Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T10:54:36.354Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES: Restoring a Salt Marsh in a Highly Urbanized Environment of New York City: The Alley Park Restoration Project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2012

John H. Roebig ,
John K. McLaughlin  and
Michael J. Feller
John H. Roebig*
Affiliation:
PhD, RLA, Senior Professional Associate, HDR, Inc., Pearl River, New York
John K. McLaughlin
Affiliation:
Director, Office of Ecological Services Bureau of Environmental Planning and Analysis, New York City Environmental Protection
Michael J. Feller
Affiliation:
Chief Naturalist, New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group (NRG)
*
John H. Roebig, HDR, One Blue Hill Plaza, Pearl River, NY 10965; (phone) 845-735-8300; (fax) 845-735-7466; (e-mail) [email protected], hdrinc.com
Get access

Abstract

The success of urban salt marsh restoration depends upon an understanding of the local tidal regime and hydrologic conditions. Reference wetland characteristics can provide biological and physical restoration baselines for a restoration design through the use of techniques such as bio-benchmarking and geomorphologic assessment. Reference site vegetation can be used as indirect indicators of local tidal elevations and duration of flooding of each tidal zone. Reference sites can also provide landscape allometry to generate geomorphologic ratios that can be applied to the restoration site. Through the use of field measurements, aerial photographs, and GIS technology, relationships can be identified for tidal channel width, depth, diurnal tidal prism, and marsh area. Calculating a hydrologic budget for freshwater is critical to estimate salinity concentrations and their effect on the restoration wetland. This information, along with field measurements of salinity, can be used to predict salinity ranges resulting from the interaction of freshwater sources and will help determine the target vegetation communities. Preconstruction planning is not always sufficient to understand site conditions, especially in urban areas. Flexibility in design, even during the construction phase, may be required to assure project success. During excavation of fill, conditions were found at specific locations that would reduce the likelihood of reestablishing historic functions and values of the tidal marsh. Designs were altered at one low marsh area, which was redesigned as mudflat; and a second low marsh area that was changed to a freshwater fen.

Environmental Practice 14:1–11 (2012)

Type
Features
Information
Environmental Practice , First View , pp. 1 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beare, P.A., and Zedler, J.B. 1987. Cattail Invasion and Persistence in a Coastal Salt Marsh: The Role of Salinity Reduction. Estuaries 10(2):165–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broome, S.W. 1990. Creation and Restoration of Tidal Wetlands of the Southeastern United States. In Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science, Kusler, J.A. and Kentula, M.E., eds. Island Press, Washington, DC, 37–72.Google Scholar
Broome, S.W., Seneca, E.D., and Woodhouse, W.W. Jr. 1988. Tidal Marsh Restoration. Aquatic Botany 32(1-2):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freese, J.H., and Kulhawy, F.H.. 1983. General Planning Considerations for Small-Scale Coastal Structures. Report to New York Sea Grant Institute. Coastal Structures Handbooks Series. New York Sea Grant Institute, Albany, New York, 124 pp.Google Scholar
Garbish, E.W. 1986. Highways and Wetland: Compensating for Wetland Losses. Federal Highway Administration (FHA) Report FHWA IP-86-22. US Department of Transportation, FHA, Offices of Research & Development, Washington, DC, 60 pp.Google Scholar
Hood, W.G. 2000. Landscape Allometry of Oligohaline Tidal Channels of the Lower Chehalis River, Washington (PhD dissertation). University of Washington, Seattle, 338 pp.Google Scholar
Lawler, Matusky & Skelly Engineers. 2000. East River Combined Sewer Overflow Facility Planning Project: Site Assessment and Land Use History at Proposed CSO Storage Conduit Network. New York City Department of Environmental Protection, Flushing, 21 pp + appendices.Google Scholar
New York State Office of Planning Services. 1972. Long Island Marine Wetlands: Status, Value, and Preserve Potentials. Prepared by the Metropolitan New York Office, Office of Planning Services. State of New York, Office of Planning Services, Albany, 60 pp.Google Scholar
Niedowski, N. 2000. New York State Salt Marsh Restoration and Monitoring Guidelines. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, 132 pp.Google Scholar
Normandeau Associates. 1992, June. A Manual for Monitoring Mitigation and Restoration Projects on New Hampshire's Salt Marshes. Prepared for Office of State Planning, New Hampshire Coastal Program. Normandeau Associates, Inc., Bedford, NH, 136 pp.Google Scholar
Rozsa, R. 1995, December. Human Impacts on Tidal Wetlands: History and Regulations. In Tidal Marshes of Long Island Sound: Ecology, History, and Restoration, G.D. Dreyer and W.A. Niering, eds. Connecticut College of Arboretum, Bulletin 34. Connecticut College of Arboretum, New London, 42–50.Google Scholar
Shisler, J.K., and Charette, D.J.. 1984. Evaluation of Artificial Salt Marshes in New Jersey. P-40502-01-84. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, New Brunswick, 160 pp.Google Scholar