Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Development Impacts on Pinelands Water Resources
Similar to Development Impacts on Pinelands Water Resources (20)
More from Kim Beidler
More from Kim Beidler (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Development Impacts on Pinelands Water Resources
- 1. Development and Water Resources in the Pinelands Area Daniel J. Van Abs, PhD, PP/AICP Associate Research Professor Rutgers University, Department of Human Ecology Team: Oliver Stringham, Yuling Gao Technical Support : New Jersey Future, Pinelands Preservation Alliance
- 2. New Jersey Future Project Funded by the William Penn Foundation Main Question: What lessons can be learned from the water resources impacts of historic and recent development in three Pinelands growth areas? Synthesis and Analysis – no field work
- 3. Project Areas Medford/Medford Lakes/Evesham - Suburban Hammonton – Historic Town Center Tuckerton/Little Egg Harbor – Coastal Village Not all within Pinelands Area
- 4. What We Assessed Demographics Land use/land cover Impervious surfaces Riparian areas Flood prone areas Forest areas Wetland areas Ground water recharge Protected lands Water quality Water availability Water infrastructure Build-out potential
- 5. Watershed & Municipal Focus
- 8. Water Quality and Availability Quality Ground and surface water quality harmed by land uses SW – pH, nutrients, arsenic and mercury are common issues GW – Nitrates, sodium chloride, contaminated sites Availability We know what goes in (recharge) We know flows in many streams We know what is used But how much use is too much?
- 9. Wetlands Impacts? Figure 4-3. Wetlands Impacts from Current Aquifer Withdrawals: Hammonton Target Area (Source: Pinelands Preservation Alliance)
- 10. Utility Capacity Medford/Evesham – Critical Area #2 restrictions Hammonton – Water allocation restrictions and move to GW discharge for STP Tuckerton/Little Egg Harbor – deep aquifer, but export sewage All utilities: repair and replacement costs Sewer service areas regulated by Pinelands Commission and NJDEP
- 11. Key Recommendations Water Withdrawals – New standards related to ecological impacts Water Quality – Expand beyond focus on nitrates in Pinelands CMP Restoration – Use redevelopment as a means of achieving restoration Watershed Plans – Address watersheds that straddle Pinelands boundaries Growth Area Plans – address aggregate impacts of planned land uses
- 12. Next Steps New Jersey Future recommendations Discuss with agencies Implement over time as possible www.njfuture.org/research- publications/research- reports/growing-smart-water- wise/
- 13. Contact Information Daniel J. Van Abs, PhD, PP/AICP Associate Research Professor for Water, Society & Environment Department of Human Ecology School of Environmental & Biological Sciences Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey 55 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08903 vanabs@sebs.rutgers.edu http://humanecology.rutgers.edu/faculty.asp?fid=101
Editor's Notes
- This presentation is drawn from a recent report prepared for New Jersey Future. I would like to acknowledge my Rutgers team, and also the contributions to this report from Nick Dickerson and Tim Evans of New Jersey Future, and Dr. Amy Karpati and Rich Bizub of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance. Chris Sturm of New Jersey Future was the project manager.
- Funding for the study came from the William Penn Foundation. The project focused on collecting and assessing existing information, in part with the aid of spreadsheet and GIS analyses. We did not conduct any field work due to budget limitations. The key question is shown on the slide.
- New Jersey Future selected three project areas, as shown here. Each represented a significantly different development pattern. Medford and Evesham Townships are both fairly typical suburban municipalities on the edge of the Pinelands ecosystem. Medford Lakes developed as a residential lakes community, while Hammonton is an historic agricultural area town center. Tuckerton, on the east coast, is an historic fishing and boat-building community. Both it and Little Egg Harbor now have extensive lagoon developments that were hit hard during Hurricane Sandy.
- We assessed a large number of water-related issues associated with land uses and land cover, along with water quality, availability and infrastructure. New Jersey Future provided demographic information and build-out analyses, while the Pinelands Preservation Alliance used a new USGS water modeling tool to assess wetland impacts of water withdrawals.
- The report is primarily focused on HUC14 subwatersheds as the basis for assessment, as is appropriate for water resources issues. However, we also looked at municipality statistics where appropriate, such as for demographics. The Hammonton area map shows clearly that the town is truly a town center, surrounded by agriculture and forests. Impervious trends in the three project areas, in the upper right, show gradual increases between 1995 and 2007, with the highest overall levels in Medford Lakes. The lower right graph shows just one subwatershed in the Medford/Evesham project area, where large amounts of forests shifted to urban land in the periods from 1986-1995 and 2002-2007, but not during the two intermediate periods.
- In this map set, we show the Pinelands Management Areas relative to the pre-1995 and post-1995 impervious surfaces for Hammonton. The darker pink areas are newer low-density impervious surfaces, while the dark brown are higher-density developments. Clearly much of the new impervious cover is within the Pinelands Town area, but some is not, indicating that some types of development were still possible in the more stringent Pinelands Development Areas.
- This map set shows forest losses, with the pink and red being losses from 1986 on. Some of these losses are to the north, outside of the Pinelands Area, but significant losses occur in the Rural Development Area, showing how low density development still eliminates significant forested areas.
- We compiled available information on water quality, showing clearly that the growth areas result in degradation of both ground and surface water quality. Again, many of these impacts could predate the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan, but still need to be addressed. Regarding water availability, New Jersey is now grappling with the question of how the use of unconfined, or surficial, aquifers can be used without damaging the water table levels and surface water flows on which wetland, ponds, lakes and stream ecosystems depend. This issue is referred to as ecological flow goals, which to date have only been implemented in the New Jersey Highlands Regional Master Plan, and even there only to a limited extent. NJDEP and the Pinelands Commission staff are reportedly looking into how recent Pinelands Commission, USGS and NJDEP work should be used to address this issue.
- Here is one map from the Pinelands Preservation Alliance using a USGS modeling tool. Hammonton is shown because they, of the three project areas, are most reliant on surficial aquifers. The results here show large scale lowering of the water table in wetlands areas from these uses, at levels considered a concern based on Pinelands Commission research. However, agencies have questioned whether this model is appropriate for this use.
- Utility capacity issues exist in some way for all areas. Local aquifer supplies are restricted for the Medford/Evesham area, while Hammonton’s use of the surficial aquifers also has hit regulatory limits. Medford/Evesham sewage treatment plans appear to have sufficient capacity, while Hammonton is engaged in a major project to shift their discharge from surface water to ground water, and Tuckerton/Little Egg Harbor export all of their sewage to Ocean County, which increases local water availability effects. However, all of them face significant future costs to maintain and replace their water infrastructure systems.
- The report makes a number of recommendations for consideration by state agencies, counties and municipalities. The slide shows five of them, focused on better management of water withdrawals, a broader set of water quality objectives, the use of redevelopment efforts as a tool for environmental restoration, and the need for more planning to better manage the water resources impacts of growth areas.
- New Jersey Future took the results of our report, consulted with a number of organizations and governments, and developed their recommendations for consideration. They are now in the process of discussing them with the relevant entities.