Approved Meeting Minutes
Herring River Restoration Committee (HRRC)
Cape Cod National Seashore Headquarters
Wellfleet, MA
August 18, 2011
9:00 am-5:00 pm
Members Present: Tim Smith, Eric Derleth, Hunt Durey, Steve Spear, Steve Block, Hillary Greenberg and Charleen Greenhalgh
Others Present: Margo Fenn, Shelley Hall, Don Palladino, John Portnoy, Bill Burke, Jack Whalen
Administration/Coordination:
Communications/Coordination with Friends of Herring River: Don Palladino reported that approximately 70 people attended the Friends’ Annual Meeting on August 16, 2011. John Portnoy and Don Palladino provided a good presentation on the goals and status of the Restoration Project, which was videotaped for future use. Steve Spear, Tim Smith, Hillary Greenberg, Gary Joseph and Eric Derleth participated in a panel for questions after the presentation.
Don Palladino also reported that he had met with Mark Forest to discuss possible funding strategies for the project. Mark Forest expressed continuing interest in the project, and attended the Friends’ Annual Meeting.
Approval of Draft Minutes: The Committee voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the July 7, 2011 meeting.
Schedule Next Meetings: The HRRC will meet on September 15, 2011 and October 6, 2011. The Technical Working Group (TWG) will meet on October 12, 2011.
Informational Update: Bill Burke updated the Committee on the status of the Cultural Resources study. Tim Smith distributed copies of the Final Phase 1A Archaeological Background Research and Sensitivity Assessment Report prepared by the Public Archaeology Lab (PAL). Bill Burke indicated that the Report would be sent to the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) and to the Wampanoag Indian Tribes for review. The National Park Service (NPS) will invite MHC to participate in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on the Herring River Restoration Project. Bill Burke provided copies of some similar MOAs that NPS has used for other projects. If MHC agrees to use this process, it would require further investigation only where there will be soil disturbance. This would be a more efficient way to approach the Phase
1B site work, since the Preferred Alternative has not yet been selected and specific areas of disturbance, in some cases, will not be known until the project is underway.
The Committee discussed this approach, noting that if sensitive resources were to be discovered after the Preferred Alternative is selected, it might necessitate modifying that choice. However, it is consistent with the Adaptive Management approach for other resource impacts and could be a more cost-efficient way to address cultural resource impacts.
RAE/NOAA Grant Application: Hunt Durey and Steve Block reported that the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) had been awarded approximately $137,000 for engineering work needed for the Herring River Restoration Project. The proposed scope of work in the grant application had to be modified somewhat to reflect a smaller grant amount so the proposed engineering for upstream culverts was deleted. Hunt Durey suggested that HRRC might want to propose another change to the scope of work in order to use some of the funds for legal research and advice. Discussion of this issue was postponed until later in the meeting.
TNC/CYCC/NPS Land Plan and Appraisal: Representatives of the HRRC, the Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Chequessett Yacht and Country Club (CYCC) met with an appraiser (Jim Czupryna) and land planning consultant (Louis Berger Group) in July to begin the evaluation of several land plans for the CYCC property. Tim Smith noted that Louis Berger confirmed that the proposed remapping of priority habitat areas by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) has been delayed. This could create a problem for the appraisal, as it needs to be based on regulations in place at the time it is issued. The Committee briefly discussed how archaeological sensitivity might affect the appraised value. Since there are no known resources on the site, the appraisal should just factor in the costs of doing
test pits in those areas that might be disturbed. HRRC representatives will meet again with TNC, CYCC and the consultants in the fall to get an update on the project.
Legal Update: There was no new information on this topic.
Wetlands Jurisdiction (DEP Consultation): There was no new information on this topic. DEP staff is still discussing the matter with their legal counsel and Commissioner. Hunt Durey noted that the option of moving the CYCC golf course to the upland might not be acceptable to CYCC. If this is the case, DEP should be made aware of their position. The Committee discussed this and agreed that CYCC’s input on the proposed Alternatives in the DEIS/EIR would be very important to determining whether the upland option is feasible.
Discussion:
Low-Lying Property Analysis/Outreach Strategy: Shelley Hall provided a brief update on the status of two properties with the Seashore that would be affected by the Restoration Project. The NPS has been working with the landowners to explore mitigation options.
At its July 7, 2011 meeting, the HRRC agreed that a letter should be sent to landowners explaining the project and the EIS/EIR process, and inviting them to work with the Committee representatives regarding any questions or issues specific to their properties. This letter would go out before the draft EIS/EIR is released for public comment. Tim Smith prepared a draft letter to landowners for the Committee to review. The Committee discussed how to best approach property owners. The group agreed that it is important to make sure that all contacts with individual property owners are documented, and that the information provided be consistent.
Hunt Durey pointed out that HRRC needs to know what kinds of impacts will be eligible for mitigation before contacting property owners. Many of the legal questions posed to the Department of Interior (DOI) Solicitors Office need to be resolved before the Committee can advise affected landowners about their options. The Committee discussed the idea of seeking outside legal counsel. If this were to be done, any outside legal opinion would still have to be reconciled with those of the DOI and town and state attorneys. Steve Spear noted that it would be helpful for an outside attorney to have access to the research materials that DOI has compiled.
The group agreed that it would be helpful to set up follow-up appointments for interested property owners with a subcommittee of the HRRC after a letter is sent out. Such a subcommittee could include representatives of the towns and the Seashore as well as the Project Coordinator.
Shelley Hall offered to contact Robin Lepore of DOI to find out when the Committee might expect a written answer to its legal questions.
Hunt Durey and Steve Block agreed to check with CLF to see if the scope of work for the RAE/NOAA grant could be modified to provide funds for outside legal advice.
HRRC members agreed to review the sample letters prepared by Tim Smith and Charleen Greenhalgh and further refine a draft letter to property owners. The letter needs further review by NPS officials and will not be sent out until the Committee is able to resolve the key legal questions.
The Committee asked Margo Fenn to develop a tracking system for property owner contacts.
Project Implementation and Funding: Since the Value Analysis Workshop in early June, the HRRC has been mulling over the estimated project costs and the feasibility of raising the necessary funds. One idea that has been suggested is trying to phase the project, so that restoration could begin even if funding for the whole project is not available all at once. The Committee discussed the pros and cons of phasing the project, and how the phases might break down. Tim Smith noted that a first phase would have to include, at a minimum, the reconstruction of the Chequessett Neck Road dike and tide gates, and the construction of the Mill Creek dike (to protect the properties in Mill Creek). As the CNR tide gates
are incrementally opened and higher tides allowed into the estuary, a second phase could include the roadwork needed to raise Old County, Bound Brook and Pole Dike Roads and other needed mitigation upstream.
Hunt Durey stressed that regulators will want assurance that the proposed project meets the restoration goals. Don Palladino commented that this approach would not change the restoration goals of the project; it is simply a strategy to raise funds. He suggested that the partner agencies map out a funding strategy; it is likely that HRRC will need to seek funds for multiple sources. Members noted that it would be ideal for the NPS to initiate a discussion of this with senior officials in the partner agencies.
Project Coordination: Hunt Durey noted that he had been working with Cape Cod Conservation District officials to extend the APCC Project Coordination contract through September 2012. This will require approximately $25,000 of existing NRCS funds to be reallocated for this purpose.
Conference Call with LBG/EQD to review the Draft Impact Matrix: The Louis Berger Group (LBG) staff joined the meeting by conference phone. The Committee reviewed its comments on the Draft Impact Matrix that LBG developed. For details of this discussion, see the Herring River Restoration Committee Minutes for August 17, 2011.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 pm.
Documents Referenced in the meeting:
-Minutes of the July 7, 2011 HRRC Meeting
-Phase 1A Archaeological Background Research and Sensitivity Assessment Final Report, Public Archaeology Lab (PAL), June 2011
Regards,
Hillary Greenberg-Lemos
| 