1. Watershed-based Plan To Restore the Hackensack Meadowlands:
The Meadowlands Comprehensive
Restoration Implementation Plan
Terry Doss and Karen Appell
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Bill Shadel and Pete Weppler
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, N.Y. District

2. Introduction Purpose: develop solutions to ecosystem degradation
Mill Creek Wetland Enhancement Site
Purpose: develop solutions to ecosystem degradation
in the Meadowlands at a watershed scale

3. Key Project Participants
The Public
Non-Federal Sponsor
New Jersey Meadowlands Commission
Lead Federal Agency
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Cooperating Agencies
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
N.J. Department of Environmental Protection
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

4. Study Authority Resolution of 15 April 1999:
“Resolved by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the United States House of Representatives, That, the Secretary of the Army is requested to review the reports of the Chief of Engineers on the New York and New Jersey Channels…with a view to determining the feasibility of environmental restoration and protection relating to water resources and sediment quality within the New York and New Jersey Port District, including but not limited to creation, enhancement, and restoration of aquatic, wetland, and adjacent upland habitats.”

5. Project Status STEPS TARGET DATE Overall Hudson-Raritan Estuary (HRE)
Reconnaissance January 2000
Project Management Plan April 2003
Meadowlands Environmental
Site Information Compilation (MESIC) May 2004
Public scoping meeting February 2005
Meadowlands Comprehensive
Restoration Implementation Plan (MCRIP) Underway

6. Study Process EIS MCRIP Problem Identification
Request for Federal Assistance
Study Problem and Report Preparation
Project Management Plan
Interim Project Cost Sharing
Agreements (PCSAs)
Feasibility Study
EIS
MCRIP
Separate Construction Projects
Preconstruction Engineering and Design
Federal Authority and Funding
Project Cooperation Agreement
Implementation
Operation and Maintenance

7. Example of Tidal Restriction in the Meadowlands
Project Need
Habitat Loss/Alteration
Tidal Restrictions
Channelization
Fill
Channel Siltation
Dredging
Sea Level Rise
Marsh Accretion
Marsh Subsidence
Habitat Fragmentation
Infrastructure/Shoreline Hardening
Example of Tidal Restriction in the Meadowlands

8. Harrier Meadow Wetland Enhancement Site
Project Need (cont’d)
Sediment and Water Pollution
Toxic Contaminants in Water/Sediment
Non-Point Source Pollution/Discharge
Landfill Leachate
Sewage Treatment Plant Outflows
/Combined Sewer Outfalls (STP/CSO)
Floatable Debris
Invasive, Exotic, Nuisance Species
Invasive Vegetation
Monoculture Plant Associations
Predator/Prey Imbalance
Feral Animal Species
Disease Vector Species
Non-Sensitive Public Use
Personal Water Craft
Harrier Meadow Wetland Enhancement Site

9. Project Goals and Objectives
Goal 1: Identify Historical Ecological Functions of the Meadowlands
Goal 2: Identify Impairments to Ecological Functions of the Meadowlands
Goal 3: Identify Physical Impairments to the Meadowlands
Goal 4: Identify Quantifiable Restoration Performance Metrics
Water Quality
Wetland Acreage
Sediment Quality
Vegetative Diversity
Wildlife Species Abundance and Diversity
Public Access

10. Project Goals and Objectives (con’t.)
Goal 5: Identify Conceptual Restoration Opportunities
Goal 6: Conduct Site Characterization and Selection
Goal 7: Evaluate Restoration Alternatives and Functions Restored
Goal 8: Assess Cost/Benefit
Goal 9: Select Restoration Opportunities
Goal 10: Monitor and Measure Performance
Mill Creek Wetland Enhancement Site

11. Potential
Restoration
Sites

12. Restoration Plan Components
Restore Wetland Hydrology
Remove Tidal Restrictions
Restore Creek Morphology
Remove Fill
Dredge Contaminated Sediments
On-site Contamination Attenuation
Invasive Vegetative Species Control
Plant Native Species
Nuisance Wildlife Control
Control Landfill Leachate
Control Non-Point Source Runoff
Control STP Discharge Quality
Manage Motorized Watercraft

13. Evaluating Wetlands and Restoration Alternatives
Habitat Evaluation Techniques
HGM – Hydrogeomorphic Assessment (tidal fringe wetlands)
IVA – Indicator Value Assessment (all wetland types)
Best Professional Judgement
Compare existing conditions at
Reference Restoration Site and
Potential Restoration Sites
Selection based on:
Meadowlands-wide goals
Initial Critical Restoration Sites
Anderson Creek Marsh
Lyndhurst Riverside Marsh
Meadowlark Marsh
Metro Media
Others?
Riverbend Wetlands Preserve

14. Benefits: Meadowlands-wide and Site Specific
Water Quality
Wetlands
Sediment Quality
Wildlife Habitat
Cultural Resources
Air Quality
Public Access
Kearny Marsh

15. Anderson Creek Marsh Fragmented Contamination Impaired Hydrology
Invasive Species
Non-Point Source Runoff

16. Anderson Creek Marsh - Historical

17. Potential Restoration Alternatives
Local sponsor support
Enhance and improve
hydrology
Plant with native species
Control any potential
remobilization of
buried contaminants

18. Conceptual Design for Anderson Creek Marsh

19. Thank You