Approved Meeting Minutes
Herring River Restoration Committee
CCNS Headquarters
18 March 2010
Members present: Hunt Durey, Tim Smith, Gary Joseph, Eric Derleth, Charleen Greenhalgh, Steve Spear, Steve Block, Hillary Greenberg-Lemos
Others Present: Margo Fenn, Don Palladino, Tara Nye
Administration/ Coordination
Friends of Herring River Update
Don Palladino reported that a local Boy Scout Troop would be helping Jeff Hughes, Wellfleet Herring Warden, with brush removal along the River in March. Herring counting will be going on again this season and a training session for volunteers will be held on March 31, 2010 at the Wellfleet Library. Don Palladino requested a meeting of the communications working group.
Approval of Meeting Minutes
The Committee voted to approve the Minutes from February 17, 2010 (Steve Block abstained).
Schedule Next Meetings:
May 13, 2010
June 17, 2010
Information Updates
Coordination with MA Natural Heritage
Tim Smith and other CCNS staff met with Eve Schluter to discuss the presence of rare, threatened, and endangered species within the boundaries of CCNS and protocols for sharing information. The Seashore’s and MA Natural Heritage species occurrence records need to be reconciled. More species may be added to the restoration project’s list of species to be concerned with. The water willow stem borer will likely be a high priority. Schluter recommended the Committee provide NHESP with an updated map showing the project area and areas where direct disturbance/alteration is likely to occur. It appears that the restoration project could be permitted under MESA through an exemption process (this allows greater flexibility, through development of a habitat management plan). However, there may still be wetland-permitting issues, as NHESP
must consult with DEP regarding any adverse impacts to rare species habitat.
Cultural Resources Study
An RFP for a Phase 1A Study has been issued by the Coastal America Foundation (CAF). Three firms responded to the RFP. Proposals will be reviewed and a contractor selected by HRRC’s next meeting. A rough time frame for completion of work will be three months.
Administration of NRCS Watershed Plan Funding
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has finished meeting with town officials and now is looking for input from state agencies (DMF and DER) on projects that have been submitted. Within a month a final list will be drafted. The list will then be vetted through the Cape Cod Coastal Resources Committee for project prioritization. The Cape Cod Conservation District (CCCD) has agreed to oversee projects and grant funding.
The four tasks the HRRC will promote are Cultural Resources assessment, feasibility for a dike and flood mitigation at Mill Creek, an extension to the contract for project coordination and additional hydrodynamic and sediment modeling. All money must be expended by December 2011. Contracts could be established by June 2010, pending the timeline for setting up the administrative structure at CCCD.
Discussion ensued on HRRC’s list of priority projects and costs associated with each project. Modeling is a very high priority for HRRC, both for sediment transport and evaluation of the Project Alternatives.
The Committee prepared a revised list of priorities in the afternoon session:
Project coordination $90,000.00
Hydro and sediment modeling $100,000.00
Mill Creek Feasibility $75,000.00
Cultural Resources Phase 1A $30,000.00
Cultural Resources Phase 1B $100,000.00
Grading plan for CYCC $ Amount TBD
Completion of LBG Phase 3 Contract
All of the documents contracted for to date have been received. The deliverables were the data sources review, summary of alternative analysis process, revision to chapter 1 of the EIS/EIR and production of flow diagrams for alternatives. The work submitted still needs revisions however committee members will revise the documents independently of LBG. The HRRC considered drafting future documents internally and making first revisions then sending it to a consultant for polishing. HRRC then discussed continuing on with LBG and the problems encountered thus far and the concept of hiring another consultant to assist the Committee through the NEPA/MEPA process. The Committee also considered the idea of additional project coordination staff to assist in preparation of NEPA/MEPA documents; however, this is a huge task and may not be the most
beneficial approach. There is also a possibility that NPS EQD could oversee consultant hiring and contracting. This will require further discussion.
February Meeting with Mark Forest
Margo Fenn and Tim Smith and Kathy Tevyaw (Assistant Superintendent of CCNS) met with Mark Forest on 18 February 2010. See separate meeting notes taken by Fenn. Following Forest’s request for a cost estimate for dike reconstruction, Smith contacted LBG for a fee proposal for preparing a more formal cost estimate for this work. LBG’s proposal came back over $29,000. The high cost was due to the need for further design work to clarify cost elements. Since it is unclear now what the final dike/bridge design will be, the Committee did not think it was a good use of public funds at this time. Margo Fenn agreed to draft a letter to Mark Forest, updating him on the Committee’s actions to respond to his suggestions, and providing updated cost information from the Conceptual Restoration Plan.
Discussion Items
Mill Creek Impact Analysis
The Committee discussed the need for a comprehensive engineering study of Mill Creek- to include dike design/feasibility, golf course filling/redesign/cost estimate, potential mitigation for other low-lying properties, and needed hydro modeling and groundwater analysis. Tim Smith drafted a scope for such a study and reviewed it with LBG and WHG. LBG and WHG had submitted a draft proposal for two elements of the study: Modeling the No Action Alternative and engineering feasibility of diking the creek. This proposal still needs review by the Committee. Margo Fenn agreed to forward the proposed scope of work and budget to HRRC members for review and comment by April 2, 2010. The Committee will finalize the scope at its April 8, 2010 meeting.
Hydrodynamic Modeling: Next Steps
Woods Hole Group will be asked to review all existing data to assist the committee in designing the sediment transport analysis. HRRC needs to better understand what we can learn from the varying levels of analysis and what will they cost. The Committee reviewed a document outlining potential next steps for hydrodynamic modeling prepared by Tim Smith with input from Steve Spear. The group agreed that the Modeling Committee should meet to go over the details of this proposal and consult with WHG. Tim Smith agreed to send the proposed next steps to Kirk Bosma at WHG and set up a Modeling Committee meeting prior to the April HRRC meeting.
Project Alternatives
Tim Smith presented a new version of the draft Project Alternatives, noting that it appears that having no tide control at Chequessett Neck is not realistic without extensive flood control elsewhere. It would expose the entire estuary to 100-year storm flooding, and protecting properties within Mill Creek would require a dike even bigger than the existing one at Chequessett Neck. The Committee debated whether to change the Alternatives to eliminate Alternative B (Fully Open at CN). The Committee agreed for the time being to retain Alternative B and add another Alternative that provides tide control at multiple locations. Tim Smith will revise the Alternatives narrative and flow diagrams and circulate a revised version for members to review.
Low Lying Properties
Mark Adams is away so no new work has been done on the low-lying properties report. Eric Derleth inquired when would be the appropriate time to talk to the towns about low-lying roads and to how to manage them. The issues to be covered include: Periodic flooding, abandonment, elevation and/or relocation. Frequency, depth, and duration of road flooding should be a product of the next modeling runs to better inform HRRC members prior to discussion with the Wellfleet Selectmen and Town Department of Public Works.
Legal Analysis
Tim Smith drafted a briefing document to be sent to the DOI Regional Solicitor after approval by George Price, Superintendent CCNS. Discussion ensued on the document. The document clearly outlines a number of outstanding legal concerns from the Committee. This is the beginning of the legal consultation process; other legal advisors (for town and state agencies) will be consulted in the future, as needed.
Cost-Sharing Concepts
The Committee reviewed a revised document on cost-sharing approaches. There is still a bit of concern because the actual construction costs are unknown. The current draft would require detailed plans to be prepared for improvements to the golf course both with and without the restoration project, in order to calculate the differences in costs. Members questioned whether public monies could be spent to design golf course reconstruction elements unrelated to the restoration project. The Committee is still waiting for Howard Mauer to complete the revised routing plan-that plan should be available next week. Further discussion of this issue was postponed until after the Committee has a chance to review the final routing plan. However, the group agreed to add a grading/design plan to the list of funding priorities for NRCS funds.
Technical Working Group (TWG)
The Committee reviewed potential agenda items for the scheduled April TWG meeting, including:
Initial impact analysis for the draft Alternatives
Definition of Adaptive Management
Approach for wetland and floodplain delineations
Update on low-lying properties
Feasibility of Mill Creek control structure
Most of these items will require further work before they are ready for discussion with the TWG. For this reason, it may make sense to cancel the April TWG meeting and provide a written update for the TWG instead. Margo Fenn agreed to consult with Tim Smith about this over the next two weeks and either prepare a cancellation notice/progress report or an agenda for the meeting.
Future Work Plan-Loose Ends: The Committee reviewed the list of Loose Ends (dated March 12, 2010) and agreed that substantial progress is being made. Steve Block stressed that we need to outline a schedule for public review of the Alternatives, noting that the lead-time for posting in the Federal Register is about four months.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Hillary Greenberg-Lemos
| 