investigations are needed.
There does not appear to be enough existing evidence to justify
large-scale removal of duck sludge deposits as "pollutants" at this time.
This is despite the fact that the dredging and ocean disposal of duck
sludge was endorsed as an acceptable practice in the late 1960s (U.S.
nept. of the Interior, 1967). Further studies may indicate a need for
such dredging either to protect water quality or to improve benthic
64
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
environments (e.g., for hard clams). If organic rich sediments are
encountered during navigation channel dredging operations, or if the
general removal of deposits is determined to be desirable, then
precautions ahould be taken to minimize the impact of removal and disposal
operations. Siltation curtains should be employed, or the project area
should be isolated with temporary dikes, or cofferdams to prevent
contamination of the surrounding waterway with undesirable material and
subsequent depression of dissolved oxygen levels. Such operations should
generally be performed during the fall and winter months to prevent
possible interference with biological reproduction and growth. The amount
of material that should be removed will depend on the characteristics of
the project involved, and particularly on the availability of suitable
spoil disposal sites. Disposal strategies for duck sludge could include'
confined disposal with subsequent dewatering and planting for habitat
creation, or upland disposal in a landfill or, preferably, use in a
composting (fertilizer) operation. Where the volume of spoil must be
limited, polluted sediments should be dredged to a depth that will allow
back-filling (capping) with at least 2 ft. of clean sediment while
providing for safe navigation.
The future of the duck ranch industry in the area has important
implications for coastal development. Aside from factors germane to the
entire duck ranching industry in Suffolk County, such as high real estate
taxes, increasing feed costs, and competition from large duck ranchea in
Wisconsin and Indiana, other factors that are specific to the individual
ranches are pertitlent to the decisiotl to remaitl in this bllsitless. These
factors include the cOtlditiotl of ratlch itlfrastructure, compliance with
wastewater treatmetlt and discharge regulatiotls, type of owtlership,
pressures from developers to COtlvert the ratlches to residetltial uses, such
65
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
as condominiums; and, in the case of family owned and operated businesses,
willingness of family members to continue in the business over the
long-term. Should existing ranches cease operations, there will be
demands for increased dredging of duck sludge deposits in the future.
Government agencies scrutinize projects involving the disposal of
duck sludge. Federal agencies typically disapprove of the disposal of
fine grained dredged spoil along the oceanfront, as it is not compatible
with the grain size of beach sediments. They may require preparation of
resource contaminant assessments if the spoil in question is polluted.
Article 13 of the NYS Environmental Conservation law prohibits the
disposal of "sludge" into marine waters. Upland disposal of duck sludge
is currently preferred by the ;>/1S Dept. of Environmental Conservation as
the disposal mode for this material. Other less preferred alternatives
include incineration and ocean dumping.
3.4 Alternative Hethods for Dredged lIaterial Disposal
In this section, the generic alternatives listed in Table 13 for the
disposal of dredged ~terial are briefly discussed, based on information
contained in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England Oivision (1982).
66
I
I
Table 13: Alternative Dredged Spoil Disposal Options
Alternative
Type
I
L Open Water:
a. deep ocean
b. near shore
c. in river/harbor
I
2. Upland:
a. no further use intended
b. for construction
c. for habitat or recreation
development
I
I
3. Containment:
a. construction
b. for habitat or recreation
development
I
4. Beach Restoration
5. Incineration
I
6. Resource Reclamation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
67
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Open Water Disposal - With this method, dredged materials are
transported to and discharged at a designated disposal site at
sea. The cost of disposal depends on transportation to the dump
site. Open water disposal can involve a deep ocean disposal site
offshore, near~shore disposal (e.g., in Long Island Sound) or
disposal in a river or harbor. Large, ocean-going barges are
required for deep ocean disposal, for example at a designated
dump site located within the New York Bight. Near shore disposal
involving open water like Long Island Sound, would involve the
use of either a cla~ shell bucket and scow, or a hopper dredge.
Disposal of dredged material in a river or harhor would take
place near where dredging occurs, using either hydraulic pipeline
or sidecast dredging equipment.
Open water disposal has heen used only infrequently in the
past by Suffolk County in its dredging projects. The shallow
depths of local waterways often preclude the use of the equipment
(barges) needed in this option. For the most part, the dredged
spoil from local navigation channels is "clean" sand, Le., it
has a low proportion of silt and clay and is relatively free of
contaminants. This makes the spoil a resource that can be used
to achieve other objectives via different disposal techniques.
:'lear shore open water disposal has been used by the County in
those instances where adequate disposal sites near the location
of the project are not available.
Upland Disposal - Upland disposal involves transport of dredged
material to an identified site that must be made legally
68
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
available for disposal and suitable for the type of material
being spoiled. Spoil deposition must also be compatible with
future site management. Transportation costs associated with
moving spoil to a site is a significant determinant in
feasibility analysis. If a site is not within hydraulic pumping
distance, the spoil would have to be dewatered and hauled by
truck. The elevation of the site is an important factor in
evaluating pumping requirements. The characteristics of the
spoil could become a constraint depending upon whether the site
is to be used for general development, recreation, or creation of
wildlife habitat. Typically, only coarse grained material
provides a suitable base for construction purposes. Coarse to
fine grained material can be used to create wildlife habitats.
Reclamation of sites requires measures to prevent erosion and
planting appropriate cover vegetation.
Suffolk County has used upland sites for the disposal of
spoil. Some spoil sites have been left unreclaimed, but others,
depending upon ownership, have been developed for residential or
marine commercial uses or for public recreation. In most casest
some form of containment structure is used in conjunction with
disposal of dredged material at an upland site.
Containment - Oredged ,naterial can be deposited within dikes or
behind bulkheads cons ttllcted of fsho re or on sho refront prope rty.
The creation of containment islands is technically feasible in
relatively shallow water. After fill capacity is reached,
artificial islands can be reclaimed for other uses. The major
69
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
cost associated with this disposal mode concerns dike
construction, for example, rock and sheet-pile cofferdams. This
option is generally limited to projects involving very large
amounts of spoil.
Suffolk County has typically used earthen dikes for
containment of mud dredged from navigation channels, or duck
sludge removed from tidal tributaries. Some of these disposal
sites have been developed; many of those located on County owned
property are nearing their capacity for receipt of fill
ma te rial.
Beach Restoration - Spoil consisting of clean sand is often used
to replenish eroding beaches that are located relatively close to
the site of a dredging project. Whether or not spoil is suitable
for beach nourishment depends upon the similarity in its grain
size composition to that of the receiving beaches. The disposal
uf contaminated sediments in a high or moderate energy intertidal
area generally would be undesirable hecause of the release and
transport of contaminants in particulate and soluble forms into
the adjacent waters. Similarly, fine grained material would not
re~ain in such an environment; it would erode quickly and be
transported offshore tu low energy, deep water areas. The major
factors limiting this. option are the characteristics of the spoil
and the transport distance of spoil to the disposal site. Beach
restoration is the method of spoil disposal used for many of
Suffolk County's dredging projects. The high sand content of
much of the spoil dredged makes It suitable for nourishing
70
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
beaches either on ocean or bay shorelines.
Incineration - Incineration has been proposed as a method for
detoxifying contaminated dredged material. The extremely high
cost of this technique limits its use to the treatment of highly
po11tlted dredged spoils in relatively low volume. It has not
been necessary for Suffolk County to tlse this method of spoil
treatment.
Resource Reclamation - Besides the potential recovery of
chemicals or nutrients from dredged material, other uses include
sanitary landfi 11 cover, applicat ion to farmland, or as a so il
enhancer in general landscaping. These methods of disposal are
associated with high costs. Their use by Suffolk COtlnty has not
been justified.
3.4.1 Habitat Development
The constrtlction of marshes and spoil islands has often been
mentioned as a potential alternative for the disposal of dredged spoil in
diked areas and along the shoreline. Recent research seems to indicate
that wetlands creation is feasible, both technically as well as
economically. Woodhouse (1979) indicates that techniqtles are available
for marsh planting and restoration, and that the" feasibility of marsh
development and the type of marsh at a given site are largely controlled
by elevation, slope, degree of exposure, and substrate." Along the
Atlantic coast, smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) was fOtlnd to be
',ost useful for planting in intertidal areas, while salt ,ueadow cordgrass
(Spartina patens) was found to be highly suitable for planting in high
marsh (irregularly flooded) areas.
71
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Other research supported by the Federal governme~t has resulted in
the development of guidelines for selecting sites based on physical and
biological factors for the creation of marshes utilizing dredged spoil.
(Johnson and McGuinness, 1975). An evaluation of all marsh establishment
work during the period 1970-1976 was also conducted (Garbisch, 1977). In
one project, criteria for habitat creation were applied in the evaluation
of federally authorized navigation channel projects to determine where the
option of habitat creation would have the highest potential for success as
a spoil disposal option. On Long Island, the Long Island Intracoastal
Waterway in Bellport and Moriches Bays and other navigation projects in
the Peconic River, Lake Montauk Harbor and Mattituck Harbor were evaluated
as potential projects for the application of this disposal mode. Through
further evaluation the Long Island Intracoastal l.jaterway in Bellport and
aoriches Bays was identified in the New England Geographical Region as the
most likely candidate for demonstration of the technique on Long I,land.
(Coastal Zone Resources Corp., 197~).
The innovative use of dredged material was demonstrated by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District in the shallow water disposal
of approximately 178,000 cubic yards of fine grained sediments, and
subsequent creation of an artificial island and various fish and wildlife
habitats in 1981-82 (Sarhart and Garbisch, 1983). rwenty-seven acres of
dredged mate rial was depos ited above :nlw adjacent to Barren Is land,
Dorchester County, Maryland in the Chesapeake Bay. Ponds, ditch and tidal
flats, ~ alterniflora, ~ patens and unvegetated bird nesting areas were
incorporated in the project. Sixteen acres of tidal wetlands were created
through both seeding and transplanting. The loss of shallow water bottom
resulting from the placement of dredged material has apparently been
adequately compensated by the creation of other habitats.
Compared to containment of dredged material at an upland location,
habitat development was found to be a cost-effective disposal option. The
72
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
upland aisposal of 178,000 cubic yards of material would have required
approximately 35 acres; site preparation, etc. costs would have been about
$250,000. The island/habitat aevelopment disposal option cost only
$106,000.
The Barren Island aisposal project demonstrated the successful
utilization of seed stock for planting ~ alterniflora. The seeding and
fertilizing operation for planting ~ alterniflora cost about $1,250 per
acre; the cost for transplanting ~ patens was about $9,500 per acre. The
project demonstrated that dredged material can be stabilizea in an open
water area by seeding techniques. This alternative is viable providing
care is taken during the disposal operation to establish the proper
elevation of dredged material in accordance with the requirements for
various wetland vegetation species. Si te selection is also cd tical; the
site would have to be selected where the spoil would have a high
probability of remaining in place. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a
technique that uses fetch, water depth and other information to derive a
scaling factor that would indicate whether or not an area would be
suitable for wetland vegetation planting.
It has been predicted that no upland sites will I,e available for
dredged spoil aisposal in Suffolk County by the end of the century. It
appears that Suffolk County will have no other option for dredged spoil
disposal than open water disposal in the bays. Due to this predicament,
there is a need for a large-scale project to demons trate habi tat/wetland
creation utilizing dredged spoil in Sllffolk County waters.
73
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4. Recommendations
4.1 Classification of Suffolk County Dredging Projects
The criteria developed in this report for determining whether public
or private interests benefit from a specific channel dredging project have
been applied to 216 Suffolk County dredging projects (195 completed
projects and 21 proposed projects). Of this total, 75 projects within the
County inventory were designated as being in the private interest. It is
recommended that the County discontinue any involvement with the
maintenance dredging of these channels. Table 14 summarizes the results
of the project evaluations by town.
It is recommended that SCDPW regularly conduct surveys of channels
determined to be in the public interest. Surveys of channel conditions
over time could be compared with historic surveys to calculate rates of
shoaling. Analysis of this information could then be used to establish
schedules for actual dredging activity. This information would have to be
tempered with the question of need should shoaling OCC'Jr as a result of a
s to rID.
Application of .the criteria for determining the relative priority of
public interest channels reveals that S8 channels should be given high
prio ri ty. Thus, if Suffo lk County only has limited funds availab 1.. fo r
maintenance dredging in any given year, priority should be given first to
these channels should a survey indicate shoaling has impaired navigation.
The criteria developed in the report should be applied in the revie"
and classification of rtew dredging projects ""'ere work has not yet been
initiated by Suffolk County. :lew projects designated as in the public
i nteres t should be implemented at the expense of the County.
4.2 Mechanisms for County Recovery of Costs for Private Interest
Dredging Projects
74
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 14: Summary of Suffolk County Dredging Project Evaluations by Town
Public Interest Projects Private Interest
Town High Priority Low Priority Projects Total
Babylon 13 2 13 28
Brookhaven 19 10 10 39
East Hampton 3 3 6
Huntington 3 1 4
Islip 19 2 16 37
Riverhead 4 6 10
Shelter Island 5 5 10
Smithtown 4 4
Southampton 16 15 19 50
Soutno 1d 7 15 6 28
Total 88 53 75 216
75
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Should County dredging policy remain unchanged in regard to
private interest channels, appropriate steps should be taken to recover
County expenditures from those benefiting from the work. The County could
be reimbursed directly from a town or village government via general fund
budget appropriations or through special districts which could be
established under NYS enabling legislation. Through this legislation
private interests benefiting from a specific dredging project would be
taxed with the proceeds used to offset County expenditures.
Pursuant to New York State Town Law - Article 12 (District and
Special Improvements) and Article 12A (Establishment or Extension of
Improvement Districts - Alternative Procedure), the town board of any town
which borders navigable waters may establish or extend in their town by
petition a harbor improvement district and provide improvements and/or
services totally at the e"pense of the district according to the
proportion of benefit derived from such an improvement. Under New York
State Village Law - Article 4 (Powers, Etc. of Officers) any village board
of trustees may dredge channels for arresting and preventing damages
resulting from floods or erosion. The cost of such improvement can be
charged at the expense of the entire village or speet fically those owners
of the property benefited, pending notice and public hearing.
4.3 Spoil Disposal Options
4.3.1 Sub-regional Plans
There is a need to develop a long-range spoil disposal ?lan for
Suffolk County. Such a plan could be prepared on a sub-regional basis,
i.e., a waterbody-wide basis, and would require the cooperation of various
municipalities, State and Federal agencies. The towns should be
responsible for preparation of t"e sub-regional plans. Such plans should
76
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
improve project scheduling and permit application review; provide for
coordinated disposal of dredged spoil using a variety of options; and help
assure continued dredging project execution.
4.3.2 Habitat Creation Demonstration Project
There is a need to implement a large-scale habitat/wetland
demonstration project utilizing dredged spoil at a south shore bay
location in Suffolk County. Such a project should be designed to
determine the feasibility of this approach in terms of dollar costs,
environmental costs and benefits, and effectiveness; and as an alternative
mode for disposal of spoil dredged from local waterways. The design,
implementation and support of this demonstration project should be
accomplished through the coordination of Federal, State and local
i nteres ts.
4.4 Preservation of Selected Marine Habitats
Many of Suffolk County's creeks and bays have undergone
extensive shoreline modifications and have been dredged to create
navi8ational channels and mooring areas; some remain that are relatively
free of alteration and/or disturbance. Governmental action often dictates
the use pattern associated with marine shoreline areas, since creek and
bay botto~sJ are for the most part, owned by various governmental
jurisdictions. It is the opinion of the Planning Department that selected
marine areas should not be dredged to accommodate boating activity. This
position would help to preserve the high productivity and ecological
diversity of such areas by eliminating adverse environmental disturbances
and potential water quality degradation.
Fish and wildlife habitat preservation, open space, passive
recreation and shellfishing/finfishing are currently the principal uses of
77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
many of the relatively pristine creeks/bays that remain; perhaps these
uses should be designated by the jurisdiction involved as the highest/best
uses of the areas in perpetuity. Usage and access by boats, especially
motor boats and deep draft sailboats, should be considered secondary.
Hence, dredging would not be conducted to accommodate boating use or
provide convenience to the boating public.
As an extension to this report, Suffolk County should establish and
apply criteria for the identification of those relatively undisturbed
Qarine areas where dredging and other modifications would not be in the
public interest. The only dredging that may be justified in such areas is
the selective removal of shoals blocking tidal exchange at the time of low
water that can be created during hurricanes/severe northeast storms or as
the result of the discharge of sediment laden stormwater runoff.
Prioritizing coastal uses in this manner involves many considerations
other than dredging, and hence, interfaces with the coastal management
program process underway at this ti~e in many of the County's
municipalities.
4.5 Channel Dredging and Spoil ~isposal Guidelines
In 1977 the Regional Marine Resources Council adopted a set of
navigation channel and spoil disposal guidelines, prepared through the
cooperative effort of many Federal, State and local interests; the
guidelines accompanied the comprehensive dredging subplan (Nassau-Suffolk
Regional Planning Board, 1979) which was included in the Long Island
Regional Element New York State Coastal Management Program. The scope and
intended use of the guidelines are summarized below (Nassau-Suffolk
78
I
I
I
I
I
Regional Planning Board, 1979: 3-4).
I
The guidelines cover such considerations as the designation of
navigation channel depths and widths, dredging operations, spoil
disposal site selection, and spoil disposal operations. They
recognize the need to provide safe navigation for recreational,
commercial, and industrial boating traffic, while conserving the
valuable and fragile natural resources of the coastal zone. The
guidelines set forth planning "rules of thumb" in as speci fie and
quantitative a manner as possible, while recognizing the need to
take local conditions into account.
The guidelines are intended to be used as ~lanning tools; they
are not intended to dictate engineering specifications or
regulatory requirements. The application of these guidelines
should result in a clearer understanding of the reasoning behind
the design and execution of channel dredging projects, and thus
should help ensure greater public acceptance and swifter
regulatory processing. Reference to and utilization of the
guidelines in the preparation of environmental impact statements
and assessments should assure that all major considerations are
addressed.
I
I
I
Comments on the original guidelines were solicited in the fall of
1984 from various regulatory agencies dealing with the permit process for
I
dredging and spoll disposal activities. In response to comments received,
the guidelines have been clarified and amended to reflect current
I
conditions and are reproduced in Appendix B.
I
I
I
I
I
I
"0
'"
I
I
I
I
I
References
Boating Almanac Co., Inc. 1984. Soating almanac, vol. 2. Severna Park,
Maryland.
I
I
Brown, Tommy L. 1984. The stability of the commercial marina industry in
New York City-Long Island. Department of Natural Resources, Cornell
University, Ithaca, New York.
I
Coastal Zone Resources Corp. 1976. Identification of relevant criteria
and survey of potential application sites for artificial habitat
creation. Volume 1 - Relevant criteria for marsh-island site
selection and their application; Volume 2 - Survey of potential
application situations and selection and description of optimum
project areas. Contract Report D-76-2. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
I
I
Dowd, R.M. 1972. Dredging on Long Island. Regional Marine Resources
Council, Hauppauge, N.Y.
I
Earhart, Glenn H. and Garbisch, E.W., Jr. 1983. Habitat development
utilizing dredged material at Barren Island, Dorchester County,
Maryland. Paper presented at 4th Annual Meeting of the Society of
Wetlands Scientists held on June 5-8, 1983 in St. Paul, Minn.
I
Garbisch, E.W., Jr. 1977. Recent and planned marsh establishment work
throughout the contiguous United States: a survey and basic
guidelines. Contract Report D-77-3. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Hiss.
I
Johnson, Lynn E. and McGuinness, lHlliam V" Jr. 1975. Guidelines
material placement in marsh creation. Contract Report D-75-2.
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, l1iss.
for
U.S.
I
I
I
Long Island Regional Planning Board.
waste treatment management plan.
1978. The Long Island comprehensive
Hauppauge, N.Y.
Long Island Regional Planning Board. 1979. Long Island regional
element New York State Coastal t-lanagement Program. :{auppauge, N.Y.
Long Island Regional Planning Board. 1984. Hurricane damage mitigation
plan for the south shore - Nassau and Suffolk Counties, N.Y.
Hauppauge, N.Y.
I
Morton, James Walter. 1977. Ecological effects of dredging and dredge
spoil disposal: a literature review. U.S. Dept. of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service Technical Paper 94. Washington, D.C.
I
I
Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board. 1979.
subplan for Nassau and Suffolk Counties.
A comprehensive dredging
Hauppauge, N.Y.
I
80
I
I
I
I
I
I
Redman, J.H. 1980 (May 8). Memorandum on status of duck farms as of May
1980. New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation - Region I,
Stony Brook, N.Y.
Suffolk County Dept. of Planning. 1982. A development plan for the
Moriches area. Hauppauge, N.Y.
Woodhouse, W.W. 1979. Building salt marshes along the coasts of the
continental United States. SR-4. U.S. Coastal Engineering Research
Center. Ft. Belvoir, VA.
I
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1975. River and harbor project maps - New
York District. New York District, Corps of Engineers, New York.
I
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division. 1982. Final
programmatic environmental impact statement for the disposal of
dredged material in the Long Island Sound region. Waltham, Mass.
I
U.S. Dept. of Interior. 1967. Conference on pollution of the navigable
waters of lIDriches Bay and the eastern section of Great South Bay,
second session. June 21, 1967. Patchogue, N.Y., Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
81
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
Federal and State Navigation Projects in Suffolk County
A-.l
I
~poe<'dl. ~:
<eOe~~1 ..nla"1".. p~"Jec"" 1ft SoIIOI~ ~OU"ty
I
~&e~d.,.IOI'I.
IJtl1lut1on ~
:~,,"...I 01......,1....,
~
P1J~ll',..
p~olect
011 "'~'"I""I p~nr""t:
"o..i1"~ _"U...,~I,.,lo"
,,1 c~ "I' dI-.",,1
9' ~ 100', .lI""', 2.~ ..II...
IO"'l"tw:l"nel'lor""'l>e""
I'C"",rnl!l'dIt-.
:.""..".etta.... :al'Il,.,f4d
P'''GlIur"bOllH
~o1r.I(I.~ 1~<1().
"',,"lIfled PHlI
~".11atlo" C~,,"...l l"",rov_"1"
..u..""91'o........-
~' ~ 100 "lII'"", .,. ..'I"
IM9 an<! I~ lC,..... .n"..,,..~
b...I..6' ~.
'In,~r,,".1 '<<llltl.:
"O""~" ~""'''''''~''''''''O"
"I ~. . IIlO' ""oJ..ct;
"",~It. <1>a"",,11 ."
". ,1'l0'
><1001" I~.'
PF..~U". bOll....... ~C1IIol..t..
",......", a' ,r.~ I "9
",."tt
u""q,.IO" C~.M.! '''ll,..,v---''
I
u.".."O............bor
UO....qIO"'" f""III.I...,
<:0..11".. ,...~.....,.I'".,O"
,,1""J"o:"
..,. ."', /illlll'"o..t.6"11...
'''''9'
"oo<;onlcRI..... u"..' qatlo.. c~.nn.1 1.0._.... ~dOll'OJd 11I11.
_I"" I'll'
..".ttluckliar_ .....1911'1011 C~."".I I...".,,_nt ~dODtltd le~.
_"Iood I'H' ,..
""
.;r_"D....tlol..i)Qr' >-lUll.... a"d ~a~19at '0" C~an".1 ~doDtooej 1M2.
IStel'II"9B"I") IlI'iDrC>V_..... _lllell '~QO
00' 19J1
Sa9lolui)Qr' IolUbOO'" a"d ~.~19atI0" C~a"".' MODtltd 1<10:'11,
!E"tK~tolll 1"'P...,....llt _111.:1 19"
"" (\11..1') "~ ~uI9otI0" ::;~an".) I "'D"O_,", ~dODtlll<l ",.
n,IIotf", I,'and
L'~. """t~_ K....ll.... >larllO<" alld ~.~1911tlo" C~a"....' ~OOpt9<l 19_'
1"'D"'<>~_"t
L.I. I "tf-IlCOII,tal NlI~ 1911t io" C~."".I I "III'OV_"t ~dODt"'" Ion
\ilatenl.,
gr",,",Cr.,.. '1..lg.tlo" C~",,".I I....o~_"t OdOplooej '"''
;rllat $""t~ !I..,. '1a~1 gatlo" <:~",,".I I ""..",,_"t O<loDtood I~1,
"cdlll", 1'1'0
~""",.,.-
'HZ
Pl.ft...... ~"",h
I
>f....,o.. ~I ..",u~: ...,0111.
.,(~ 7' g"Oj"ct..,
I' ~ 90'. ~llI""', 2.2 'oil..
1<>..q,l"'o"'lllJ.ftl...t
."tooa"", ."da"-=I'o",~I)a.I"
/,,,,,,,,,.at;0'."0'.
P'."....."bOOl.. ,,"01
~""""0=!.1 11'111"9
0=...11'
Callgl.ted-
'''~~
,.
I
..<:II,lbl....dlllaltlo"01
..1,'1"98' <1(lO'O"oj"ct
tol2' .,'0..,.,...1",
Stl..II"9!1l",I..
e' ~ 100'. ~ll"""'" ., ..II.
10"g. .1.'70' b......t....
lInd2an-=""...~...fte'
,>d 9' :1&..
PI.........bOll..."d
o=",,_el.III'III"IJ
c..att
Callgl,Ue6-
,,~
011 '"r..I"al plla.r""':
c.",.ij""~a\lt~..I'a"o"
01 10' ~ 100' CI'""'J.e.:
""dll","".""e1 toe"o
'00'
<>'.........I:toet,
~"""I.t_
,,~
10'. 100'. ~ll"""'" & III I I..
lo"'l. 2 a"ttt......,. ..... &'
."d!l.dlIeD.'.I90.t>r...........
I
'-l.I"",i" ".isrl"9 Cl'"oJact
::.",.I.ted-
I'HI
COlI....e.a..d
gl."u".bOOlh
I.' ~ 100', 1S01r"". .. III I I.
''''''l'
I
"odll.."I.tl""ll'g"oJ.cl'
'01" ,"0'
'~""DIo.tell-
,~.
Ol..u..._h"....
C(l!Hllll..o=l al II,~I "OJ
~...I l'
12' . I~'. IIDg...... ./ ..!Ie
10"Q, b..... ~nl~ .00' . m'.
1/1' 'lot.. .1Id .""t.1Id .'"~
jet'I",.
'lodlly ...ct:O" '.~SIII""lICOdo
." let '0 SIl '"""ICOCll .:""81 ~.,
~. . 1')0'; ; ~<:: ludllio :.,,~
I
";0II01.,hld
""
..t"8!ou...b....t.
'S' .1/10'. H ..It"., lo"'l I~".,
O.'cllog"" ~o SIII,,"lICO'" C,,".'.
'-lodl Iy ..I.~ I"q .. ~ 6' Cl'"0 lac~
'0 ~. . I 'l'l'; "'~"fl ~h .,,"..
."",.. to ,;;a ~Il...".'
:OIIOle~.
~...... ......I~
.nd ol..u".
b~t.
.' .'OO',!>','OO'.IlDCI'""'"
,~ ..II. 10"'l. ..' ..... ~...~
Jet~ I...
I
"ad111 ...1.';"\1 10~ . leO'
CI'"<>J.ct..,e' .1'0': "Cdl1y
.",.tl"" TO'.II')O'Oall:lloque
:","",".1 ",e' .100' In
o~.. Id....t 10" 0. oIl ~.."" I "".
~""'~""'; 'lid Cetr.... ~gu"
~~Dletell
,~.
~e""'" ,.,...1"..
"""......c.,a....
O'.."U....I:t""..
10' ~ 200', 10' . 100', 19.1
"" '", 10"9 fro.,.. ~ I... 1.la..;
:" I.' ~o ".ud 01 o."'=lloq..
'11....!OI.!.lo.S..l,.<><l
;..~.... 0" .... ~ . I de 01
"lIt~h"9". "I .....
I
:"",gl..t...
'~~,
"."...I........I..I"'lorojecl'
:""'......"I.III.hl"\l
c...I1'.c"'."....."'"
..u pl."'"...........
II')' ~ <'0' u"'DlI<:I I I ood 1.",,'11
...."".,.. Inlet, ."d '00' j..~.y.
~dog~ed IQH.
"cdlll"" I~O
y..11.~lonC".""., 1""..""_",,
qr.. !.I".d Inl.t
~' . I~()' "nd " ~ 100'.
'IDg.."".I..il.'O"q
Plen......l:toe.'
CQItlI.''''''
uo....glo/lalleellltl...;
o"""d."~Mlt"O..lt.tlO"ot
,. .'00' (roJe<:'; "",dllv
:~"nnel '0 6' , 100'
~d09'ed 18ElO
y.~lq.fl.,nCha"n.' ''''Di''"._nt
';u"'D...nu,I"'.t
I~.yl.,.. C....I
I
r......,......,C.."Il
g'..""...eb....t'
...lIf""........ dl.....'o... ~.. 'h.
....,....._ol,"lIIlo..."....t.
$"'_ d\otIIn." .0..... ...."1
......I""'...I'd "",..I".'eell..I.
";un..nr?l'".t\We.dtHII'
,"'u'lb..!>' ""''''''lDCI'"OItdt
~,,",,.I. ...,..nO='TJ..lnq ."d i>lt.",1"9
.,...t Tall........., )o.""..t
'''0111 d be~' ~ ~O'.
u"'q"'O"C~&n".' I_<:>._no
rl..,.I..nd
S....._...
I
I
~dOl>tltd 189i').
._1 'I*, ,~...,
19'0. I~e
'...d'I",
,',,,,.
yo' ".dll</
JII ...".In.' P""~""': ....1..
"",., "'if 4)' . J~')' .,..oj"o:>
'0 I ~' . <"0'
.0' ~ l~O', !" ",:.. '"n9
~."......<:oo, ~ :..n....
~"".., ~""'_.cl.,
I',";nqcr"tt,
;>4t..<:>I~u'" .~"";~,,I \
0..,...,...0'"''
;>"... hll....""
'I..~-
u..lqatlon C~..""~I ,"'O...~~_..t
I
~dODted 1%0
II)' .,00' _,J,,'I.,
~' . Inl)' _ '.0 "'II......
yot.h..''''
"o.'ly e~I.~ I"q 10' Cl'"o !<oc.
..., I" . ,'')()'; ....."" ~Il~,,~..
'" ~~II"I~ Coynty r.""....cl 41
'1,...""I'lCIII,..,.
S~ I Macae" ,",.1'
u..lgwtlonC~..."el ,......."._"1'
:~""cl.) P'-'9
eral' 1I"" pl..asu~.
~""'..
0_tltdl<;l60
',)' ~ ?(l0' . ,8 ", I"
~' ~ '1)0' . 1.1 ","..:...
".I,.tol" ...I.tl~ ","oJeet
_lo=~.,I",e1'
".~lqot1'IO"CIl~"".1 1......0_".,.
uot,t"rled
~'''n''''. bOIl"
I
'1' , ,,' '.~ ""..
~...lq.tl,,"CIl"""ell_o_.t
~dOD'ooej '14~
"odl!y .~I. ~ 1 ~q 8' . ,~,
,,""1 ~ct 10~' , l'lO'
er""oeC..""
'~..d'I..
".""
:""....clalll,"I"'9
C~"I' ,.... "'..",yr,,
b".t,
~ec.-.d"IO'" II.'., .... '''::00 '11" ~11lPl! pUlll,,,.tl,,,, .n'1119<I. ~0"9 1.1,,"d ".91"".1 E'_t . ..rs ~u'.1 '-l....qellleftt ..~"'l...... <2l'ooej \0 .~....II 1979. I" edl.IO" to ...:"".."..tlo..
"" ....,.11"9 1_""'1. alt.....,tooej ".~lq..tIO" g"oJ.et" .... ""'910",,1 E:.."""nt "," -""',...._"". <........1 .........,'...,0.. 01 .....e. a.dltlo",,1 ="..~"eI. ;, .~. GSA - ::S8 "..t ~~""".. ::S~
~o..tll CIl""".I, ,,"01 o"".''''llllt :.._. "II. (11'",,"""" dl...n,lo... 01 bat" ';;l! ...... \ 'IO....~ ~".."..I. ...8' . I~O': ..u.......I,., 10" ~"".d e.;1 10" '11. <..".....1 ..I,...n"nClO ~I ~""~el' ...,..
'''. r;..... Co... to\lt~ '" 1S8 ::;11.."",,1 ."" I~CJII ,~. 0,.."... r::"",. "Mt .., ';;8 :,."".,, .-...oec'lvel'l. <........1 n.~11..tl,," g'ojeet "I'" C"."".I 11_~1,,~ ~' ~ ''lO' I...,. '"'' r;..."t :"""e ,.,
'"_",01"e"ot..ulfCr_l.p...,.,0.edl,,'Il.R"910,,..IEI_n',
'''''''''Do"'!blll tv 01 <I... 1.1."" ~.~IO".I ,;"...""...
...~ I '10 c"ll. 'or' .....""111 tat!on 01 Jet'l... ,,"d co......yet Ion .,1 . I' ,ad go.o... ,I nq "0=1';'.,
I
I
I
I
A-2
I
I
APPENDIX A (Cont'd)
I
New York State Navigation Channels
I
I
I
The Long Island State Parks and Recreation Commission maintains the
State Boat Channel and Sloop Channel that run north of the barrier island
between Jones Inlet and Fire Island Inlet. These channels were authorized
and dredged in the 1920s and are approKimately 11' K 200'. The Long
Island Regional Element New York State Coastal Management Program
recommends that these channels be maintained at a depth of 8' and a width
of 150' to support recreational boating traffic. The following segments
of the State Boat Channel tend to shoal and, as a result, are dredged
approKimately every five years: West End Boat Basin at Jones Beach, area
between Oak Island and Captree Island, and area just east of the Cap tree
Boat Basin.*
The boat basin and approach channel to the boat basin at ijeckscher
State Park are dredged almost every year with a land based crane. The
channel and basin are hydraulicly dredged approKimately every five years.
Approach channels to New York State boat ramps on Long Island, such as
that found in Jamesport and Freeport, are maintained by the corresponding
local municipality. The Regional Element recommends that the approach
channel to the boat basin at ijeckscher State Park be maintained at a depth
of 6' and a width of SO' for shallow-draft recreational boating activity,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
*Personal communication, Mr. Frances Hyland, Long Island State Park and
Recreation Commission, January 4, 1985.
I
~3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
Channel Dredging and Spoil Disposal Guidelines
B-1
I
I
CHANNEL DREDGING AND SPOIL DISPOSAL GUIDELINES
I
Navigation Channel Dredging Guidelines
. Determine the need for maintenance dredging of naviation channels
through periodic field surveys and investigations of accidents. Avoid
dredging, wherever possible, through the movement, alteration, or
addition of navigation aids, or through the establishment or
enforcement of traffic control regulations.
I
I
Explanation: The "maintenance" of navigation channels should include
the provision and accurate positioning of adequate channel markings.
Maintained channels do not have to be perfectly straight, especially
where natural shifting of bottom sediments occurs, as long as the
designated channel dimensions exist, the channel can be accurately
marked, and navigation of channel curves is feasible. Accurate channel
marking and enforcement of traffic control measures (e.g., speed and
passing rules) should reduce the number of accidents and the demands
for maintenance dredging.
I
I
.
Terminate maintenance of underutilized navigation channels through or
adjacent to highly productive and sensitive natural areas whenever
reasonable alternative routes exist.
I
I
Explanation: The need for navigation channel maintenance should be
based on present and potential usage. and should take into
consideration dredging, spoil disposal, and boating impacts on the
environmental values of wetlands, shellfish beds, etc.
I
.
Create new navigation channels only when the facilities to be served
are vital to the economic and social development of the surrounding
area, and only when such facilities cannot reasonably be located
adjacent to existing channels or open water.
I
I
Explanation: The high potential environmental costs of dredging new
channels should be given considerable weight in the planning process.
The availability of vacant land, and the expansion capacity of existing
facilities adjacent to existing channels or open~water, should be
evaluated before new channels are dredged.
I
.
Commence the dredging of new navigation channels, or the deepening or
widening of existing channels, only after the effects of such projects
on groundwater resources have been assessed and found to be
environmentally acceptable.
I
I
Explanation: Detailed hydrologic studies should be conducted,
especially where confining sediment layers may be present or where a
significant freshwater interface exists (e.g., within streams).
I
.
Maintain recreational navigation channels at the min.imum depth n.eeded
to provide a bottom clearance of at least 3 feet at mlw for 90% of the
boats presently using, or reasonably expected to be using such
channels, unless extraordinary local circumstances or conditions
necessitate the provision of greater depths.
I
I
I
B-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Expla<latio<l: The depths of <lavigatio<l cha<l<lels should be designed to
minimize dredging requirements (spoil volumes) while providing for safe
<lavigatio<l at all stages of the tide. Project depths for recreatio<lal
channels should be based on a detailed a<lalysis of the <lumber and types
(drafts) of recreatio<lal craft presently utilizing them, or reasonably
expected to be utilizing them give<l the location, depth, and other
characteristics of the waterbody(s) involved; local tidal regimes,
current patterns, and wi<ld patterns should be cO<lsidered. Project
depths should not be based on a small percentage of large recreational
vessels that presently use or may wish to use a channel.
o
Maintain <lavigation cha<lnels serving commercial or industrial
facilities centers so as to provide, at Mean Low Water, a 3 ft bottom
clearance for the largest class of vessels using, or reasonably
expected to be using such channels, unless extraordinary local
circumstances or conditions necessitate the provision of greater
depths.
Explanat ion: The depths of navigation channels should be designed to
minimize dredging requirements (spoil volumes) while providing for safe
navigatio<l at Illl stages of the tide. Project depths for channels
serving a significant number of commercial or industrial vessels should
be based on an analysis of the drafts of these vessels, and local tidal
regimes, current patterns, wind patterns, etc.
o
Locate new navigation channels so as to provide an adequate buffer zone
between boating traffic and sensitive natural areas (e.g., wetlands,
wildlife sanctuaries), rapidly erodi<lg shoreli<les, or bathing beaches.
Explanation: Channel location should take into account the impacts of
boat-related turbidity, waves, fumes, noise, etc., on coastal resources
and human uses.
o
Limit the allowable "overdepths" during dredging operations to no more
than 2 ft so as to minimize spoil volumes and avoid the creation of
irregular channel bottoms or deep holes.
Explanation: Some overdredging should be expected if desired channel
depths are to be attained, since limitations exist on the accuracy of
dredging techniques. Follow-up surveys should be conducted to
ascertain new cha<lnel dimensio<ls.
o
Limit "premai<ltenance" of navigatio<l channels to those few areas that
are highly prone to shoaling and to depths for which cost-effective<less
ca<l be shown.
Expla<latio<l: Reductions in rnai<lte<la<lce freque<lcy through
premainte<lance should be demonstrated and weighed agai<lst increased
economic and e<lviro<lmental costs.
o
Limit slopes O<l navigation cha<l<lel sides, based on slumping
characteristics, up to a maximum slope of l O<l 3. Adjust cha<lnel
locations and widths, if possible, to minimize slumping of adjacent
lands or mud flats.
B-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Explanation: Planning for new (or enlarged) navigation channels should
include an analysis of sediment properties within the right-of-way to
determine stable slope angles. Slopes should be limited so as to
prevent rapid infilling of the channel. The effects of unavoidable
slumping on bordering bottom and uplands should also be considered.
o
Limit maximum changes, due to navigation channel dredging, of water-
levels at the heads of embayments at mlw and mlw to 3 inches, or 5% of
the mean tidal range, whichever is less.
Explanation: Channel dredging operations at the mouths or interiors of
embayments with restricted tidal ranges should be monitored closely so
that undesirable impacts due to tidal range changes can be avoided,
including changes in salinity, exposure of mudflats, drowning of
low-lying lands, etc.
o
Schedule navigation channel dredging operations and select appropriate
equipment so as to minimize, as much as possible, interference with
water and shoreline activities, including boating, bathing, and
shorebird/waterfowl breeding.
Explanation: Channel dredging operations should be scheduled so as to
minimize impacts on other users of the coastal zone, and should avoid,
if possible, the peak boating and bathing months between Hemorial Day'
and Labor Day and, where relevant, the shorebird/waterfowl breeding
season between Hay 1 and August 15.
o
Schedule and select appropriate equipment for major navigation channel
dredging operations involving more than 10,000 cubic yards of fine
grained sediments (silt and clay fractions less thsn l/16mm in
diameter, comprising more than 20% by weight) so as to minimize
potential impacts on fish and shellfish reproduction, and rapid algal
and attached plant growth.
Explanation: Channel dredging operations involving large volumes of
fine grained material have a high potential for adverse biological
impacts and should be scheduled, ~enever possible, during those times
of the year when releases of nutrients, and increases in turbidity
(reductions in light penetration) will have the smallest impacts on
important local biota - generally during fall and winter months (late
September to late March). Important spawning grounds for winter
flounder should not be disturbed during winter and early spring. As a
rule of thumb, the use of a clam shell dredge in fine grained sediment
will not elevate water column turbidity levels at a distance greater
than 500 meters from the dredging site. However, there is not much
information available on the attenuation of turbidity levels caused by
the unconfined shoreline disposal via hydraulic pipeline dredge.
o
Provide the opportunity for the removal and/or transplantation of
significant hard clam stocks located within the right-of-ways of
navigation channels prior to the initiation of new, large scale
dredging operations; limit sedimentation depths (resulting from
dredging operations) outside of the right-of-ways to less than 1/2 inch
during periods ~en water temperatures are less than 50oF.
3-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Explanation: Prior to dredging, a sampling program for hard clams and
other shellfish should be conducted, and clam dredges used where
necessary to remove shellfish from project right-of-ways. Sampling
programs and shellfish removal would not normally be required for
channel maintenance dredging. Sedimentation should be limited during
periods of reduced clam activity to prevent burial of clam siphons.
Spoil Disposal Guidelines
.
Develop long-range spoil disposal management strategies for each
navigation channel, and identify and, if necessary, reserve sites for
spoil management.
Explanation: Periodic maintenance of navigation channels is
inevitable; future as well as present spoil disposal needs should be
considered.
.
Use unpolluted coarse grained spoils (with sand and gravel fractions,
l/l6mm or larger in diameter, comprising more than 80% by weight) for
beach nourishment, shoreline development or stabilization, and the
creation of wetland or upland habitats.
Explanation: Clean coarse grained spoil should be considered a
resource and used for a constructive purpose.
.
Use unpolluted fine grained spoils (with silt and clay fractions, less
than l/l6mm in diameter, comprising more than 20% by weight) for
nourishment only on beaches fronting well flushed waters; use them for
beach nourishment, shoreline development or stabilization, and habitat
creation only when suspended solids in spoil site effluents can be kept
to less than 8 grams/liter (8,000 ppm) above background levels in
bordering receiving waters.
Explanation: Unpolluted fine grained spoils should be considered a
resource and should be used for constructive purposes consistent with
their physical properties. Special condi tions, safeguards, and
management techniques, including settling, screening, or biological
filtering of effluents, should be employed to prevent turbidity impacts
on bordering receiving waters.
.
Use fine grained organic rich spoils (with loss on ignition or volatile
solids greater than 5%) for beach nourishment, shoreline development
and habitat creation only where acceptable levels of suspended solids
in adjacent waters can be maintained; where undesirable residues will
not remain on the beach; and where significant nutrient enrichment of
bordering waters can be prevented.
Explanation: Fine grained dredged spoil with high organic contents
should be used for constructive purposes, but should be given
additional treatment, including the use of physical, chemical, and
biological methods to minimize the potential for euthrophication of
bordering receiving waters.
B-S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
Use dredged spoil polluted with grease, oil, pesticides, heavy metals,
etc. for beach nourishment, shoreline development, or habitat creation
only after adequate pretreatment, or on-site treatment, so as to assure
that undesirable pollutants do not return to bordering waterways.
Explanation: Project plans should provide for pretreatment of polluted
spoils at special management areas, or for adequate treatment or
special handling, e.g., capping polluted sediment with clean material,
at the actual spoil disposal site.
o
Use unpolluted or properly pretreated dredged spoils to fill in deep,
anoxic man-made holes in channel and bay bottoms, and cap with material
compatible with surrounding sediments, if necessary.
Explanation: Man-made, deep holes are often undesirable sediment traps
and should be restored to a condition compatible with the surrounding
natural bottoms. Naturally occurring deep holes usually indicate
severe scouring conditions and should not be considered suitable sites
for spoil disposal.
o
Use open water disposal for dredged spoils only after all other
alternatives have been found to be infeasible.
Explanation: Open water disposal is not a constructive use of dredged
spoil and should not be considered a desirable long-term disposal
method where other feasible alternatives exist.
o
Use dredged spoils for beach nourishment during the period from late
November through early March, if possible, and deposit spoils no closer
than 1/2 mile from inlets lacking protective jetties, and "downdrift"
of inlets where littoral transport is basically undirectional.
Explanation: Beach nourishment operations should be scheduled so as to
avoid conflicts with shoreline users, including recreational fishing,
and should be designed so as to mini.nize the likelihood that spoils
will be transported back into inlet channels and embayments.
o
Select spoil site locations and utilize management techniques so as to
minimize erosion from water and wind. Use dewatering techniques to
assure drying within two years of the time of deposition.
Explanation: Areas of high wave, water curre\lt, or wind erosion should
not be selected as spoil management sites. Fringing wetlands
submergent vegetation, sand fences, and/or upland vegetation should be
used to prevent erosion, and vegetation or shallow wells should be used
to promote drying.
B-6