Approved MeetingMinutes
Herring River Restoration Committee (HRRC)
Cape Cod National Seashore Headquarters
Wellfleet, MA
May 9, 2013
9:30 am-5:00 pm
Members Present: Tim Smith, Hunt Durey, Eric Derleth, Steve Spear, Steve Block, Charleen Greenhalgh, Hillary Greenberg
Others Present: Margo Fenn, Don Palladino, John Portnoy, Mark Husbands (by phone)
Administration/Coordination: Communications/Coordination with Friends of Herring River (FHR):
Grant Updates: Don Palladino gave the group an update on the status of several FHR grants. The Restore America’s Estuaries (RAE/NOAA) Project Coordination Grant through the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) and the Division of Ecological Restoration (DER) was amended to add $10,000 (from DER) to hire an outside consultant to research and evaluate organizational models for the implementation of the Restoration Project. FHR has contracted with Catherine Barner of the Golden Gate Conservancy to do this work. The Massachusetts Bay Program (MBP) grant for hydrodynamic modeling work has gotten underway. There has been no word yet about the grant awards from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or the Massachusetts Environmental Trust (MET). Don Palladino noted that FHR would prepare press release(s) if these
grant applications are successful. FHR is also seeking a grant from the Cape Cod Five Cents Savings Bank.
Milestones for Grant Deliverables: Don Palladino noted that deliverables for CLF/DER Project Coordination grant are submitted with the monthly invoices. He reviewed the schedule and deadlines for deliverables under the MBP grant. Margo Fenn noted that she would be preparing an interim (6 month) report on the CLF/DER Project Coordination grant.
Other Activities: Don Palladino reviewed upcoming FHR activities and events, including the spring herring count, Wellfleet’s 250th anniversary celebration, Harbor Fest, the 4th of July parade and the Annual Meeting on August 20, 2013.
Approval of Minutes: The Committee voted to approve the Minutes of the April 11, 2013 meeting with corrections.
Meeting Schedule: The Committee agreed on the following schedule for upcoming meetings:
May 23, 2013: MOU Working Group meeting
June 19, 2013: Regular HRRC meeting
June 20, 2013: MOU Working Group meeting
July 11, 2013: Regular HRRC meeting
July 17, 2013: Technical Working Group (TWG) meeting (tentative)
Informational Updates:
Woods Hole Group Final Modeling Report: Steve Spear reported that he had contacted modeling experts at the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) about the possibility of providing peer review of the WHG final report but still not had a response.
FEMA Update: Charleen Greenhalgh reported that FEMA had released the Preliminary Draft Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). FEMA has posted digital copies of the FIRM and FIS report materials on its website: www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata.
FEMA is working with the NFIP State Coordinator to schedule a community coordination meeting with the Towns of Wellfleet and Truro. The meeting will be at least 30 days after the issue of the letter, which is dated May 5, 2013.
The Committee had a lengthy discussion about the relationship between FEMA’s maps and the modeled flood elevations prepared by the Woods Hole Group for the Herring River Restoration Project. The Committee had previously considered designing the new Chequessett Neck Road (CNR) dike/bridge to meet FEMA flood control standards. However, the FEMA maps do not treat the CNR dike as a flood control structure. The dike is factored in as an embankment, and is overtopped by the FEMA modeled 100-yr design storm (despite that it has never been known to go under during any actual storm). Constructing a FEMA-certified structure at CNR would have limited value in the FEMA context because the current FEMA modeling also predicts overwash at Duck Harbor and several other locations during their modeled 100-yr event, meaning the Herring River
flood plain would remain exposed to the FEMA mapped 100-yr flood plain whether or not the CNR dike was certified. Tim Smith noted, however, that the new bridge could be designed so that it could be modified in the future to provide flood protection, if necessary.
Steve Block suggested that the HRRC prepare a short paper to explain this issue. Low-lying property owners might be confused about the differences in the modeling projections. The Committee agreed that the Restoration Project should only be responsible for managing water flowing through the new CNR dike/bridge. It is not feasible for the Project to address the levels of storm-related flooding modeled by FEMA resulting from the potential breaching of coastal dunes in other locations within the estuary. The Committee agreed that the text of the FEIS/EIR would need to be modified to clarify this matter. Steve Spear suggested that the HRRC ask the Woods Hole Group to model a higher tidal forcing event at the CNR dike.
Charleen Greenhalgh and Hillary Greenberg agreed to notify HRRC members about the date and time of the FEMA meeting with the towns.
Update on MOU III Development: Margo Fenn updated the Committee on the MOU Working Group activities. At its April meeting, the Working Group reviewed a first draft of MOU III and made a number of modifications. This revised draft was sent out to HRRC members. The Working Group also agreed in that meeting to hire Catherine Barner to help the group explore management models for implementation of the Restoration Project. Eric Derleth asked about the Working Group’s recommendation to leave High Toss Road in place. He noted that there are both ecological and practical reasons for removing the causeway, as it will be overtopped and eroded by tidal flow once the Restoration process gets underway. HRRC members noted that High Toss Road would not be very useful as an emergency access route to Griffin Island,
because the road will be flooded at high tide. Charleen Greenhalgh noted, however, that the Wellfleet Board of Selectmen (and maybe Wellfleet town meeting) would need to officially state their preference on this matter.
The Committee briefly discussed the process for approval of the Draft and Final MOU III. John Portnoy noted that the previous MOUs had been approved by a vote of the Boards of Selectmen and the signature of the Superintendent of the Seashore.
Legal Updates: Hunt Durey reported that he had consulted with the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) about some of the public trust doctrine issues. CLF will explore this further with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office.
Fuss and O’Neill (F&O) Analysis for Mill Creek: Members of the HRRC met with F&O and WHG officials on May 8, 2013 to review alternatives for the Mill Creek dike and tide gates. F&O will evaluate two different designs/locations for a dike at the mouth of Mill Creek. Tim Smith noted that they have recommended three eight-foot wide four-sided box culverts with combination slide/flap gates to control tidal flow in and out of Mill Creek. Eric Derleth added that F&O will also evaluate the proper elevation for the culvert inverts. Next steps are to put together an evaluation matrix and review it with the full HRRC. The Committee will meet with Chequessett Yacht and Country Club (CYCC) officials to review this, as well. Margo Fenn agreed to consult with Nils Wiberg about scheduling time(s) to review the
evaluation matrix, perhaps at the regular June or July HRRC meetings.
CNR Bridge Design: Hunt Durey reminded the group that the MA Department of Transportation (MA DOT) will need to review the design plans for the new CNR bridge. The Committee agreed to provide DOT officials with the Fuss & O’Neill Technical Memorandum on the CNR bridge.
DEIS/EIR Response to Comments: Mark Husbands joined the meeting by phone. Husbands has been working with the Louis Berger Group (LBG) to prepare a “Statements of Concern” document, summarizing the comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/EIR). Margo Fenn noted that the list of comments has been put into a spreadsheet format so that it can be sorted into five categories for potential responses. The HRRC needs to review the different groupings of comments and prepare its responses for the Final EIS/EIR.
Tim Smith presented the revised vegetation change maps that he had prepared to address the questions raised by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program staff in their comments of the DEIS/EIR. At the April HRRC meeting, the Committee had reviewed a sample analysis of the mid-Herring River basin. The Committee had agreed that mean high water spring tides would drive vegetation changes. In extremely simplified terms, salinity levels of less than 6 ppt would likely produce tidal fresh marsh, salinity levels of 6 to 18 ppt would create brackish conditions, and salinities above 18 ppt would be salt marsh. Tim Smith used these assumptions to prepare a similar analysis for the whole estuary. Smith provided some of this information to Eve Schluter of NHESP for review. The Committee members suggested that HRRC representatives schedule a
conference call/webinar with NHESP staff to review this analysis and discuss next steps in developing a Habitat Management Plan. Hunt Durey noted that the MA Department of Environmental Protection had requested similar information, including estimated acreage of high and low salt marsh. Smith noted that the available data are not sufficient to distinguish areas of high versus low salt marsh vegetation to any meaningful degree.
Tim Smith agreed to contact Eve Schluter of NHESP to discuss the habitat change maps and analysis.
The Committee had a discussion of project phasing. Steve Block and Hunt Durey suggested that it might make sense to begin the restoration process in those basins where there are few, if any affected private properties. They noted that Project resources (both staff time and grant funds) are limited and suggested the Committee focus its efforts in the near-term on completing the FEIS/EIR, the Record of Decision and the Adaptive Management Plan for the Project. This might allow the Project to get underway sooner. The long-term goal would be unchanged, i.e. restoration of the entire estuary, but it would not all be done at once.
Other members of the group pointed out that this approach could reduce the chances of restoration in all basins and complicate the permitting process. Don Palladino asked if there are ways to supplement staff/consultant resources in order to keep moving forward with the whole Project. While the Project will likely proceed in phases, with incremental openings of the tide gates over time, it is not necessary to formally designate those phases. The group agreed that the HRRC should continue to work with affected landowners to identify and address any structural impacts. The Committee reviewed the list of properties with potential structural impacts and discussed potential flood prevention measures for some of those properties. The Committee agreed that it would be helpful to use a few of these sites as case studies for working
through permitting issues with DEP.
Final Draft Public Outreach and Landowner Engagement (O&E) Plan: The Committee reviewed the Final Draft of the O&E Plan and voted to approve it with one addition. Hunt Durey suggested that the Committee assign specific responsibilities for landowner outreach and continue to track contacts with those landowners. Tim Smith suggested that the monthly update of Project loose ends be converted to a spreadsheet format in order to make it easier to track activities over time. Margo Fenn agreed to provide the approved Public Outreach and Landowner Engagement Plan to CLF, DER and RAE/NOAA. Fenn will also revise the format of the Project loose ends list.
Adaptive Management: Tim Smith reported that United States Geological Survey (USGS) had submitted a preliminary proposal to NPS for help in developing the Adaptive Management Plan. NPS is also working on a number of funded resource monitoring projects and other proposals.
Other Business: Hunt Durey reported that MA DER has funded an economic study of water/wetland impacts on property values. This work should be completed by the end of June 2013. Steve Spear reminded the Committee that the group must determine the high water threshold for the CNR bridge design.
Documents Referred to in the Meeting:
-Minutes of the April 11, 2013 Meeting
-Public Outreach and Landowner Engagement Plan, Parts A, B and C
Respectfully Submitted,
Hillary Greenberg-Lemos
| 