Approved Minutes
Herring River Restoration Committee (HRRC)
Cape Cod National Seashore Headquarters
Wellfleet, MA
November 4, 2010
9:30 am-4:00 pm
Members Present: Tim Smith, Eric Derleth, Charleen Greenhalgh, Hunt Durey, Steve Block, Steve Spear, Hillary Greenberg (arrived late)
Members Absent: Gary Joseph
Others Present: Margo Fenn, Tara Nye, Shelley Hall, Don Palladino. John Portnoy, Pat Weslowski, Bill Burke, Craig Wood, David McGowan
Administration/Coordination:
Communications/Coordination with the Friends of Herring River: Don Palladino reported on the activities of the Friends. The booth at the Wellfleet Oyster Fest generated considerable interest and many new people signed up to get the Friends’ newsletter. The Friends have signed an agreement with Rachel Smith to develop an educational video about the river.
Wellfleet Harbor Conference: HRRC is scheduled for a 30-minute presentation at the Harbor Conference on November 6, 2010. Tim Smith and Steve Spear agreed to present an update on the Herring River Restoration Project at the Conference.
Approval of Draft Minutes: The Committee voted to approve the draft meeting minutes for October 7, 2010.
Schedule Next Meetings: The Committee agreed that future meetings would start at 9:30 am and conclude in mid-afternoon. Monthly HRRC meetings are scheduled for: December 2, 2010
January 6, 2011
February 10, 2011
Informational Updates:
Woods Hole Group (WHG) Hydrodynamic/Sediment Modeling: There was a conference call with Kirk Bosma of WHG on October 15, 2010 to review and confirm the scope of work for the next hydrodynamic modeling runs. It is anticipated that the remaining work under this contract will be completed by mid-January 2011. HRCC is waiting for a proposal from WHG to perform the next sediment modeling steps. The EIS/EIR schedule depends on timely delivery of the modeling results.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Watershed Plan Funding for Project Coordination: Hunt Durey reported that NRCS has approximately $110,000 in additional funding for some of the needed technical studies (e.g. sediment modeling, Phase 1B Cultural Resources analysis) for the Herring River project. These funds will be administered by the Cape Cod Conservation District and need to be spent by July of 2011. A bidding process may be required to select a contractor. Tim Smith agreed to contact Jeremy Bell of the Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration to review the proposed scope of work for sediment modeling.
The Committee discussed what other sources of funds might be available to address other needed technical work. Eric Derleth suggested that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Climate Change funds might be available. Steve Block said that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA)/Gulf of Maine partnership grant request for letters of interest is on the street. These funds require a 1:1 non-federal match. Shelley Hall noted that the National Park Service might also have some small amounts to contribute (beyond the Environmental Quality Division funding of the EIS/EIR development). She noted that all NPS units, including Cape Cod National Seashore, current budget request (under preparation) must cover fiscal years 2013-2015. Tim Smith also suggested that the Massachusetts Bays Program might be a funding
source for development of the Adaptive Management Plan. These state funds might be used as a match for the Gulf of Maine program funds.
The Committee agreed to develop a cross-referenced list of upcoming work tasks and existing and potential funding sources, starting with the list that was developed for NRCS funding. Tara Nye offered to work with Tim Smith to draft a matrix of work tasks and funding sources for review by the full HRRC at its December meeting.
Legal Update: Robin Lepore in the Department of Interior (DOI) Solicitors office is preparing a brief concerning some specific legal questions related to the project. HRRC has not received anything new on this since the August meeting. Shelley Hall agreed to check with NPS officials about the status of the legal research.
Phase 4 EIS/EIR Contract/EQD Coordination and EIS/EIR Schedule: The Committee reviewed a revised draft project schedule (dated 10/25/10) for Phase 4 of the EIS/EIR. The revised schedule was prepared by the Louis Berger Group (LBG) and Mark Husbands of EQD to address issues raised at the October HRRC meeting. The new schedule builds in more review time for draft sections of the EIS/EIR and pushes back the public hearings on the DEIS/EIR until late October of 2011. Members discussed the proposed schedule and how the time frame might be shortened. Shelley Hall is consulting with CCNS Superintendent George Price and other regional NPS staff to determine if conducting a “Value Analysis/Choosing By Advantages” (an internal NPS planning process) workshop is appropriate within this timeframe. If not, this could
shorten the overall schedule to some degree. Other members suggested moving up the public hearings to late August or early September. The feasibility of doing this will depend, in part, on how much time both the HRRC and the Cooperating Agencies will need to review draft documents. Tim Smith noted that the HRRC process would be for members to submit their comments on draft materials to him and Margo Fenn. Fenn and Smith will consolidate HRRC comments for review by EQD and LBG. Tim Smith stressed that once the EIS/EIR schedule is finalized, HRRC members should set aside time in their work schedules for review of draft documents. Hunt Durey also noted that the HRRC meeting schedule should be coordinated with the EIS/EIR review schedule.
Don Palladino expressed concern about the delays in the EIS/EIR schedule, noting that the public is anxious to see project implemented. He strongly urged shortening the process wherever possible.
HRRC members suggested that the LBG team review the MEPA Certificate (including comments of the Cape Cod Commission) to ensure that MEPA and CCC procedural and substantive requirements are accounted for in the EIS outline and schedule. If necessary, LBG will set up a meeting with MEPA and/or CCC staff to review this.
The Committee discussed the status of potential Cooperating Agencies. NRCS and NPS executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2008. The NPS sent invitation letters to other federal agencies in June 2010. USFWS agreed by letter to become Cooperating Agency and has suggested developing a MOU similar to NRCS. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) have also agreed by letter to participate as CAs as part of the TWG. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has not yet responded. It is not clear at this point whether additional documentation or MOUs are necessary to formalize CA status with NOAA, EPA, and ACOE.
All HRRC members agreed to check with their respective agencies to clarify how they wish to be involved in review of both internal and public draft EIS/EIR documents. The proposed internal and public draft EIS/R review process will be presented to the TWG at its January 2011 meeting.
Section 106 Phase 1A Cultural Resources Study: Bill Burke reported that the Public Archaeology Lab (PAL) would be conducting additional fieldwork on November 10, 2010. The Phase 1A Report is due to be completed by the end of 2010.
Presentation and Discussion: At this point in the meeting, representatives of the Chequessett Yacht and Country Club (CYCC) arrived to participate in a discussion of the golf course renovation. Participants included: Jack Whalen, Martin McDonald, Chuck Edmondson, Jim Garpow, Gary Carter and Barbara Boone.
Howard Maurer/LBG Cost Estimate for CYCC Golf Course Renovation: Craig Wood of LBG and Howard Maurer, golf course architect presented the latest plans for renovation of the Chequessett Yacht and Country Club (CYCC) golf course. These plans are largely unchanged from the plans that the Club and the HRRC reviewed in September but include a new sheet that color-codes the amount of filling proposed for the lower fairways. Craig Wood noted that extra filling would be required in some of the low-lying areas to compensate for compaction of the underlying peat. All fill materials are proposed to come from the upland area of the CYCC property. After excavation, this area will be used for a new golf practice area. The total amount of proposed clearing would be approximately 11 acres; 4.6 acres of that clearing is for the new
practice area.
The Committee discussed the plans, asking how much salt marsh restoration is proposed and whether further ground disturbance would be needed in order to make the water flow in and out of the restoration areas. Craig Wood noted that there would be a small area of Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVW) on Hole #9 that would be altered by the reconstruction. Howard Maurer estimated that it would take a full season (starting in the fall) to complete the reconstruction, noting that the fill will need time to settle before final grading and planting can take place. Eric Derleth noted that the plan is based on the assumption that the maximum tide height in Mill Creek could reach 5.5 feet (NGVD 29). If tides were controlled to a lower elevation in Mill Creek, less filling might be needed.
Howard Maurer presented the cost estimate for the project, reviewing each line item. He noted that the golf industry is depressed now and that the estimated prices may be conservative (i.e. high) given how competitive the bidding process would likely be in the next few years. The cost estimates do not assume prevailing wage requirements as it was assumed for this exercise that CYCC would be the private contracting entity to oversee the work. The most substantial cost items are the earthwork and the new irrigation system.
The Committee discussed what other “soft costs” might be involved, i.e. preparation of final design plans and bid packages, legal and permitting costs, and construction oversight. Howard Maurer suggested that a part-time Clerk of the Works would likely be needed. Howard Maurer and Craig Wood agreed to prepare an estimate of what these other project costs might be and provide that information to HRRC members in the next two weeks.
The next step in the process is to work out a cost sharing agreement between the Restoration Project and CYCC. The Committee discussed with CYCC representatives how to approach that task. Margo Fenn suggested that HRRC and CYCC each lay out their views on what is a reasonable way to allocate costs and then have a smaller group meeting to discuss that. Third party mediation might be needed if the two entities disagree but the groups should explore their views on cost allocation approaches first.
HRRC and CYCC agreed to each discuss the cost estimate and outline their proposals for cost sharing during the next few weeks, and hold a small group meeting to discuss cost sharing, probably in early December.
Shelley Hall cautioned that HRRC can’t guarantee how much federal agencies would be willing or legally allowed to pay for golf course reconstruction. That will be determined by the funding agencies. However, HRRC can outline what it considers to be a reasonable funding allocation based on its knowledge of eligible uses of funds generally associated with public funding sources for tidal restoration projects.
TNC/CYCC/NPS Land Plan and Appraisal: David McGowan reported that the Nature Conservancy (TNC) has been working with Department of Interior (DOI) officials to develop a scope of work for a land appraisal for 13 acres of land that CYCC may wish to sell to the National Park Service. The scope of work is complete, and once CYCC has reviewed and approved it, TNC will contract with a qualified land planning consultant and appraiser to do the work. The appraisal will take three months to complete.
Eric Derleth asked whether the parcel size is fixed-i.e. Could the amount of land that CYCC offers for sale be modified without having to do a new appraisal? David McGowan noted that he would like to keep the proposal flexible, but any dramatic change in the acreage would probably necessitate another appraisal. Barbara Boone stressed that if the land planner finds that the proposed 13-acre subdivision is not a workable plan, it is critical that the planner consult with CYCC officials about other options. David McGowan noted that the land planner and appraiser need to take into consideration the long term plans for the entire property, including the renovation of the golf course, development of the new practice area, and the frontage lots along Chequessett Neck Road. He also suggested exploring the idea of putting a Conservation
Restriction on the entire CYCC property as another option for raising funds.
Barbara Boone agreed to review the scope of work for the land plan and appraisal with CYCC officials and get back to David McGowan with any comments or questions that they have. Once CYCC has agreed to the scope of work, TNC will seek bids from qualified consultants to do the work.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Update: Tim Smith, Hunt Durey, Steve Spear, Craig Wood and Chris Feeney of LBG met with FEMA officials in Boston on October 12, 2010 to explore issues related to flood zone mapping and the Restoration Project. FEMA is in the process of remapping the flood zones for all of Barnstable County. This effort will include inspection of flood control structures to determine if their height, structural condition and operations & management plans are adequate to provide flood protection. The HRRC has a number of questions about how this effort might affect plans for reconstructing the Chequessett Neck Road dike, and also what it means for the feasibility of diking Mill Creek.
FEMA will be contacting each town in Barnstable County this fall to obtain information on existing flood control structures. Preliminary modeling of new flood zones will be developed during the spring and summer of 2011, with official release of the revised draft flood maps in the fall. If the Chequessett Neck Road dike is found to be inadequate and the town does not upgrade the structure, the areas upstream of the dike in the floodplain would be remapped as FEMA flood zones (“A zones”), triggering the requirement for property owners with federally backed mortgages to get flood insurance.
If the Herring River Restoration Project reconstructs the Chequessett Neck Road dike to provide larger tide gate openings, the dike may have to be upgraded to meet Army Corps of Engineers standards. This would likely mean an increase in dike height to provide the necessary “freeboard” above projected flood elevations, making the reconstruction project more costly. It is not clear what standards a Mill Creek dike would have to meet; it will depend how Chequessett Neck Road dike is classified.
HRRC members commented that the FEMA remapping process should be included in the “No Action” Alternative discussion in the EIS/EIR so that the towns and private property owners will be aware of the potential change in flood zone boundaries independent of the restoration project. One option for the Town of Wellfleet would be to request a conditional letter of map revision before the FEMA maps are completed. This process could provide restoration planners with information about projected new FEMA map zones ahead of FEMA’s remapping schedule but would require the Town to conduct hydrodynamic modeling (consistent with FEMA standards) to document flood zone boundaries. The Committee discussed this idea but still had questions about intervening in the FEMA mapping process.
Craig Wood agreed to contact Chris Feeney of LBG about writing up a summary of the October 12, 2010 FEMA meeting. Tim Smith offered to send HRRC members a document that explains how FEMA regulations may affect a similar tidal restoration project in Maine. HRRC will need to consult the Army Corps of Engineers to determine design requirements for reconstruction of the Chequessett Neck Road dike and potential new construction of a dike at Mill Creek under the different Action Alternatives.
Other Discussion Items:
EIS/EIR Adaptive Management (AM) Plan: Tim Smith presented the group with revised draft Objectives for the Adaptive Management Plan. One of the key steps in the AM process is making sure that the Project Objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, results-oriented and time-fixed. Feedback from the 9/23/10 AM workshop and the 10/13/10 Technical Working Group (TWG) meeting suggested that the Fundamental Project Objective (an overall goal for the ecosystem) should probably address both environmental and social concerns. Tim Smith and Margo Fenn rewrote the Fundamental Objective to incorporate both these concerns. The Committee discussed the revised language and simplified it a bit to read: “Restore natural functioning estuarine habitats while minimizing impacts to public infrastructure and adjacent property owners.”
Tim Smith led the group in an exercise to review and modify the wording of the 11/2/10 draft Means Objectives. The Committee agreed that the Objectives should not include mitigation items and therefore deleted several of the Draft Means Objectives.
Tim Smith agreed to revise the Project Objectives to reflect the group consensus and circulate a new package to HRRC members. Once approved by HRRC, these Objectives will be incorporated into a revised AM “white paper” and sent to the Technical Working Group (TWG) for review at its January 12, 2011 meeting.
The Committee discussed next steps in the AM process. Tim Smith noted that the HRRC must identify the driving factors, management actions and state variables for each Means Objective (similar to the influence charts that were developed in the Neckles et al Structured Decision Making paper). Eric Derleth asked if the United States Geological Survey (USGS) might be able to help develop the needed Adaptive Management models. Shelley Hall noted that the NPS might have some funds to help with this.
Louis Berger Group (LBG) High Toss Road Conceptual Designs:
The Committee reviewed the 10/29/10 Report and Conceptual Drawings prepared by LBG for High Toss Road. The report considers three options for the High Toss Road causeway:
Replacing the existing 60-inch culvert with a 30-foot culvert while leaving High Toss Road at its current elevation. This would require stabilization of the road surface and its embankments to prevent erosion during routine over-topping.
Replacing the existing 60-inch culvert with a 30-foot culvert while elevating a 1,000-foot long road segment to 6 feet to prevent over-topping. This would require stabilization and widening of the footprint, causing wetland impacts of approximately 13,000 square feet.
Removing the existing 60-inch culvert and the road/causeway to restore an open creek channel, thus eliminating the access across Herring River to Duck Harbor Road. This would increase the wetland area by approximately 12,000 square feet.
The Committee discussed the options, noting that removing High Toss Road would be preferable for restoration of tidal flow. The Town of Wellfleet and the Cape Cod National Seashore officials need to be consulted about this.
Steve Spear offered to work with engineers at NRCS to estimate what each of the High Toss Road options might cost. He will prepare cost estimates and circulate them to HRRC members for review. Once the Committee has a better idea of costs, HRRC will set up meetings with CCNS and Town of Wellfleet officials to discuss the options.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm.
Documents referenced in the meeting:
-Minutes of the October 7, 2010 HRRC Meeting
-CACO Herring River EIS Schedule v3, October 4, 2010
-CYCC Preliminary Budget, Howard Maurer Design Group, October 29, 2010
-CYCC Grading Plan, LBG, November 2, 2010
-High Toss Road Alternatives, LBG Technical Memo, October 29, 2010
-High Toss Road Conceptual Drawings
| 