|
CLINTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
This document was financed in part by a grant
through the Office of Long Island Sound Programs, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the US Department of
Commerce under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and was
prepared in cooperation with the Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection’s Coastal Area Management Program.
Revised: November 7, 1983
Effective
Date: November 30, 1983
Revised: September 10, 1984
Effective
Date: October 15, 1984
Revised: August 8, 2005
Contents
Section 1: Introduction
Section 2: Summary of Issues and
Recommendations
Coastal Issues
Proposed Revisions
to the Clinton Plan of Conservation and Development
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations
Non-Regulatory
Recommendations
Section 3: Coastal Area and Resources
Coastal Area
Coastal Resources
Section 4: Municipal Authorities Affecting
the Coastal Area
Plan of
Conservation and Development Summary
Summary
of Zoning Regulations
Section 5: Coastal Issues
Section 6: Proposed Revisions to the Clinton
Plan of Conservation and Development
Proposed
Coastal Goals and Policies
Section 7: Proposed Changes to Zoning
Regulations
Section 8: Non-Regulatory Recommendations
Section 9: References
List of Figures
Figure 1: Coastal Boundary, Clinton, Connecticut
Figure 2: Coastal Resources
Figure 3: Shellfish Concentration Areas
Figure 4: Future Land Use Plan
Figure 5: Open Space and Public Facilities Plan
Figure 6: Zoning Map, Clinton, Connecticut
Figure 7: FEMA Map
Figure 8: Tidal Restoration Map
Figure 9: Existing and Potential Public Access
Figure 10: Wastewater Facilities Plan
Section 1: Introduction
The Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA), which became
effective January 1, 1980, is intended to protect the State’s
coastal resources while providing for continued economic
growth. The Act defined coastal resources, established a
coastal boundary within which those resources would be
regulated, and established goals and policies to guide coastal
development. The CCMA is implemented through existing
regulatory authorities of State and local government. Local
government implementation occurs through coastal site plan
review and a municipal coastal program.
Coastal site plan reviews are mandated by the Act. All
subdivisions and development proposals brought before the
Planning and Zoning Commission and all variance requests brought
before the Zoning Board of Appeals must receive a coastal site
plan review if the proposed activity is within the coastal
boundary. There are limited exemptions from this requirement,
which is provided by the CCMA. The coastal site plan review
required the applicant to: identify coastal resources on and
adjacent to the site; assess the capability of those resources
to accommodate the proposed use and the suitability of the
project for the site; evaluate the impacts of the project; and
describe proposed methods to mitigate any adverse impacts.
The municipal coastal program provides a municipality with an
opportunity to develop long-term coastal resource management
objectives, and to make municipal zoning and related ordinances
consistent with those objectives.
The Town of Clinton elected to update its municipal coastal
program, and received a financial assistance grant from the
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection’s Office of
Long Island Sound Programs. The Clinton Municipal Coastal
Program, as presented in this document, describes Clinton’s
coastal area and resources, the major regulatory authorities
affecting development within the coastal area, and coastal
issues that were identified during the review of this program.
The program also proposed changes to the Town Plan of
Conservation and Development and Zoning Regulations, and
recommends several non-regulatory actions for coastal resource
management.
Section 2: Summary of Issues and
Recommendations
Coastal Issues
1.
Encroachment of man-made uses into environmentally
sensitive coastal resource areas.
2.
Degraded water quality of the Hammonasset, Indian and
Hammock Rivers and the Inner Harbor.
3.
Small shellfish populations.
4.
Degraded tidal wetlands.
5.
Degraded groundwater quality in regards to the impacts of
septic systems and non-point sources.
6.
Poor physical access to the coast through State or
Municipally owned properties and through the coastal site plan
review process.
7.
Poor visual access to the coast.
8.
Over-development of the harbor area while needing to
provide for continued economic growth.
9.
Lack of maintenance of historic and architecturally
significant buildings.
10.
Poor economic vitality of the Central Business District.
11.
Lack of a balanced, developed shorefront.
12.
Lack of strict regulations that result in the loss of
property from natural disasters.
13.
Lack of public awareness that results in the loss of
property from natural disasters.
14.
Lack of maintenance plans that result in the loss of
property from natural disasters.
15.
Impassible roadways during 100-year storm events.
16.
Lack of an open space plan that provides for the
acquisition of specific parcels for open space.
17.
Encroachment into the 50’ Tidal Wetlands Buffer.
Proposed Revisions to the Clinton
Plan of Conservation and Development
Coastal Goals and
Policies
The coastal goals and policies established by the Connecticut
Coastal Management Act are included by reference and municipal
coastal policies are as follows:
Municipal Goals
and Policies
1.
Avoid and discourage non-essential encroachment of
man-made uses into environmentally sensitive coastal resource
areas.
a.
Encourage owners of sensitive resource areas to donate
land in fee-simple or to dedicate conservation easements to the
Town of Clinton.
b.
Discourage development immediately adjacent to tidal
wetlands and other sensitive coastal resources through the
development of buffers.
c.
Encourage the use of tax abatement provisions to lessen
economic pressures on property owners for development of
sensitive lands.
2.
Improve water quality in the Town’s rivers and harbors.
a.
Upgrade water quality in the Indian and Hammock Rivers to
SA classification.
b.
Establish a sewer minimization program that will
discourage or prohibit development in wetlands and other areas
where on-site sewage disposal is inappropriate. The program
should require upgrading existing inadequate systems to current
standards and address the impacts of septic systems and
non-point sources to improve groundwater quality.
c.
Reduce erosion and sedimentation through appropriate
regulatory controls such as the establishment of vegetative
buffers between development and wetlands and watercourses,
provision of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures
as part of any development, and monitoring of construction
activities.
d.
Require appropriate disposal of all waters from boats
using Clinton Harbor.
e.
Require the incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMP’s)
for stormwater treatment in all development proposals.
3.
Renew the shellfish population and concentration areas.
4.
Maintain and improve the quality of existing tidal
wetlands and provide rehabilitation and restoration of degraded
tidal wetlands.
5.
Increase physical access to the coast.
a.
Identify areas appropriate for public access.
b.
Encourage development of a long-term program of public
acquisition of selected waterfront and wetland areas.
c.
Develop public walkways along portions of the
Hammonasset, Indian and Hammock Rivers.
d.
Improve vehicular traffic flow to and from the harbor by
improving street conditions on existing access roads.
6.
Increase visual access to the coast.
7.
Continue periodic maintenance dredging of the existing
Federal Navigation Channel.
8.
Restrict, through appropriate regulatory measures, the
expansion of marinas and boats using the harbor to a level that
will not overtax land support facilities, including existing
transportation routes.
9.
Discourage new, non-water dependent uses along the
Hammonasset, Indian and Hammock Rivers and Clinton Harbor.
10.
Reduce the density of new developments within the Coastal
Area.
Land Use Changes
1.
Indicate undeveloped portions of Cedar Island as proposed
open space on the Future Land Use Plan and the Open Space and
Public Facilities Plan.
2.
Areas identified in the Sewer Minimization Program as
potentially requiring development of a community sewer system
shown on the Open Space and Public Facilities Plan.
3.
A long-term plan to acquire the additional beach and park
areas shown on the Open Space and Public Facilities Plan should
be prepared. This plan should indicate priorities and method of
acquisition.
4.
The two town-owned beaches should be retained in their
present use.
5.
Coastal high hazard areas (V-zones) as determined by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency and shown on Flood Insurance
Rate Maps for Clinton, should be maintained as open space and
developed areas should be monitored and/or controlled to reduce
losses of personal property and to ensure the safety of all
occupants in this area.
6.
The number of permitted slips/moorings in the harbor
should be limited to between 1,400 and 1,700 provided that water
quality in the harbor is maintained or improved.
7.
Traffic movement on Main Street through the Central
Business District should be improved by coordinating signal
lights, eliminating or restricting on-street parking and
providing addition exclusive turning lanes.
8.
Undeveloped parcels greater than ten acres should be
zoned to reduce the density of development.
Proposed Changes to Zoning
Regulations
1.
Establish provisions that permit flexibility in setback
and area coverage requirements for all waterfront properties to
allow the construction and reconstruction of permitted
structures in such an orientation and position that they will
have the least adverse impact on visual access to the waterfront
while also not adversely impacting sensitive coastal resources.
2.
Require that all slips and moorings for boats in Clinton
Harbor must have adequate pump-out facilities available for
waste discharge.
3.
Revise the Flood Hazard Zone section of the Regulations
to remove non-applicable portions and add new provisions
reflecting current State and Federal requirements. Strengthen
minimum requirements to reduce potential risks, promote the
health and welfare of the Town’s people and reduce losses to
property.
4.
Revise Regulations to discourage development within 100’
of tidal wetlands similar to the language existing for
Conservation Subdivisions.
5.
Revise zoning designations for any tracts of undeveloped
land within the Coastal Boundary Area greater than ten acres.
6.
Revise Regulations to discourage the construction of
jetties/groins and fences that prevent pedestrian passage below
the mean high tide line, and encourage the construction of
stairs over existing jetties/groins.
7.
Revise Regulations to discourage the construction of
fences and/or walls that block the view from the public way of
marshes and open water.
8.
Develop stricter regulations for construction standards
in high hazard areas that enhance the current codes through the
Zoning Regulations.
Non-Regulatory Recommendations
1.
The Planning and Zoning Commission should prepare an
existing land use map (for the entire town). This should be
updated at least every two years, and annually if feasible.
2.
The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Harbor
Management Commission should jointly maintain an up-to-date
inventory of slips and moorings and on-shore storage capacity
for boats as an aid in future planning efforts.
3.
The Town should undertake a program aimed at long-term
restoration of all degraded tidal marshes.
4.
The Water Pollution Control Commission should proceed
with a Sewer Minimization Program.
5.
The Harbor Management Commission should update the Harbor
Management Plan.
6.
Any future dredging of the channel in Clinton Harbor or
the Hammonasset River should be coordinated with the Shellfish
Commission at least two years in advance of the time of the
proposed dredging.
7.
The Shellfish Commission should create a management
program for improving the shellfish production in the rivers and
harbor.
8.
The general public should be made aware of the
Regulations pertaining to the areas that are subject to
potential natural disasters.
9.
The town’s infrastructure, especially Beach Park Road,
Hammock Road, Shore Road, Causeway, and Meadow Road, should be
carefully looked at or improved to ensure that they are passable
during a major storm event.
10.
Construction and Development Standards should be updated
to include criteria for construction in the high hazard areas.
11.
The Board of Selectmen and the Public Works Commission
should develop a plan for periodic inspections of
infrastructures within high hazard areas, recommend repairs or
upgrades and set a time table for such repairs or upgrades.
Section 3: Coastal Area and Resources
Clinton encompasses 10,752 acres (16.8 square miles), and had a
2000 population of 13,094. Dramatic population increases during
the 1950’s and 1960’s changed Clinton from a rural/seasonal
community to a suburban community with an urban center.
However, seasonal recreation along the coast is still important,
and during the summer months population increases to around
14,000. Projections of future population indicate continued but
slower growth to a 2010 year-round population of 13,224 or 1%
over 2000.
Coastal
Area
Clinton’s coastal boundary is shown in Figure 1: Coastal
Boundary, Clinton, Connecticut, located at the end of this
document. The coastal boundary was delineated by determining
the farthest inland of 1,000 feet from mean high water; 1,000
feet from tidal wetlands or the 100-year coastal flood zone and
then adjusting the boundary to coincide with property lines.
The coastal area includes about 4,350 acres (6.8 square miles)
or 40.5% of the total area of Clinton. Although there is no
up-to-date map of existing land use in Clinton, about 1,936
acres of the coastal area are developed or in protected open
space, distributed as follows:
Acres
|
Use
|
|
1,000 |
Residential |
|
80 |
Industrial |
|
29 |
Public and Institutional |
|
146 |
Commercial |
|
66 |
Active public open space (Parks and Beaches) |
|
464 |
Protected passive open space |
|
26 |
Marine Commercial |
|
125 |
Agriculture |
|
1,936 |
Total
|
About 2,414 acres are undeveloped, including large areas of
inland and tidal wetlands.
Approximately 3,900 people (30% of the Town’s year-round
residents) live within the coastal boundary, and 1,575
year-round dwellings (31%) and 473 seasonal dwellings are within
the coastal area. The number of seasonal dwellings has
increased by 92 dwellings from 381 in 1980 as a result of
stricter criteria being proposed and enacted by ordinance in
September 2004, therefore making it more difficult for
homeowners to convert seasonal dwellings for year-round use.
Background
Clinton Harbor has played a major role in the historical
development of the Town. The harbor was once a seaport for
lumber, shipbuilding and fishing. Three shipyards were active
along the Indian River until the late 1800’s. The Connecticut
State Historic Commission has identified sixteen sites of
historic or architectural importance in the harbor area.
Today, the harbor supports a large recreational boating
industry. There are nine private marinas and the Town Dock
facility in Clinton Harbor and along the Hammonasset and Indian
Rivers provide slip moorings for about 1,450 boats. On-shore
summer and winter boat storage and boat repair is also provided
by many of the marinas. The Town operates a marina and public
dock for launching boats.
The marinas provide access to Long Island Sound for both Town
residents and non-residents. Visual access to the Sound and the
marsh areas of the Hammonasset, Indian and Hammock Rivers is
also provided at points along the harbor-front, as well as from
the water. This view is a major attraction for many Clinton
residents.

Access to Clinton Harbor from Long Island Sound is provided by a
Federal Navigation Channel that begins approximately at Wheeler
Rock and extends to Esposito Beach. This Federal Channel was
completed in 1951 and was last dredged in 1981. The authorized
size of the channel is 100 feet wide, 8 feet deep and about
1,500 feet long. From the end of the Federal Navigation
Channel as determined by the Army Corps of Engineers through the
remainder of the inner harbor and up the Hammonasset River, is a
narrow and very shallow natural channel. Water depth in this
channel is approximately four feet deep at low tide. In
addition, this channel is approximately 60 feet wide. Many
boats berthed at the marinas on the Hammonasset River must wait
until high tide to enter or leave the river.
To improve existing boating conditions and provide for future
expansion, proposals have been made to widen and extend the
existing Federal Navigation Channel. However, no action has
been taken on previous proposals to expand or extend the
Channel. Disposal of dredged material is one of the biggest
obstacles to any dredging program because of the high cost
involved. In the past, spoil material from maintenance dredging
of the Federal Channel has been disposed of in open water
disposal sites in Long Island Sound. If the channel were
widened and deepened, it would provide for safer passage of the
boats that presently use the harbor. It would also make it
possible for larger boats to safely enter the harbor and create
an opportunity for new or expanded marinas to handle additional
boats.
Within the past few years, it has become apparent that the
bulkheads located at the launch ramp, the Town Marina, and at
the intersection of Commerce and Grove Streets are in need of
repair or rebuilding to prevent the continued collapse of the
bulkheads into the harbor.
General Issues of Concern
One of the most significant issues with respect to the
protection of coastal resources surrounds the elimination of any
groundwater pollution caused by overly dense development that
occurred, primarily, decades ago. Like neighboring towns
located on Long Island Sound, Clinton has numerous shorefront
areas - beach communities – where development density exists at
significantly higher levels than what would be permitted under
today’s zoning and health code regulations. In the most of the
buildable land in areas adjacent to coastal resources is
developed, the most significant risk comes from redevelopment –
knock downs within residential areas. Where seasonal cottages
are eliminated, it is common for the new homes to become
year-round in nature – “winterized”. Because of issues,
including sewer minimization, such conversions cannot occur
until an on-site waste disposal system is either maintained or
replaced in order to bring it up to current health codes.
Conversion to year-round use is prohibited if the lot size and
site conditions will not provide adequate on-site waste
disposal. On September 11, 2004, the Board of Selectmen enacted
an ordinance, “Winterization of Seasonal Use Structures”, to
assist in the Water Pollution Control Commission’s effort to
decrease groundwater contamination from septic systems. This
ordinance requires a homeowner to upgrade their subsurface
sewage disposal systems to current standards before converting a
seasonal use structure for year-round use. In addition, the
ordinance gives specific time frames for the completion of the
work needed for winterization.
Several areas in Clinton have been identified as having
groundwater contamination and wastewater disposal problems,
identified as Needs Area 1 and Needs Area 2 in Figure 10:
Wastewater Facilities Plan. As a result, the Town of
Clinton is currently under order from the Connecticut DEP to
abate the identified water pollution sources. The Water
Pollution Control Commission is presently studying the problem
areas, possible problem areas and alternative solutions to
minimize the need for sewers. Several areas in the coastal area
have been identified that may need related issues addressed at
some time in the future if water quality problems should
continue. The Commission is also enforcing the requirements set
forth in the “Septage Disposal Ordinance”.
The significant issue of sewer minimization, or eliminating
existing and potential groundwater pollution and the
despoliation of coastal resources including tidal wetlands, is
currently of high priority in the Town of Clinton. Policies in
both the 2000 Plan of Conservation and Development and this
Municipal Coastal Plan are directed at minimizing or eliminating
the potential for this type of pollution.
Coastal Resources
The Town of Clinton is endowed with significant coastal
resources along its entire shoreline. Although the waterfront
has been colonized and utilized by humans for well over three
hundred years, the Town enjoys resources of high quality.
Indeed, all thirteen of the identified coastal resource
categories are represented and extend from the Hammonasset River
on the western border to Groveway Beach on the eastern border.
Like most Connecticut shoreline communities, those resources are
under increasing pressure as more and more people discover and
enjoy the public amenities that exist on the waterfront.
The Connecticut Coastal Management Act (§22a-90 through 22a-113j
CGS) defines and sets forth policies for coastal resources
management in the State of Connecticut.
The following Section of the Municipal Coastal Plan is
designed to identify and define Clinton’s coastal resources and
to present policies that guide local, state and federal land use
decisions. Further, concerns, issues and parcels specific to
Clinton are discussed so as to clearly delineate opportunities
to further preserve, protect and enhance the coastal resources
for all the competing users of the resources. This document
provides the basis for the balancing of uses and needs of
coastal resources that is prescribed by the Connecticut Coastal
Management Act.
1.
Beaches and Dunes
a.
Definition: Beaches and dunes are beach systems,
including barrier beach spits and tombolos, barrier beaches,
land contact beaches and related dunes and sand flats (CGS
§22a-93(7)(C)). In general, beaches are dynamic areas abutting
coastal waters that are characterized by sand, gravel or
cobbles. Often, in the winter the beach profile is steeper and
narrower than in the summer.
b.
Policies: To
preserve the dynamic form and integrity of natural beach
systems in order to provide critical wildlife habitats, a
reservoir for sand supply, a buffer for coastal flooding and
erosion, and valuable recreational opportunities; to
insure that coastal
uses are compatible with the capabilities of the system and do
not unreasonable interfere with natural processes of erosion and
sedimentation; and to
encourage the restoration and enhancement of disturbed or
modified beach systems (CGS §22a-92(b)(1)(K)).
To require as a
condition in permitting new coastal structures, including but
not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, that access to,
or along, the public beach below mean high water must not be
unreasonable impaired by such structures (CGS §22a-92(b)(1)(K)).
To disapprove extension
of sewer and water services into developed and undeveloped
beaches, barrier beaches and tidal wetlands except that, when
necessary to abate existing sources of pollution, sewers that
will accommodate existing uses with limited excess capacity may
be used (excerpt from CGS §22a-93(15)(H)).
c.
Adverse Impacts: Degrading
tidal wetlands, beaches and
dunes, rocky shorefronts, and bluffs and escarpments
through significant alteration of their natural characteristics
or functions (CGS §22a-93(15)(H)).
Degrading water quality
through the significant introduction into either coastal waters
or groundwater supplies of suspended solids, nutrients, toxics,
heavy metals or pathogens, or through the significant alteration
of temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen or salinity (CGS
§22a-93(15)(A)).
Degrading natural erosion
patterns through significant alteration of littoral
transport of sediments in terms of deposition or source
reduction (CGS §22a-93(15)(C)).
Increasing the hazard of
coastal flooding through significant alteration of
shoreline configurations of bathymetry, particularly within high
velocity flood zones (CGS §22a-93(15)(E)).
Degrading visual quality
through significant alteration of the natural features of vistas
and view points (CGS §22a-93(15)(F)).
Degrading or destroying
essential wildlife, finfish or shellfish habitat through
significant alteration of the composition, migration patterns,
distribution, breeding or other population characteristics of
the natural species or significant alteration of the natural
components (CGS §22a-93(15)(G)).
d.
Significant Issues and Parcels: Like all shoreline
communities in Connecticut, Clinton’s beaches are one of its
primary coastal resource assets. Along with the numerous
private association beaches, Clinton has two public beaches, the
Clinton Beach and Esposito Beach.
Clinton Town Beach, the Town’s primary public beach, is located
on the eastern flank of the harbor at the terminus of Waterside
Lane and Waterside Lane Extension. The developed area of the
beach is 1.3 acres and has 550 feet of water frontage. The
beach is maintained by the Public Works Department, which has
recently added an additional children’s play area, funded in
part by the fundraising efforts of the Town Beach Playground
Committee, and a DEP-funded viewing pavilion south of the beach
overlooking the Harbor and tidal marsh. Parking is available
for about 75 cars. During the summer months access to the beach
is by permit. Residents may obtain a seasonal pass for a
nominal cost, and non-residents may obtain a daily permit for
only a small charge. At low tide swimming is not possible
because mud flats extend almost to the Navigation Channel.
Esposito Beach, a very small area located between marinas at the
foot of Maplewood Drive, provides only limited opportunities for
swimming with the large number of boats using the area.
However, it does provide a convenient open space within a
heavily developed marine commercial area.
The Town also owns land on the western end of Cedar Island.
Although not developed as a beach area, it is used by the
residents of Cedar Island and by others who have access to the
island by boat.
The most significant issue facing Clinton’s beaches likely
involves continued protection and enhancement of these
recreational assets. Clinton Town Beach is located at the end
of a northward-oriented spit of upland that separates Clinton
Harbor from Hammock River tidal wetlands complex in an area
devoid of significant development other than the beach
facilities themselves. The beach has always been a popular
summer spot for many townspeople. The Town has successfully
enhanced this recreational resource and has included an
educational component as well.
Due to its smaller size and location within Clinton’s marina
area, Esposito Beach has not been a significant point of
interest for most people outside the immediate neighborhood in
which it exists. As a result, the Town has not focused on it as
a significant public resource. Future efforts to enhance this
small public resource, including making efforts to improve water
quality deficiencies, should be encouraged in the future.
Private beaches owned and maintained by beach associations exist
in the areas of Harbor View, Grove Beach, Blake Avenue and
Indian Drive. In the Clinton Beach area, 10-foot right-of-ways
between lots (about ever 100 feet) on the south side of Shore
Road provide beach access for owners of lots across from them on
the north side of Shore Road.
As the Town continues to grow, it is expected that use of the
beach facilities, both public and private, will necessitate
further effort to preserve, protect and enhance them.
2.
Bluffs and Escarpments:
a.
Definitions: Bluffs and escarpments are naturally
eroding shorelands marked by dynamic escarpments or sea cliffs
which have slope angles that constitute an intricate and dynamic
balance between erosion, substrate, drainage and degree of plant
cover (CGS §22a-93(7)(A)).
Bluffs and escarpments are a significant sediment source for
other features such as beaches and dunes. They provide valuable
wildlife habitat and support unique plant communities and
species. They reduce the impact of coastal flooding by
opportunities and scenic vistas if such uses can be designed to
protect the resource from disturbance.
b.
Policies: To
manage bluffs and escarpments so as to preserve their
slope and toe; to discourage
uses which do not permit continued natural rates of erosion; and
to disapprove uses that
accelerate slope erosion and alter essential patterns and supply
of sediments to the littoral transport system (CGS
§22a-92(b)(2)(A)).
c.
Adverse Impacts: Degrading
tidal wetlands, beaches and
dunes, rock shorefronts, and bluffs and escarpments
through significant alteration of their natural characteristics
or functions (CGS §22a-93(15)(H)).
Degrading natural erosion
patterns through the significant alteration of littoral
transport of sediments in terms of deposition or source
reduction (CGS §22a-93(15)(C)).
Increasing the hazard of
coastal flooding through significant alteration of
shoreline configurations or bathymetry, particularly within high
velocity flood zones.
Degrading visual quality
through significant alteration of the natural features of vistas
and view points (CGS §22a-93(15)(F)).
Degrading or destroying
essential wildlife, finfish or shellfish habitat through
significant alteration of the composition, migration patterns,
distribution, breeding or other population characteristics of
the natural species or significant alteration of the natural
components (CGS §22a-93(15)(G)).
d.
Significant Issues and Parcels: From the
perspective of coastal systems, natural bluffs and escarpments
serve several important purposes including acting as a sediment
source for beach systems while at the same time serving as a
buffer to the erosive effects of coastal storms. The slopes
also act as critical wildlife habitat as well. When viewed in
terms of development, however, those natural functions can run
counter to the need to minimize or eliminate erosion of
these bluffs in order to preserve the homes that are often built
atop such bluffs and escarpments. It is the balance of these
natural and human needs that we seek in our land use decisions.
Further, when such bluff and escarpments are protected or
armored or otherwise manipulated through development, they are
defined as “modified” bluffs and escarpments.
In
Clinton, the Hammock and Kelsey Point area of the shoreline is
identified as “modified” bluffs and escarpments, this is because
of the fact that the majority of the shorefront has been
stabilized over the years through the construction of seawalls.
Elevations of the bluffs and escarpments range from
approximately 15 to 25 feet above sea level and are a result of
remnant glacial deposits, likely recessional moraines. As such,
the slopes are composed of undifferentiated sand, gravel and
larger material and are particularly prone to the erosive forces
of Long Island Sound. Although the structures have stabilized
the slopes and homes on top of the slopes (development needs),
the bluffs and escarpments no longer provide source material to
adjacent beaches (coastal system needs). As a result of the
diminishment of natural source materials to the coastal system
here and elsewhere, Connecticut beaches, in general, are
receding, or at least, not growing. This is especially true in
the areas of headlands.
In that “bluff-front” (waterfront) properties located in the
Hammock and Kelsey Point areas of Clinton have waterside
property lines located at the Mean High Water line (usually at
the base of the bluffs and escarpments), and setbacks
from property lines, including the Mean High Water line, do not
usually impact development at the top of the slope, or as close
as safe construction practices allow. In an effort to further
protect bluffs and escarpments, the Town should encourage
preservation by establishing a setback from the break in
slope. Adopting this type of preservation tool would
accomplish several goals including protecting the fragile top of
the slope as well as buffer the vegetated slope, a wildlife
habitat, from more intensive human activities.
There are few properties located on Hammock and Kelsey Points
which have not been armored using either seawalls or rip
rap. Areas that have not been stabilized using such structural
means are located along the eastern and western most flanks of
the promontory where the increased elevations drop back down to
lower topographic areas. In those elevation transition areas,
the Town should make every effort to discourage further armoring
of the bluffs and escarpments as they transition to the lower
beach resource areas. At the very lease, vertical “hard”
structures such as seawalls should be discouraged in favor of
“softer” irregular features including rip rap, where necessary
to protect an existing structure that may be prone to damage –
the structure instead should be set back a sufficient distance
from the slope.
3.
Coastal Hazard Areas:
a.
Definition: Coastal hazard areas are defined as
those areas inundated during coastal storm events or subject to
erosion induced by such events, including flood hazard areas as
defined and determined by the National Flood Insurance Act and
all erosion hazard areas as determined by the Commissioner (CGS
§22a-93(7)(H)). Generally, coastal flood hazard areas include
all areas designated as within A-zones and V-zones by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). A-zones are those
areas subject to still-water flooding during the so called
“100-year” flood events while V-zones are those areas subject,
in addition, to direct action by waves three feet or more in
height.
b.
Policies: To
manage coastal hazard areas so as to insure that
development proceeds in such a manner that hazards to life and
property are minimized and to promote nonstructural solutions to
flood and erosion problems except in those instances where
structural alternatives prove unavoidable and necessary to
protect existing inhabited structures, infrastructural
facilities or water-dependent uses (CGS §22a-92(b)(2)(F)). An
“existing inhabited structure” is a building, which was
constructed and inhabited, prior to authorization of the CCMA on
January 1, 1980 and is still in residential use.
To maintain the natural
relationship between eroding and depositional coastal landforms;
to minimize the adverse impacts of erosion and sedimentation on
coastal land uses through the promotion of nonstructural
mitigation measures. Structural solutions are permissible when
necessary and unavoidable for the protection of infrastructural
facilities, water-dependent uses, or existing inhabited
structures, and where there is no feasible, less environmentally
damaging alternative and where all reasonable mitigation
measures and techniques have been provided to minimize adverse
environmental impacts (CGS §22a-92(b)(2)(J)). To
maintain, enhance, or
|