A Salt Marsh Advancement Zone Assessment of West Haven, Connecticut

Similar documents
CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE

POLICY FOR NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AREAS

Protecting Open Space & Ourselves

Acres 32% 35% Not Suitable. Impervious. Possible UTC. Vegetation. Existing UTC

STREAM AND BUFFER AREA PROTECTION/RESTORATION

Natural Resources and Climate Resiliency in Germantown

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW

A Partnership for Saving West Africa s Coastal Assets

WATERSHED. Maitland Valley. Report Card 201

Building Resilient Communities - Low Impact Development and Green Infrastructure Strategies

New Jersey Forest Stewardship Program Spatial Analysis Project Map Products And Data Layers Descriptions

Integrating Water Quality and Natural Filters into Maryland s Marine Spatial Planning Efforts

STREAM RESTORATION PURPOSE, PRACTICE, AND METHODS. By Marcus Rubenstein, CPESC

Estuary Adventures. Background. Objective

Quantifying the Benefits of Stream Restoration

Go Green, Save Money: Lowering Flood Insurance Rates in Virginia with Stormwater Management. Kristen Clark VCPC Alumna, Spring 2014

Project Goals and Scoping

(1) Bridge, Road and Railway (Adaptation Project) (2) Bridge, Road and Railway (BAU Development with Adaptation Options)

Environment & Conservation Introduction

Provincial Policy Statement 2014 Training Aid

VILLAGE OF BELLAIRE WATER QUALITY ACTION PLAN

Performance Standard 6 V2

A Freshwater Blueprint for Maritime Canada

719 Griswold, Suite 820 Detroit, MI DANVERS POND DAM REMOVAL AND STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT

PUBLIC NOTICE. REPLY TO: Denver Regulatory Office 9307 South Wadsworth Blvd 30 DAY NOTICE Littleton, CO FAX (303)

A Report on Existing and Possible Tree Canopy in the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, NC

Land Management and Flooding. Where are we now?

TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. 7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE SAM PAH U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OFFICE OF POLLUTION CONTROL

Standards for SWMF s. (Stormwater Management Facilities) Lacombe County s Guide to Developing Stormwater Management Facilities

The Next Generation of Mitigation: Linking Current and Future Mitigation Programs with State Wildlife Action Plans and Other State and Regional Plans

Long Island: Water Resources. Water Sayings. Water Issues. Water Quality Issues specific to LI Coastal Areas. Agriculture and Water Regulation

Natural Flood Management. Measures & Multiple Benefits. Steve Rose (JBA)

Living Shorelines & Coastal Resiliency: A Consultants Perspective. Presented by: Bethany Bearmore, P.E. Louis Berger

CHAPTER 7. San Dieguito River Flooding Adaptation

Municipal Stormwater Management Planning

Applying Ecosystem Services to Collaborative Forest Management Elk River Public Meeting

7 Mineral and Energy Resources

LAND USE POLICIES BY COMMUNITY DESIGNATION

Pierce County s Green Y

GREAT BAY REGION, NEW HAMPSHIRE

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mobile District

Report to N.C. Legislative Commission on Global Climate Change March 15, 2010

Wildlife Conservation Strategy

Habitat Grant Projects Clinton River Watershed

Community Disaster Resilience

15A NCAC 07H.0209 COASTAL SHORELINES (a) Description. The Coastal Shorelines category includes estuarine shorelines and public trust shorelines.

Chapter 10 Natural Environment

Jamestown S Klallam Tribe

Day 1 Workshop Activities 1 & 2: Habitats and Species/Species Groups

Adaptation to Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change

Chapter 6. Hydrology. 6.0 Introduction. 6.1 Design Rainfall

Science Plan. Executive Summary. Introduction

Hydrologic and Ecologic Impacts from the CERP Indian River Lagoon South Project

Tools Quantifying the Benefits and Life Cycle Costs of Green Infrastructure Sakshi Saini

CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLAN OF BEN TRE PROVINCE

Linking Land Use to Water Quality

Sea-level Rise Science and Decision Making in an Uncertain Future. Rob Thieler U.S. Geological Survey Woods Hole, MA

EFFECT OF UPSTREAM DEVELOPMENT ON THE CLEAR CREEK AREA

ENVIRONMENT LONG-TERM GOAL: INTRODUCTION: Environment 117

TORCH LAKE TOWNSHIP WATER QUALITY ACTION PLAN

Coastal Texas Protection and Restoration Project

Runoff Volume: The Importance of Land Cover

SOUTHWEST CONNECTICUT RELIABILITY PROJECT

Trails Permitting Process

Introduction to the Natural Resources Element

Pennsylvania Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual. Chapter 3. Stormwater Management Principles and Recommended Control Guidelines

Ducks Unlimited Canada. Conserving Canada s Wetlands

Mud Lake Lakeshed Assessment

Adapting to Climate Change in the Northeast: Experiences from the Field. Climate Projections for Forests: A Quick Summary

Adapting to Climate Change in the Northeast: Experiences from the Field

West Fork White River Watershed Conservation Map Summaries. Prepared for the Beaver Watershed Alliance. By the Watershed Conservation Resource Center

Long Island s. Environmental Issues. Environmental Issues. Environmental Setting. Environmental Setting. Suburbia and the Environment

Section 2: Watershed Characteristics and Runoff

Concept, Feasibility & Mobility Studies. Southport Connector Expressway

Biodiversity. The UNIVERSITY of OKLAHOMA

ICCG Think Tank Map: a worldwide observatory on climate think tanks Arctic, Energy Poverty and Health in the Second Volume of IPCC s AR 5

(1)(A)Inventory of the following existing natural resources on the USFSP Campus or within the context area adjacent to the University.

Walnut Creek Watershed Management Authority. Project Kick Off March 18, 2015

APPENDIX A. NEPA Assessment Checklist

Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP) Version 2.0. Executive Summary

Clallam County Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update

Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Technical Memorandum

Climate Change Impacts in Washington State

Climate Adaptation & Disaster Risk Reduction Building Coastal Resilience

Waterfront Land Use. Michigan Coastal Community Working Waterfronts. Table of Contents. Case Studies

TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL M E M O R A N D U M. To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 3E

OUR MISSION: To preserve, protect, and restore Delaware s Inland Bays the water that flows into them and the watershed around them.

Narragansett Bay and Watershed Restoration Bond Fund

5.5 NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS AND COASTAL ZONE

Raritan River Basin. How to protect quality & quantity of water resources? Land Protection and Management to Protect Water Resources

Challenge 2: Community Resilience in Dania Beach

Enclosed farmland: Arable and Horticultural, Improved and Neutral Grasslands

Maryland s Living Shorelines Program. Bhaskaran Subramanian February 27, 2015

[CAMROSE COUNTY MDP & LUB OPENHOUSE DISPLAY BOARDS SUMMARY COMMENTS] Share your thoughts, fill in the blank: Not enough. Less. Too many.

Addition to Section 4 - Special Use Regulations

Transcription:

A Salt Marsh Advancement Zone Assessment of West Haven, Connecticut

Front cover image: Open space and unprotected parcels critical to the conservation of marsh advancement corridors in West Haven; from the accompanying Comprehensive Map Book of West Haven, Connecticut.

Table of Contents Introduction... 2 Suitable vs. Unsuitable Advancement... 3 Marsh Advancement vs. Wetland Extent... 3 Planning for the Future... 3 Total Marsh Advancement... 4 Marsh Advancement in Open Space Parcels... 4 Total Advancement in Open Space Parcels... 4 Suitable Open Space Advancement by Owner... 5 Suitable Advancement by Open Space Parcel... 6 Marsh Advancement in All Parcels... 6 Total Advancement in All Parcels (OS vs. Non-OS)... 7 Suitable Advancement by All Parcels... 8 Appendix Map Book... 9 RECOMMENDED CITATION: Ryan, A. and A. W. Whelchel. 2014. A Salt Marsh Advancement Zone Assessment of West Haven, Connecticut. The Nature Conservancy, Coastal Resilience Program. Publication Series #1-R, New Haven, Connecticut. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This effort was made possible through partial funding by the Horizon Foundation, Vervane Foundation, and the McCance Foundation Trust. Page 1

Introduction In 2006, The Nature Conservancy established the Coastal Resilience Program (www.coastalresilience.org) that provides tools and a solution framework to reduce the ecological and socio-economic risk of hazards and comprehensively improve community resilience. The Program focuses on helping decision-makers explore locally relevant, downscaled, flooding scenarios from sealevel rise and/or storm surge, analyze the potential ecological, social and economic impacts of each scenario at a local, regional, and state scale, and facilitate solutions to address these issues. Since 2006, The Nature Conservancy has assisted many coastal and inland communities in Connecticut by providing this critical information and a comprehensive, community-based process that improves overall resilience and sustainability. There is a universal recognition by coastal and inland communities in Connecticut and elsewhere that natural infrastructure wetlands and forests - is a cost effective, long-term part of the solution to help protect people, infrastructure and natural systems from extreme weather and climatic change. Fortunately, our state has a remarkable diversity and abundance of natural resources that provide habitat for wildlife and fisheries, enhance the aesthetics and quality of life for residents, and, of course, defend the shoreline and rivers against storm surge, inland flooding, and sea level rise. The presence of natural resources across the state in particular salt marsh, beaches/dunes, forested headwaters, and river floodplains is the result of previous recognition and commitment to long-term conservation and the requisite balance with socio-economic growth. In order to maintain these natural resources it will require 1) routine and on-going management activities as well as the restoration of degraded areas, 2) forward-looking planning to accommodate changes in habitat composition and location due to climatic change and 3) enforcement, modification and/or development of new land use policies and growth strategies. Opportunities also exist to account for and integrate the services or co-benefits provided by natural infrastructure via new development, redevelopment, or realignment activities. Economically important services/co-benefits from natural infrastructure include wave attenuation, improved water storage and filtering of pollutants from surface runoff, erosion control, and improved aesthetics and desirable public amenities. Taken in total, the immediate and longer-term management of natural infrastructure by the state, towns, private property owners, non-profit organizations, and others will help to reduce hazard risk and improve resilience across Connecticut. While longer-term changes in temperature and precipitation patterns will alter the species composition and type of habitats in a given location, the more immediate implication is the upslope advancement of habitats such as salt marsh in response to continued sea level rise. Sea level rise and the impacts of flooding have and will continue to alter the presence and abundance of natural resources in Connecticut. One of the most noticeable changes is occurring at the shoreline s edge where salt marsh is in the process of advancing upslope into areas now considered uplands. In order to clearly identify where this will occur along West Haven s shoreline, The Nature Conservancy presents the following report to assist with future planning for natural resources in the context of overall risk reduction and resiliency improvement for the community. Ultimately, it is our hope that this report will serve to inform the community about Page 2

future marsh advancement locations, current land use of those locations and which parcels are critical to ensure the persistence of natural resources in West Haven longer term. The Salt Marsh Advancement Model used in this analysis was co-developed by The Nature Conservancy and the University of Connecticut s Department of Natural Resources Management and Engineering. A full discussion of the Model and underlying methodology is beyond the scope of this report, but a few important details are needed to put the following analysis into context and define how to use the results for planning and implementation. Suitable vs. Unsuitable Advancement In the following figures and tables suitable advancement areas are abbreviated as Yes and unsuitable areas are abbreviated as No. Suitable areas are classified based on the current land cover type - forest or agrigrass - and as such are expected to convert to salt marsh as hydrologic conditions change due to sea level rise, in the absence of further land use conversion. Land cover types classified as urban (i.e. roads, buildings, runways, parking lots, etc ) are considered to be unsuitable for salt marsh advancement at this time. Though much of our analysis is grouped by parcel ID and associated characteristics, these classifications suitable and unsuitable exist independent of the parcel boundaries. In other words, a given residential parcel can have both suitable (lawn) and unsuitable (building footprint) advancement areas. Marsh Advancement vs. Wetland Extent There is a key distinction in this report between the current wetland extent in a municipality and the marsh advancement areas analyzed herein. Marsh advancement areas include only the future projected wetland extent clipped to current upland land cover. Therefore, no assumption should be made about net gain or loss of current wetland extent based on this advancement area analysis. Another key consideration is that in some cases the identified advancement area will include land that converts to wetlands and subsequently to open-water over time. This further demonstrates that net change in both existing and future wetland extent should not be inferred from our analysis. Planning for the Future The advancement and eventual establishment of coastal marshes will occur over the course of several decades and as such our analysis extends out to the 2080s. The rate of change is slow and decadal, yet inevitable. There is an abundance of existing property, infrastructure and natural infrastructure assets clustered along the Connecticut coast and communities will need to formulate growth and realignment plans well in advance of the 2080s scenario presented here. The following data analysis and associated map book (Appendix) can assist with a resilient transition through the presentation of marsh advancement areas and an accounting of the projected changes to coastal property. Page 3

Total Marsh Advancement The full extent of marsh advancement in West Haven by the 2080s is projected to be 498.6 acres, with 369.2 acres (74.1%) having suitable (Yes) land cover for wetland advancement. The other 129.4 acres (25.9%) are occupied by built structures and associated infrastructure and are unsuitable for marsh advancement (No), currently. Total Marsh Advancement by 2080s Percent Marsh Adv Acres (%) Yes 369.2 74.1 No 129.4 25.9 Total 498.6 100.0 Marsh Advancement in Open Space Parcels Open space (OS) properties are a critical component of long-term community resilience because they currently have little to no development and are the most likely areas to remain undeveloped through the 2080s. The recognition of the role of these parcels in future wetland extent and improved resilience in West Haven is vital for strategic land management, economic development, and planning. Total Advancement in Open Space Parcels The following three categories are considered in this section: Yes OS: Areas of open space suitable for marsh advancement No OS: Areas of open space unsuitable for marsh advancement Non-OS: Unprotected areas both suitable and unsuitable for marsh advancement West Haven s open space parcels contain 225.3 acres of total marsh advancement area with 185.1 acres (37.1% of total) having a land cover suitable for future wetlands (Yes OS). Further analysis of the 273.3 acres of unprotected parcels (Non-OS) can be found in the following Marsh Advancement in All Parcels section. Open Space Marsh Advancement Open Space Marsh Advancement 54.8% 37.1% Yes OS No OS Non-OS OS type Acres Yes OS 185.1 No OS 40.2 Non-OS 273.3 Total 498.6 8.1% Page 4

Suitable Open Space Advancement by Owner The city of West Haven owns the greatest share of suitable open space for marsh advancement accounting for 173.3 acres (93.6%). Private owners hold the remaining share of suitable open space with 11.8 acres (6.4%). Suitable Open Space Advancement Owner type Acres Total "yes" OS (%) Total "yes" adv (%) Municipal 173.3 93.6 46.9 Private 11.8 6.4 3.2 Total 185.1 100.0 50.1 Suitable Open Space Advancement 6.4% Municipal Private 93.6% Page 5

Suitable Advancement by Open Space Parcel West Haven has 65 open space parcels that intersect the full extent of marsh advancement by the 2080s. There are 10 open space parcels that each provides more than 4 acres of advancement area with a total aggregate of 146.3 acres (79.0%) of West Haven s suitable open space marsh advancement area. The top two parcels contributing the most suitable marsh advancement zone are both located along Old Field Creek and together contribute 27.7% of the total (185.1 acres). 30 Open Space parcels with > 4 acres of Suitable Marsh Advancement (n = 10) 25 20 Acres 15 10 5 0 7364 7391 4667 4105 100206 17343 4658 100205 849 Parcel ID Open Space parcels with > 4 acres Suitable Marsh Advancement Total "yes" OS Parcel ID Acres (%) Owner Map Book Page # 7364 25.7 13.9 Municipal 7 7391 25.6 13.8 Municipal 7 4667 18.1 9.8 Municipal 7 4105 17.2 9.3 Municipal 7 100206 16.6 9.0 Municipal 6 17343 13.8 7.4 Municipal 6 4658 11.6 6.3 Municipal 7 100205 9.3 5.0 Municipal 6 849 4.3 2.3 Municipal 7 4099 4.1 2.2 Municipal 7 Total 146.3 79.0 Page 6

Marsh Advancement in All Parcels This section incorporates all parcels into the analysis of suitable marsh advancement. These results help put the open space analysis into perspective, as well as identify important unprotected parcels in West Haven s marsh advancement landscape. Total Advancement in All Parcels (OS vs. Non-OS) West Haven s existing open space parcels are made up of municipal parks and recreation properties, municipal open space, cemeteries, public schools, and certain private properties. This section provides an analysis of suitable areas for marsh advancement on these open space parcels versus all other parcels. These two types of parcels are designated as: OS for open space parcels Non-OS for all other parcels Open space parcels contain 185.1 acres (50.1% of total) of suitable marsh advancement zone. The other 184.1 acres of land suitable for marsh advancement (49.9% of total) are unprotected and generally occur on residential, commercial, or industrial properties. The unprotected suitable areas will receive a significant amount of marsh advancement by 2080s. This information has two important implications for future planning: 1) today s unprotected properties will play a vital role in maintaining West Haven s wetland resources in the future, and 2) a large amount of current development (89.2 acres) will be in direct conflict with rising sea levels and advancing marshes. 300 Total Marsh Advancement in All Parcels 250 Acres 200 150 100 No Yes Total Marsh Advancement Parcel type Yes No Total OS 185.1 40.2 225.3 Non-OS 184.1 89.2 273.3 50 Total 369.2 129.4 498.6 0 OS Non-OS Page 7

Suitable Advancement by All Parcels There are 866 parcels in West Haven that provide areas of suitable marsh advancement, but only 17 parcels offer suitable areas greater than 4 acres. This small subset provides 197.5 acres of marsh advancement zone or 53.5% of West Haven s overall total. The specific parcels can be viewed via the corresponding Map Book pages (Appendix) indicated in the table below. Acres 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Parcels with > 4 acres of Suitable Marsh Advancement (n=17) Parcel ID Open Space parcels in dark green Parcel ID Parcels with > 4 acres of Suitable Marsh Advancement Acres Page 8 Total yes adv (%) Map Book Page # 7364 25.7 7.0 7 7391 25.6 6.9 7 4667 18.1 4.9 7 4105 17.2 4.7 7 100206 16.6 4.5 6 17343 13.8 3.7 6 16532 13.0 3.5 4,6,11,18 4658 11.6 3.1 7 100205 9.3 2.5 6 16487 8.0 2.2 4,6,11,18 14810 7.2 2.0 5,7,11,18 14859 6.6 1.8 5,7,11,18 15556 6.4 1.7 4,6,11,18 14809 5.7 1.5 5,7,11,18 14775 4.4 1.2 5,7,11,18 849 4.3 1.2 7 4099 4.1 1.1 7 Total 197.5 53.5

Appendix Map Book Please consult your Salt Marsh Advancement Resource Disc for the complete dataset of suitable and unsuitable advancement per parcel. Page 9

Comprehensive Map Book of West Haven, Connecticut

This pag e intentionally left blank

-- Table of Contents -- Overview Maps Marsh Advancement...................... 2 Unprotected Parcels.............................. 4 Critical Parcels.................................................. 6 Inset Maps Unprotected Parcels.................................................................. 9 Advancement per Parcel........................................................... 17 Page 1

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Marsh Advancement - North 0 0.5 1 Mile ± Marsh Advancement by 2080s Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover North South Page 2

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Marsh Advancement - South 0 0.5 1 Mile ± Marsh Advancement by 2080s Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover North South Page 3

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - North 0 0.5 1 Mile ± Parcels Marsh Advancement by 2080s Unprotected Non-OS Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable advancement are shown. North South 16532 16487 15556 Page 4

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - South 0 0.5 1 Mile ± Parcels Marsh Advancement by 2080s Unprotected Non-OS Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable advancement are shown. North 14809 14775 14859 South 14810 Page 5

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Critical Parcels - North 0 0.5 1 Mile ± Note: Only Non-OS and OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable advancement are shown. Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Protected OS North South 100205 100206 17343 16532 16487 15556 Page 6

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Critical Parcels - South 0 0.5 1 Mile ± Note: Only Non-OS and OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable advancement are shown. Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Protected OS North South 14809 14810 14775 14859 7364 7391 4658 4667 4099 4105 849 Page 7

This pag e intentionally left blank Page 8

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Map Index - Unprotected Parcels A2 B2 C2 C3 D1 D2 Page 9

Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 see page 11 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - Map A2 A2 Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Marsh Advancement Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 10

see page 10 16532 16487 15556 14809 14775 14810 14859 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 see page 12 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - Map B2 A2 Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Marsh Advancement Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 11

see page 11 see page 13 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 see page 15 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - Map C2 A2 Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Marsh Advancement Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 12

see page 12 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - Map C3 A2 Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Marsh Advancement Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 13

see page 15 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - Map D1 A2 Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Marsh Advancement Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 14

see page 12 see page 14 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Unprotected Parcels - Map D2 A2 Parcels Unprotected Non-OS Marsh Advancement Developed Land Cover Forest, Grass, Ag Land Cover µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 15

This pag e intentionally left blank Page 16

Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Map Index - Advancement per Parcel A2 B2 C2 C3 D1 D2 Page 17

Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 see page 19 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Advancement per Parcel - Map A2 A2 Advancement per Parcel < 0.5 acres 0.5-1 1-2 2-5 5-20 > 20 acres µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 17

see page 18 16532 16487 15556 14809 14810 14775 14859 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 see page 20 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Advancement per Parcel - Map B2 A2 Advancement per Parcel < 0.5 acres 0.5-1 1-2 2-5 5-20 > 20 acres µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 18

see page 19 see page 21 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 see page 23 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Advancement per Parcel - Map C2 A2 Advancement per Parcel < 0.5 acres 0.5-1 1-2 2-5 5-20 > 20 acres µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 19

see page 20 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Advancement per Parcel - Map C3 A2 Advancement per Parcel < 0.5 acres 0.5-1 1-2 2-5 5-20 > 20 acres µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 20

see page 23 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Advancement per Parcel - Map D1 A2 Advancement per Parcel < 0.5 acres 0.5-1 1-2 2-5 5-20 > 20 acres µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 21

see page 20 see page 22 Feet 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Marsh Advancement by the 2080s Advancement per Parcel - Map D2 A2 Advancement per Parcel < 0.5 acres 0.5-1 1-2 2-5 5-20 > 20 acres µ Note: Only Non-OS parcels with > 4 acres of suitable marsh advancement are shown. D1 B2 C2 D2 C3 Page 22