Expand wetlands protections in flood prone areas
First, the State should update its wetlands maps in a narrow set of priority watersheds based on flood risk where possible. Most State wetland maps are seriously outdated and inaccurate, leaving hundreds of thousands of acres of unmapped wetlands vulnerable to destruction. Under current New York law, if a freshwater wetland is not formally mapped it is not protected or otherwise regulated by the State. One recent remapping effort in the New York City drinking water watershed found 12 square miles of completely unmapped wetlands in a 360-mile area.
Second, the State should consider a statutory amendment that would extend the scope of wetlands jurisdiction to cover wetlands that are smaller than the current 12.4-acre threshold if they are within an area at high risk of flooding. Small wetlands are a significant percentage of overall wetlands.
New York can no longer rely on federal
wetland regulations, as federal protections for smaller wetlands and headwater stream areas have been limited by recent court decisions on the scope of the federal Clean Water Act.
Wetlands protection efforts have been contentious in New York and across the country for decades. As a practical matter, the threshold size for wetlands protection and whether wetlands are mapped (and therefore protected) can affect real estate development opportunities and have local tax revenue implications. Therefore, any new mapping effort or changes to wetland jurisdictions to reduce vulnerability to storms and droughts must be narrowly targeted to address such critical objectives and will require extensive public education and engagement.
Create a wetlands and natural systems mitigation banking program to promote restoration
The contention over wetlands protection
Figure L-22: Destruction and damage from Irene and Lee (NYSDEC, 2011)
could be greatly reduced if the State adopted carefully designed wetland banking mechanisms.
While “mitigation” or “conservation”
banking is not a new concept, it has not been widely used in New York. At the federal level and in other states, mitigation banking has been used on a patchwork basis to address freshwater wetlands, endangered species, impaired watersheds, and stormwater controls.
Portions of the Ohio River watershed, for example, employ conservation banking to meet water quality goals. The Willamette Watershed Basin in Oregon uses mitigation banking to offset a wide variety of impacts.
North Carolina has a transportation-focused mitigation banking program (see North Carolina Mitigation Banking Program box).
Following the success of these other states, New York could begin with a pilot program to test the idea’s feasibility.
The bank would be created using a public-private partnership among project developers, regulators, and private investors, after public consultation with stakeholders. In exchange for permanently protecting the land or wetland, the bank manager could sell associated natural resource value credits to developers who need to satisfy legal requirements for compensating environmental impacts of development projects.
A New York State wetlands bank would help create a market for natural resource protection credits by enabling private investors and landowners to undertake environmental restoration and protection projects using private capital, thereby funding environmental protection projects that would otherwise go unfunded. The bank could expedite permitting and reduce overall costs of projects by providing readily available, preapproved mitigation measures or credits to address adverse environmental impacts associated with project developments.
Critics of environmental banking argue that it encourages development, providing an avenue to regulatory approval that did not exist before. On the other hand, under the status quo, development projects typically languish at the wetland-mitigation phase, during which a lengthy and expensive battle ensues, involving the regulator, developer, and environmental groups. The result has typically been that the development project goes forward after much delay and expense but with two undesirable outcomes: 1) a poorly formulated compromise wetlands mitigation requirements that are not likely to succeed and 2) frustration and unnecessary costs and delays faced by all parties.
A well designed environmental mitigation bank could produce better environmental and economic development results.
Provide protection for small streams across the state The destruction of small streams and associated shunting of stormwater elsewhere exacerbates flooding in the same manner as the loss of wetlands or floodplains or the creation of new impervious surfaces. Small streams, like smaller wetlands, typically account for the bulk of the land area in a
North Carolina Mitigation Banking Program (North Carolina, United States)12
watershed and provide crucial stormwater attenuation. Under current law, minor streams (typically classified as “C” or “D”) are at risk of damage when regulatory protection is not afforded them under State
“Protection of Waters” laws. Of the 86,000 miles of streams in New York, 52,000 miles have no or limited State regulatory protection. As with many smaller wetlands, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and EPA jurisdiction over such water bodies has been limited by federal court decisions.
The State should consider expanding the Protection of Waters Law to extend regulatory protection to minor streams in prioritized flood prone areas and include minimum regulated setbacks and buffers.
This would enable the State to create a streamside buffer beside such streams where appropriate. Appropriate regulatory variance criteria should be developed to prevent undue hardships or protect other important economic or social interests.
As with enhanced wetland protections, new stream and watershed protections to reduce vulnerability to storms and droughts and to enhance the resilience of nearby communities will require extensive public education and engagement.
Expand green infrastructure and urban forests
Further promote and expand green infrastructure
New York should promote a statewide effort for green infrastructure in an effort to slow the flow of stormwater and also to make cities more livable. Traditional hard infrastructure “end of the pipe” solutions to stormwater typically focus on draining water off the landscape as quickly as possible—
something that exacerbates the water quality problems during flood conditions.
Green infrastructure uses engineered systems to mimic natural processes to infiltrate, evaporate, retain and reuse stormwater. Some typical applications of green infrastructure include green roofs, city parks, permeable pavement, rain barrels, vegetative planters that infiltrate water into soils, wetlands, roadside bioswales, drywells, and urban forests. Holding and infiltrating stormwater on the landscape is not only fundamental to peak flood hazard mitigation and preserving water quality, but also to aquifer and reservoir recharge for drought prevention. By holding or directing stormwater to absorptive vegetation, green infrastructure can help prepare urban areas for the effects of climate change, promote energy efficiency, improve air quality, provide natural habitat, and make communities more livable.
This approach can also make cities more resilient by slowing stormwater runoff and reducing ambient air temperatures. Steps
to promote green infrastructure should include the following.
Clean water regulations: Amend New York’s clean water regulations to ensure that the state more fully incorporates green infrastructure practices into its clean water permitting and regulatory programs. This includes the regulatory programs to reduce levels of runoff into combined sewer overflow systems. The current programs encourage the construction of hard infrastructure solutions without coordinated consideration of green infrastructure.
Communities such as New York City and Syracuse, with encouragement from the State, are re-deploying funds from combined sewer overflow (“CSO”) grey infrastructure projects to more cost effective green infrastructure.
Stormwater management design manual: Update the New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual (the design criteria for both the “General Permit for Construction Activities” and
“General Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems”) to require the use of updated precipitation data in the design of stormwater management practices to ensure that runoff from new development mimics pre-development rates of runoff for design storms including the 100-year event.
Green infrastructure incentives:
Incorporate increased green infrastructure incentives into the State clean water infrastructure funding programs operated
by DEC (“Water Quality Improvement Program” grants, EFC (“Green Innovation Grant Program”) and the Department of Agriculture and Markets (“Agricultural Environmental Management” program).
Linear practices: Develop protocols on incorporating linear green infrastructure practices, such as road-side bio-swales on state roads — serving as a model for action by counties and municipalities on their roadways.
Urban parks: Pilot the creation of innovative urban parks that are designed to serve as an absorptive and calming flood plain during high water. Such parks can increase the value of nearby properties.
These parks have the added benefit of increasing nearby property values
Further promote and expand urban forests
Greening our cities with trees and other plants can help mitigate the effects of heat waves. Heat waves pose the greatest danger to human life in urban areas, where the urban “heat island” effect can cause parts of cities to be up to 10 degrees hotter than surrounding rural areas. The heat island effect is attributable to the large amounts of concrete and asphalt that absorb heat and tall buildings that prevent the heat from dissipating. Marginalized or disadvantaged communities already burdened by environmental challenges are often the most vulnerable to extreme urban heat conditions, due to less access to air
Figure L-23: Examples of Green Infrastructure – Green roof at SUNY Orange Newburgh Campus (Left), Kingston Library Rain Garden (Middle), and Bioretention at Vassar College (Right) (NYSDEC, 2012)
Save the Rain (Onondaga County, United States)
An excellent example of a New York community that has embraced green infrastructure is Onondaga County. The Save the Rain program (www.savetherain.
us) is a comprehensive stormwater management plan that relies upon a suite of green infrastructure initiatives to beautify the City of Syracuse while reducing combined sewer overflow (“CSO”) discharges into the Onondaga Lake Watershed.
This nationally-recognized program is being undertaken in cooperation with the State as a cost-effective alternative to a series of large tanks and centrifuges proposed under a prior CSO reduction plan.
Figure L-24: Large green roof installed at “OnCenter” in Syracuse is a major project of the “Save the Rain” Program (Onondaga County, 2012)
Devastating Heat Waves in Europe
The devastating 2003 European heat wave resulted in perhaps more than 70,000 deaths across Europe as a whole, and over 14,800 deaths in France alone. Paris was hit the hardest, due to a roughly 8 degree heat island effect in that urban setting. The prevalence of heat waves will increase — both duration and intensity
— over the coming years as a result of climate change. For example, the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment report, “Confronting Climate Change in the U.S.
Northeast” (2007), predicts that the number of days above 100 degrees in New York City each year will increase from an average of 2 days per year to at least 7 and as many as 25 days, depending in part on the rate of growth in GHG emissions.
conditioning, buildings with relatively poor insulation, and less green space. The State should pursue the following measures to promote urban forests.
Tree planting: Establish a goal of planting a significant number of trees per year in urban areas around the State. Tree planting is an integral part of a comprehensive strategy to combat stormwater runoff and urban heat. A single tree on an urban street can absorb 4,075 gallons of stormwater per year, preventing runoff that exacerbates flood conditions.13 Tree canopies shade buildings, sidewalks, streets, and other structures, keeping them cooler, reducing air conditioning and other energy needs in the summer and reducing the overall urban heat island effect. Trees also remove pollutants from the air and soil and can shelter buildings from cold winds in winter months, reducing heating costs.
Tree repair: Tens of thousands of trees were lost to Superstorm Sandy in the downstate New York area. Help local communities repair damage by providing trees for replanting.
Carefully manage drinking water supplies
New York State’s water supplies include reservoirs, rivers, aquifers, single streams and private wells. Although most of these are relatively resilient to the impacts of climate change, sea level rise, drought and storm events can threaten some drinking water systems. The Commission recommends the following measures to help protect New York State’s drinking water systems.
Stream restoration program: Work with New York City to adopt a heightened and expedited watershed stream restoration program in order to stabilize and re-vegetate watershed streams. In New York City, 9.4 million people receive their drinking water from 19 upstate reservoirs and controlled lakes, which are fed to the city through hundreds of miles of water tunnels. This is one of the largest and purest unfiltered
supplies in the world. Recent storms caused extensive stream bed and bank damage with a resulting significant increase in suspended clay particles. If left unaddressed, this turbidity could threaten the “unfiltered”
status of the city’s drinking water supply under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
Detailed stream management plans that are already developed would provide a specific blue print for implementation.
Aquifer protection: Enhance protocols to protect the Long Island Pine Barrens and similar deep flow aquifer recharge areas on Long Island. One important step in protecting the Long Island aquifer from saltwater intrusion due to rising sea levels over the long term is to maintain an adequate supply of clean rainwater and waterway infiltration while promoting the efficient use of withdrawn water for the three million people it supplies. Water supply permits, over time, should incorporate conservation protocols to maintain a sustainable water balance in the aquifer. The State should continue to monitor the slow process of saltwater intrusion to determine if additional steps are necessary.
Backup water supplies: Work with Poughkeepsie and the other cities that rely on Hudson River water to identify and assure adequate and redundant backup water supplies in keeping with current State regulations. Drinking water supplies that rely on Hudson River water are vulnerable to the northward migration of the tidal saltwater front — the shifting and imprecise dividing line between the freshwater upstream and the salt water migrating northward with sea level rise.
This threat can be exacerbated by drought, which reduces the flow level of fresh water in the Hudson.
Identify systems: Identify the drinking water systems and aquifer systems that could be most vulnerable to drought, monitor the quantity of water in those systems, develop guidance on appropriate water efficiency measures, and identify alternative supplies.
Drought can threaten smaller village drinking water systems that rely on a single
stream or well fields for water. A long-term drought that substantially reduces the flow in those streams or localized aquifers could deprive thousands of people of clean drinking water. In addition, drought can also cause many of the more than one million backyard drinking water wells to be exhausted.
Water efficiency: Help municipalities control the infrastructure costs of their water systems by financing the installation of water meters and water-saving devices, and implementing other municipal water efficiency programs by providing interest-free loans to municipalities throughout New York. Water conservation programs can help communities reduce costs of infrastructure construction and make systems more resilient to drought and power outages.
Such programs have been shown to reduce water use by up to 30%, save ratepayers money, support infrastructure investment, and provide savings to allow for economic growth without spending additional resources for water or wastewater capacity Drought emergency: Enable the Governor to declare a drought emergency. In New York State, the Governor has very limited authority to regulate water use restrictions during times of even extreme drought.
State agencies currently only have the limited authority to issue non-binding, staged warnings pegged to the severity of drought conditions. Local water utilities typically do a good job of controlling water usage. However, allocations and binding conservation practices can become the focal point of significant dispute in times of extreme scarcity. In order to ensure that critical public health and safety needs are protected, the Environmental Conservation Law should be amended to enable the Governor to declare a drought emergency. This would require the development of regulations that ensure systematic and equitable reductions of water use when necessitated by worsening drought conditions.
Strengthen dams and levees to protect the public from inland flooding
Natural systems can provide protections against flood waters, but only up to a point.
As demonstrated by the extreme conditions during Irene and Lee, engineered defenses in the Southern Tier such as dams, levees, and berms provide invaluable protection to New Yorkers. The State should enhance these defenses.
The State manages 80 miles of levees and other flood control projects along inland waterways, including barriers which protect extensive portions of New York’s Southern Tier. The City of Binghamton, for example, would have been inundated in during major storms in 1996 and 2011 if not for its system of levees and pump stations.
These levees held during Lee and Irene, but sustained significant damage in some locations. Repairs are underway.
New York has over 700 dams that play an important role in flood control. In 2009, State dam safety regulations and engineering criteria were modernized in accordance with recommended national protocols. Many dams, including some owned by State agencies, require structural upgrades and detailed emergency response plans to become fully compliant. DEC conducted over 250 emergency dam safety inspections in the aftermath of Lee and Irene, with substantial damage identified for repair at some locations.
Unlike a natural flood, which spread across the landscape relatively slowly, a flood caused by levee- or dam-failure is often rapid, forceful, and extremely damaging, and occurs with little or no warning. In addition, levees and dams that have been in place for years can accumulate significant levels of sediment in the reservoirs that form upstream behind them. Flood waters released suddenly by a levee or dam failure can strip river systems of vegetation along banks, causing damaging shoreline erosion and channel incision, washed away wetlands, change to the structures of
rapids and river contours, changes in water temperatures, turbidity and sedimentation in water, and release of toxins potentially stored in impounded sediment.
The Commission recommends that the State should consider the following actions:
Dam safety criteria: Revise State dam safety criteria and associated flood inundation zones to ensure that they are adequate under extreme weather scenarios.
The 2009 regulatory changes should be revisited to take into account the long-term impacts of a changing climate.
Levee adequacy: Review the adequacy of flood protections afforded by levees under their current and sometimes substandard design. While strengthening these levees could be extremely expensive, the State and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers should assess the need for levee expansion projects where a range of alternative flood-hazard mitigation measures would be insufficient to provide adequate protection of high-population areas. These projects could be integrated into long-term capital planning to protect communities against flooding.
Figure L-25: Batavia Kill Dam No. 1 with flow through emergency spillway eroding downstream bank during Irene (NYSDEC, 2011)
New York Works program for flood-control projects
Governor Cuomo has acted to address the risks posed by neglected dams
Governor Cuomo has acted to address the risks posed by neglected dams