HomeMy Public PortalAboutSelect Board Meeting Packet - 09.17.2021Weekly Count of New COVID-19 Infections: March 8, 2020 – September 11, 2021
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
3/15-3/213/22-3/283/29-4/44/5-4/114/12-4/184/19-4/254/26-5/25/3-5/95/10-5/165/17-5/235/24-5/305/31-6/66/7-6/136/14-6/206/21-6/276/28-7/47/5-7/117/12-7/187/19-7/257/26-8/18/2-8/88/9-8/158/16-8/228/23-8/298/30-9/59/6-9/129/13-9/199/20-9/269/27-10/310/4-10/1010/11-10/1710/18-10/2410/25-10/3111/1-11/711/8-11/1411/15-11/2111/22-11/2811/29-12/512/6-12/1212/13-12/1912/20-12/2612/27-1/21/3-1/91/10-1/161/17-1/231/24-1/301/31-2/62/7-2/132/14-2/202/21-2/272/28-3/63/7-3/133/14-3/203/21-3/273/28-4/34/4-4/104/11-4/174/18-4/244/25-5/15/2-5/85/9-5/155/16-5/225/23-5/295/30-6/56/6-6/126/13-6/196/20-6/266/27-7/37/4-7/107/11-7/177/18-7/247/25-7/318/1-8/78/8-8/148/15-8/218/22-8/288/29-9/49/5-9/115 3 1 2 0 2 0 0 0
1 0 2 0 0 0 0
1 2
5
2 0 0 0 0
2 0 2 1 2 3
0 1
4
1 3
6 6
13
22
11
7
20
2425
53
24
20
8 8
5
1113
21
32
21
25
12
6 7
3 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
2 3 5
9
14
7 9
12
15
7
0
3 3
7
53
14
2 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0
3
0 0
1
5
0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
New Brewster COVID-19 Cases
Resident (536 Total)Long Term Care (111 Total staff & patients)
Ages of Brewster Residents with Active COVID-19 Infections
0-9 years (1)
7%
10-19 years (0)
0%
20-29 years (2)
13%
30-39 years (4)
27%
40-49 years (0)
0%
50-59 years (1)
7%
60-69 years
(5)…
70-79 years (2)
13%
80+ years (0)
0%0-9 years (1)
10-19 years
(0)
20-29 years
(2)
30-39 years
(4)
40-49 years
(0)
50-59 years
(1)
60-69 years
(5)
70-79 years
(2)
80+ years (0)
August 29 – September 4
% COVID Infections in Age Groups % COVID Infections in Age Groups
0-9 years (0)
0%
10-19 years (0)
0%
20-29 years (1)
14%
30-39 years (2)
29%
40-49 years (1)
14%
50-59 years (2)
29%
60-69 years (1)
14%
70-79 years (0)
0%
80+ years (0)
0%0-9 years (0)
10-19 years (0)
20-29 years (1)
30-39 years (2)
40-49 years (1)
50-59 years (2)
60-69 years (1)
70-79 years (0)
80+ years (0)
September 5 – September 11
BREWSTER RESIDENT VACCINATION TOTALS DATA AS OF 9/09/2021
Town Age Group Population
Proportion of
town
population
Individuals
with at least
one dose
Individuals
with at least
one dose per
capita
Proportion of
town
individuals
with at least
one dose
Fully
vaccinated
individuals
Fully
vaccinated
individuals
per capita
Proportion
of town fully
vaccinated
individuals
Partially
vaccinated
individuals
Partially
vaccinated
individuals
per capita
Proportion
of town
partially
vaccinated
individuals
Brewster 12-15 Years 369 4%244 66%3%213 58%3%31 8%5%
Brewster 16-19 Years 367 4%271 74%4%240 65%3%31 8%5%
Brewster 20-29 Years 681 7%587 86%8%530 78%8%57 8%9%
Brewster 30-49 Years 1,444 15%1,301 90%17%1,154 80%16%147 10%23%
Brewster 50-64 Years 2,323 23%1,925 83%25%1,798 77%26%127 5%20%
Brewster 65-74 Years 2,349 24%1,916 82%25%1,781 76%25%135 6%21%
Brewster 75+ Years 1,592 16%1,401 88%18%1,280 80%18%121 8%19%
Brewster Total 9,926 100%7,645 77%100%6,996 70%100%649 7%100%
* = total < 30 individuals
9/16/21 Barnstable County COVID Update
Good Afternoon All. Here are our updated charts and information, as of yesterday evening.
______________________
Vaira Harik, M.S.
Deputy Director
Barnstable County Dept. of Human Services
Cell: 520-271-6314
Email: vharik@barnstablecounty.org
Wellfleet - Regional Low Lying Road Assessment and Feasibility
Short title: “Low lying Roads”
Project Narrative Please provide your full project narrative. Use the rating system as a guide for what information should be included in the narrative to ensure the maximum score possible for your project. Please keep in mind that reviewers will likely not have historic knowledge of your MVP process, this project, or supporting efforts – please provide a full, yet succinct explanation for each question. This section should be completed, saved as a PDF, and uploaded to the online form in the appropriate section. Total size of all documents attached to the online form cannot exceed 25 MB. Please keep responses to a reasonable length.
1. Project Description, Rationale, and Climate Data (13 points)
• Up to 8 points for description & rationale, including:
i. What climate change impacts/vulnerabilities this project will address.
ii. What the project’s goals and objectives are.
1. If the project is one component/phase of a larger project, please succinctly describe previously completed or future work and the vision for the overall project in addition to the proposed component/phase.
iii. Why the project was chosen.
1. How the project will positively impact the resiliency of the site and community.
2. If applicable, please include quantifiable information about the historic or expected future damages that are likely to occur if the project is not completed (e.g., number of people/homes/structures at risk, number of people depending on the infrastructure being improved, extent of past flooding, expected cost if infrastructure fails, etc.).
iv. How the project reflects municipal priorities established in the community’s MVP-approved report or subsequent climate resilience report that built upon the MVP process.
The strength of Cape Cod is also its weakness: A diverse and fragile coastal ecosystem that must always
be taken into consideration when determining human need. Like other South Shore communities, the
Cape faces problems with roadways that travel through sensitive and ever-changing environments.
Innovative ideas that address a road near a wetland can serve as a valuable case study to numerous
communities in the Commonwealth and beyond.
The Town of Wellfleet is submitting an MVP Action grant request on behalf of itself and five other Cape
Cod communities: Bourne, Barnstable, Brewster, Eastham and Truro. The participants want to identify
and assess the vulnerability of low-lying roads and associated infrastructure affected by climate change.
Specifically, the towns want a feasibility analysis that offers potential solutions for roads, road segments,
bridges, and culverts at risk of flooding from sea level rise and/or storm surge. The proposed project will
combine Town staff knowledge of existing problem areas, Cape Cod Commission regional knowledge
and outreach skills, and the expertise of engineers and coastal flood modelers. This will be a collaborative
effort to determine the extent of current vulnerabilities and to stave off future risks.
The participating towns have all received MVP certification. This has allowed them to initiate community
discussions about rising seas levels and increased storminess. The towns have taken critical first steps in
making residents and businesses aware of encroaching climate-related threats to critical assets,
particularly in the floodplain.
One of the key elements of this project is to engage the public on climate change impact on vulnerable
low lying roads and how that will affect their lives in the coming years. Introducing citizenry to such
concepts as abandonment, nature-based options, and more traditional approaches, will improve
understanding and acceptance of alternate approaches.
Other goals include addressing climate vulnerability of critical roads by improving coastal resilience and
emergency access and ensuring public safety for climate vulnerable populations. As the initial feasibility
and assessment phase, this project will set the stage for Towns to move forward with design and
permitting of the identified priority roads and road segments.
During the MVP planning process, participants identified multiple low-lying roads and culverts where
flooding is a recurring problem. They determined that flood-prone roads, among other things, slow down
emergency response within the towns and obstruct access to the regional hospital. Of great concern is an
older demographic that is especially vulnerable to hazardous storm events or lost emergency access.
According to the US Census, 31% of the Cape Cod population is 65 years or older. In the US, roughly
29% of all seniors live alone (Merck Manual, American Psychological Association). The elderly,
especially those living on their own, are often constricted both physically and mentally during a crisis. For
example, they often lack transportation and would be unable to relocate to safety in a flooding event.
Low lying roads on the Cape are often the only direct route to hospitals and public safety centers. Failure
to address this potential crisis will place thousands of people in harm’s way, including loss of life. With
proper funding, this project will improve the towns’ resiliency in a storm surge and make it stronger for
future climate change impacts. Creating flood-proof roadways in these populated areas is not only
possible, it is morally imperative. This project is the initial phase of a larger project to address low lying
roads on Cape Cod. Presumably, roads not selected in this project will be addressed in another grant
cycle (or with a different funder). Quantifiable information about the historic or expected future damages
that are likely to occur if the project is not completed are detailed in Section 7 (Need for Financial
Assistance).
The six Cape Towns will partner with the Cape Cod Commission (Commission) and hire an engineering
consulting firm (Consultant) to meet the goals of the project. The scope of work will include GIS spatial
analysis and the latest available climate projections (e.g., Massachusetts Coastal Flood Risk Model,
Resilient MA SLR projections) to inform the vulnerability assessment. One of the main objectives will be
to develop a risk-based approach to help communities prioritize low-lying roads and road segments by
imminent threat level and relative importance for transportation needs.
The process for the project is as follows:
• Commission and Consultant will conduct an initial screening to identify roads in each town
vulnerable to flooding, storm surge, and sea level rise.
• The towns will hold a public forum/workshop to present up to five of the most critical local sites
as identified by Commission.
• Public forum/workshop attendees will participate in narrowing down the choices to two sites for
final analysis.
• Consultant will conduct a feasibility analysis to determine potential solutions for flooding
scenarios anticipated over a 50-year planning horizon.
• Consultant will offer both nature-based solutions (NBS) and traditional in determining the best
option for each site.
• There will be a follow-up public session to present recommended solutions. This will be a
comprehensive presentation that explains the pros and cons of each alternative. As with the first
forum, this will be an opportunity for community feedback in decision making.
• Each town’s Core MVP Team will then meet to discuss preferred options.
Please see the budget narrative explaining tasks, responsible parties, and timeline in more detail.
• Up to 4 points for the degree to which the most up-to-date climate science and data (including data found on resilientma.org and/or local-level studies) will be utilized, including specific reference to the climate data utilized. (Note: If you completed the optional RMAT Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool in Attachment E, you may use those recommendations to inform this answer.) v. For Project Type 1: Planning, Assessments, Capacity Building, and Regulatory Updates– What climate data will be used to inform the process or report and how will they be utilized? If it is a regulatory project, how will the regulations use climate data to ensure they will provide reasonable and effective guidance into the future? vi. For Project Type 2: Design and Permitting – What climate data and standards will be used to inform the design process and how will they be utilized? vii. For Project Type 3: Construction and On-the-Ground Implementation – What is the design life of the project? What climate data were incorporated into the design and how were climate data utilized to inform the process? If a different type of implementation project (e.g., land acquisition) describe how climate data informed the project.
Cape communities have low-lying roads that currently flood or are expected to flood under future sea
level rise and worsening storm conditions. Some of these problem sites are due to undersized culverts.
Another concern is road segments at very low elevations. Some road segments pass through or are
dangerously close to salt marshes, beaches, or other wetland resource areas. This project will explore
possible solutions including road abandonment, dune creation, culvert openings, bridges and/or road
elevation. In some instances, road relocation with restoration may be a viable option.
The project will use the latest available probabilistic relative sea level rise (RSLR) projections and state-
of-the-practice methodologies for roadway vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning, such as the
new assessment standards and design guidelines developed by the Resilient Massachusetts Action Team
(RMAT) for roadways facing coastal climate change impacts – the standard tool for coastal climate
change vulnerability assessment in the Commonwealth. These projections use an updated tidal epoch
(midpoint 2008) that accounts for the effects of ice sheet loss, ocean dynamics, and land-water storage
scenarios. In conjunction with recent Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (MACZM) sea level rise
guidance, the updated RSLR projections use a High Scenario (following K14 under RCP 8.5) and have a
99.5% probability of not being exceeded. This represents the new standard for coastal climate change
planning in the Commonwealth.
In addition to using the latest downscaled projections to assess nuisance flooding on Cape Cod’s low-
lying roadways, this project will utilize available modeling to assess low-lying roadways vulnerable to
storm surge. The hydrodynamic modeling utilized for this study simulates natural processes that affect
coastal water levels. These include tides, waves, winds, storm surge, sea level rise, and wave set-up, at a
fine enough resolution to identify site-specific locations that may require adaptation alternatives.
The model quantitatively incorporates climate change influences on sea level rise, tides, waves, storm
track, and storm intensity for various time horizons. The ability to perform discrete risk estimates at
various time horizons allows for better near- and long-term planning. The model evaluates a statistically
robust sample of storms, including hurricanes, tropical storms and nor’easters, based on the region’s
existing and evolving climatology. Using this storm set, the model then calculates resulting water
elevations to estimate the probability that different flood depths will be exceeded at each nodal point
within the model boundary. The resulting flood risk maps and probability curves can then be interpreted
to identify the projected annual probability that any node within the model will experience flooding, and
if so, up to what elevation. This probability-based approach benefits Cape Cod communities because it
enables them to make strategic and phased adaptation investments over time.
Finally, this project will leverage state-of-the-practice methodologies for roadway vulnerability
assessment and adaptation planning. Recent efforts by the Resilient MA Action Team (RMAT) and
MassDOT have produced new assessment standards and design guidelines for roadways facing coastal
climate change impacts. These recently formalized approaches will form the basis for Cape Cod’s low-
lying roadways assessment.
• 1 point for inclusion of MVP yearly progress report (Attachment D) or for indication that MVP Planning Grant process was completed within the past year. There is a place on the online form to upload Attachment D. If regional application please include for all MVP-designated municipalities.
Please see attached MVP yearly progress reports.
2. Timeline, Scope, and Budget (15 points)
• Up to 4 points for project scope. Please detail each task/step of the project here and include a summarized version in Attachment B. For each task, please identify if it is dependent on completion of another task.
Project Tasks:
0. Project Kick-off
Budget: $1,887 (Grant Request: $1,415, Match: $472)
1. Identify and Assess Potential Sites: Conduct an initial screening to identify roads, road segments
and infrastructure vulnerable to nuisance flooding, tides, waves, winds, storm surge, sea level rise
and wave setup. The towns will engage the Commission and Consultant to screen roads using
available modeling to assess vulnerability and risk, develop critical elevations, extract modeling
results, and perform risk assessment for 2030 and 2070. Consultant will train Commission staff
on flood risk models and develop critical elevations for each road segment, extract model data,
and assess roadway segment vulnerability. A framework for scoring roadways based on flood risk
and criticality will be developed and risk assessments for critical roadways will be completed.
The scoring will prioritize projects based on transportation criticality and vulnerability criteria.
These findings will be reviewed by the MVP Core Team in each town. The top three to five sites
will be selected for presentation to the public through a forum/workshop similar to the initial
MVP planning and certification process.
Timeline: October 2021 – March 2022
Budget: $122,840 (Grant Request: $66,660, Match: 56,180)
2. Public Outreach and Engagement: Conduct public meetings using various methods and platforms
to engage a wide variety of stakeholder interests, including a remote option (e.g., Zoom). In
addition to a public workshop/forum, there will be web-based resources (e.g., Cape Cod Coastal
Planner tool) to help illustrate the benefits and drawbacks from different management
approaches. The goal of this process is to introduce the public to the project and get feedback
based on local interests, community values, and concerns. Each town will prioritize at least three
top sites through the public engagement process. The MVP Core Team would then choose two
sites, based on factors such as community feedback, property ownership, site constraints, from
the selection to be part of this project. Timeline: March 2022 – June 2022
Budget: $57,821 (Grant Request: $47,367, Match: $10,454)
3. Reporting: Monthly progress reports summarizing project progress.
Timeline: Monthly October 2021 – June 2022
Budget: $2,672 (Grant Request: 2,004, Match: $668)
4. Roadway Feasibility and Alternative Solutions: Consultant will be contracted to conduct a
feasibility analysis, evaluate critical infrastructure, inventory wetland resources, model SLR
impacts, and identify potential adaptation strategies for a 50-year planning horizon. The two
chosen sites in each town will receive three conceptual level adaptation plans apiece, along with
associated tradeoffs (yielding a total of six concepts per town). Solutions will include nature-
based concepts whenever feasible but will ultimately be determined by existing conditions and
constraints of the individual sites. Each road is unique in its criticality, width, location, slope,
surrounding environment (e.g., salt marsh, dune, steep slope) and all of these will factor into
decision making. Lastly, solutions will be informed by Resilient MA Action Team’s (RMAT)
guidance and standards for climate change adaptation, vulnerability assessment considerations,
and resilient design.
Timeline: July 2022 – November 2022
Budget: $59,330 (Grant Request: $59,330)
5. Public Outreach and Engagement: Conduct a second public forum/workshop to present and
discuss proposed solutions. At this session, residents will explore benefits and drawbacks of each
alternative and share their preferences with the project team. The towns’ MVP core teams will
identify design solutions for each site based on community feedback. This task will enable the
towns to apply for funding to complete the design and move ahead with implementation. Note:
permitting, design, and implementation will be a future grant application.
Timeline: December 2022 – April 2023
Budget: $66,155 (Grant Request: 56,241, Match: $9,914)
6. Reporting: Monthly progress reports summarizing project progress and a final case study report
including a PowerPoint presentation, lessons learned, and project photographs.
Timeline: Monthly July 2022 – June 2023
Budget: $4,320 (Grant request: $3,240, Match: $1,080)
1. Up to 4 points for the project budget. Applicants will include budget numbers for each task and sub-task via Attachment B. There is a place to upload Attachment B as an Excel spreadsheet on the online form. The second tab on the spreadsheet is now optional but can be used to calculate budget numbers to the extent helpful, identify assumed rates for project team time and municipal in-kind match, or justify high grant funding requests for specific tasks by providing greater detail. The Applicant may also use another format to provide greater detail on these items (e.g., a quote from a contractor) if available. There is a spot to upload additional materials on the online form.
Budget Categories
Grant Request
CCC In-Kind
Match
CCC Cash
Match
(federal
funds) Total
Personnel 41,231 13,750 54,980
Fringe Benefits @
68.22% 28,127 9,380 - 37,508
Travel - - - -
Equipment - - - -
Supplies - - - -
Contractual 139,650 - 46,550 186,200
Construction - - - -
Other - - - -
Total Direct Charges $209,008 $23,130 $46,550 $278,688
Indirect Charges @
66.09% $27,249 $9,087 $0 $36,336
Total Project Budget $236,257 $32,217 $46,550 $315,024
PERSONNEL
Total Cost: $54,980 (Grant Request: $41,231, CCC Match: $13,750)
The Commission’s staff salaries are calculated based on the average hourly rate for each employee during
the lifecycle of the grant. The average rate includes a 2% cost of living adjustment for each fiscal year
(beginning on July 1st) and a 3% step increase for eligible employees on their anniversary date of
employment.
The Commission will match grant salaries with in-kind labor at the ratio of 75% salaries billed to the
grant and 25% salaries billed to in-kind match.
Direct Labor is used as the base for applying the indirect cost charge.
The following Commission staff is included in this grant proposal:
Natural Resources Manager will assess criticality of roads; organize public forums to present project,
climate resiliency and low lying roads; conduct outreach to engage citizens.
Chief Planner will assess criticality of roads; organize public forums to present project, climate resiliency
and low lying roads; conduct outreach to engage citizens.
Planners will assess criticality of roads; hold public forums to present project, climate resiliency and low
lying roads; conduct outreach to engage citizens.
Water Resources Analyst will assess criticality of roads; hold public forums to present project, climate
resiliency and low lying roads; conduct outreach to engage citizens.
GIS Director will conduct initial screening to identify roads vulnerable to flooding, storm surge and sea
level rise.
GIS Analyst will conduct initial screening to identify roads vulnerable to flooding, storm surge and sea
level rise.
Special Projects Coordinator will prepare outreach material and online engagement opportunities.
FRINGE BENEFITS
Total Cost: $37,508 (Grant Request: $28,127, CCC Match: $9,380)
Fringe benefits include: Holiday Pay, Paid Time Off, Health/Dental Insurance, Medicare and Retirement.
Fringe benefits are calculated at a rate of 68.22% applied to direct labor (per the most recent Barnstable
County FY19 audit).
CONTRACTUAL
Total Cost: $186,200 (Grant Request: $139,650, CCC Match: $46,550)
The Commission will comply with State law, County policies and Uniform Guidance requirements (2
C.F.R. 200) related to procurement and competitively award a contract to a qualified firm to complete
low-lying roads assessment and solutions as described in the scope of this project, as well as help with
public forums. A budget estimate of $184,200 is based on previous quotes from consultants.
The Commission will provide $46,550 cash match from federal grant funds. In April 2020, Cape Cod
Commission was awarded grant funding by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development
Administration (EDA) for the Cape Cod Resiliency Initiative project. Low-lying roads assessment on
regional scale is included in the scope of work of this grant and justifies the use of federal funds to match
this MVP grant proposal.
The Commission will also seek the assistance of a Portuguese translator for the outreach to
Environmental Justice populations on the Cape. Translation services are estimated at $2,000 based on
previous experience.
INDIRECT COST
Total Cost: $36,336 (Grant Request: $27,249, CCC Match: $9,087)
In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200 App. VII D1b, the Commission, a local government agency that
receives less than $35 million in direct Federal funding, is not required to obtain a NICRA. The
Commission’s audited FY19 indirect rate is 66.09% and is applied to direct labor only. This indirect cost
rate is equivalent to 13% if applied to the Commission’s Modified Total Direct Costs of $209,008.
2. Up to 4 points for a clear project timeline that can be completed within the specified contract period. For projects that require completion of Attachment C, please include major milestones, regulatory touchpoints and approvals, and information on how any project planning, design, and regulatory compliance efforts will be met during the grant period. Please ensure the timeline dates align with start and end dates for each task in Attachment B.
Project Timeline
Timeline Task Responsible Party
October 2021 – March 2022 1. ID road segments Towns & CCC & consultant
March – June 2022 2. Conduct public workshops Towns & CCC & consultant
Monthly Oct 2021 – June 2022 3. Monthly progress reports Towns & CCC
July –November 2022 4. Feasibility & alternative
solutions
Consultant
December 2022 – April 2023 5. Conduct public workshops Towns & CCC & consultant
July 2022 – June 2023 6. Monthly progress reports and
final case study
Towns & CCC
3. Up to 3 points for identification of regulatory project components (including satisfactory completion of Attachment C if a design, permitting, or construction project). Documented coordination with applicable regulatory agency/ies is encouraged. Projects with significant regulatory compliance barriers identified through assessment of Attachment C or construction projects that do not have all necessary permits and permissions in hand may be disqualified. There is a place on the online form to upload Attachment C.
N/A
3. Nature-Based Solutions and Environmental Co-Benefits (16 Points)
• Up to 10 points for the degree to which nature-based solutions (i.e., solutions that protect, restore, or manage ecological systems) are incorporated into the overall vision of this project and how the selected strategy/ies will help the community adapt to existing and projected impacts of climate change. More information about nature-based solutions can be found in the MVP toolkit. Consider the following questions in your response: a. For Project Type 1: Planning, Assessments, Capacity Building, and Regulatory Updates– How will this work “set the stage” for future implementation of nature-based solutions? b. For Project Type 2: Design and Permitting – Describe all design options (including nature-based options) that will be evaluated or considered in the design process.
c. For Project Type 3: Construction and On-the-Ground Implementation – What are the nature-based solutions being implemented? If the project is not nature-based, describe a clear assessment of design alternatives and discussion of why a nature-based solution was not chosen. (Note: Hard infrastructure projects in any phase may still receive a maximum of 5 points for a response to this question that demonstrates why this approach was deemed necessary over nature-based approaches and illustrates how environmental conditions will improve with grey infrastructure implementation.)
The Consultant will examine at least one NBS for each selected site. The findings, including the NBS
option, will be presented at the second public workshop. This is an opportunity to educate members of the
community about NBS and let them share in the selection of alternatives. This workshop will be mutually
beneficial in that the MVP Core Team will get local feedback, including personal concerns, that can be
incorporated into the planning process—and the community will be highly informed about the benefits
and tradeoffs associated with various solutions.
A discussion about cost, construction, maintenance, and consideration of co-benefits will lead to greater
buy-in from the public.
Across Cape Cod, towns have a good track record of restoring salt marshes, river and bog systems
through culvert replacements, dam removals, and other methods that help preserve the natural
environment; this project will build upon those previous successes. Given the location of many of the
roads in this project, solutions will likely lead to site remediation, habitat restoration or enhancement, use
of wetlands as means for enhancing water quality and constricting flood waters, improved groundwater
recharge, and better public health.
This project sets the stage for successfully addressing low lying road vulnerability into the foreseeable
future. Great care will be given to choosing either a NBS, hybrid or traditional gray solution for each
road. The decision making process will weigh existing conditions, community needs and desired design
life of the identified remedy.
That said, Cape Cod has a history of public support for nature-based solutions that provide environmental
co-benefits. This project aims to follow the tradition of restoring habitat connectivity and integrity
wherever possible.
• Up to 6 points for identifying and describing environmental co -benefits of the proposed project in the table below. For non-implementation projects, please identify how this work will “set the stage” for future co-benefits.
Co-Benefit Description of how the project will produce this
environmental co-benefit Promotes Biodiversity (habitat restoration, creation, or enhancement) ☒ Culvert enlargement to increase tidal inundation; dune creation Restores/remediates Project Site ☒ Road relocation – site remediation in wetland resources areas or buffers Promotes Environmentally Sustainable Development / Reduces Development in Climate Vulnerable Areas
☒ Road relocation or road abandonment
Improved Water Quality and/or Increased Groundwater Recharge ☒ Reduction in impervious surfaces which will increase infiltration, increasing groundwater recharge Improved Air Quality ☐ Climate Mitigation (carbon sequestration, site-scale improvements for cooling, reduced energy use)
☒ Tidal wetland restoration will enhance carbon sequestration
Other Environmental Co-Benefit: ☒ Reduce long-term maintenance with road abandonment; improve emergency access and access confidence will reduce risks to public health
4. Environmental Justice and Public/Regional Benefits (14 points)
• Up to 8 points for a project located within a mapped EJ Population, identified through the Massachusetts EJ viewer, with demonstrated positive impacts to that community and
demonstrated support from the community. To receive full points, the Applicant should:
o Provide specific relevant demographic information related to the Environmental Justice Population (i.e., income, race, and English isolation) and a description of where the community is located geographically relative to the project site.
o Demonstrate how the project will increase climate resiliency for this EJ Population.
o Demonstrate support from the EJ Population that the project is intended to benefit. Demonstration of support may include:
Letters of support from residents or community groups representing these populations.
Indication that residents or community groups representing these populations will be part of the project team (i.e., the community liaison model described in Attachment F) and, if so, specifically how much of the project budget will be
used to compensate them for their work and on what tasks? (Please make sure this partnership is easily identifiable in your Attachment B scope/budget).
Note: Recognizing that there may be members of your community who are highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change that do not meet the specific criteria or thresholds of an EJ population, the MVP program also recognizes benefits to and involvement of “Climate Vulnerable Populations.” Climate Vulnerable Populations are those who have lower adaptive capacity or
higher exposure and sensitivity to climate hazards like flooding or heat stress due to factors such as access to transportation, income level, disability, racial inequity, health status, or age. Projects that benefit and involve Climate Vulnerable Populations outside of a mapped EJ area may receive
up to 4 points in this category by answering the above questions for the Climate Vulnerable Population(s). More information on Environmental Justice, Climate Vulnerable Populations, and the MVP program can be found in the MVP toolkit.
There are several Environmental Justice (EJ) mapped areas within two of the participating Towns:
Barnstable (EJ for income, minority, and minority and income) and Eastham (EJ for income). There will
be outreach to people in these demographics as part of larger public engagement. Even though exact
project locations are not yet known, the site selection process will include criteria that elevates the road
segment’s criticality for transportation, resulting in selection of sites that will improve regional access and
connectivity. Solutions will positively impact climate resiliency for the region, including for elderly and
vulnerable populations, and those who travel through the region for service industry jobs. and likely for
the mapped EJ community
According to several reports (e.g., Wellfleet Housing Plan Report, 2017; Aging in Barnstable, 2014; 2010
US Census) approximately 30 - 33% of the year-round population is over the age of 65, more than twice
the national average. This has impacts on the region in terms of accessibility to hospitals and health care.
Additionally, the Climate Change Vulnerability Map viewer indicates that 30.4 - 41% of the population
within the project towns lives alone. The percentage of people over 65 who live alone varies widely, but
is on average 17.3%, with Eastham having the highest percentage (23.8%) and Bourne having the lowest
(13.1%). According to the Massachusetts Environmental Public Health climate data, people living alone,
especially seniors, are more vulnerable to climate-induced flooding. In such an event, they could
potentially be trapped in their homes, cut off from road travel and lose communication.
More than 32% of Cape Cod’s population have less physical and socioeconomic resiliency due to income,
health, age, and lack of transportation. Many older people in Barnstable County experience some level of
disability, which further limits their ability to respond to climate change related emergencies. Older
residents who live alone have notably lower household incomes. This project will result in improved
access and security for these Climate Change Vulnerable populations.
Commission staff, serving as a community liaison, will work with each town’s project team as well as the
Wellfleet Energy and Climate Action Committee to develop a customized outreach strategy using known
methods for communicating with various populations, including the environmental justice and climate
vulnerable demographic. Multiple strategies will be employed to reach stakeholders who want to
participate but face barriers due to language, mobility, or other constraints. Tools may include translation
of notices into Portuguese, conducting virtual/remote workshops, interactive websites, promoting
workshops at Brazilian churches and senior centers, community access TV and utilizing civic groups to
connect with their members. The process is part of the larger goal to get public feedback on road segment
prioritization.
• Up to 3 points for the degree to which the project has broad and multiple community benefits. Rationale should include: o How the project will provide the highest level of climate resilience for the greatest number of people and/or largest geographic area possible. o What community co-benefits the project will provide (e.g., social, economic, public health, recreational, public access, equity, etc.). Please focus on non-environmental co-benefits as
environmental co-benefits are included in Question 3 above.
From a regional perspective, remediating flood-prone road segments will increase reliability of access and
ensure emergency response and evacuation. While the specific locations of road segments are not yet
known, the project’s purpose in maintaining safe access along regional roads will improve to-and-from
travel services, emergency services, and job commutes for the greatest number of climate change
vulnerable and EJ populations on Cape. It is inherent in a regional project that the greatest number of
people over the largest geographical area will be served. This is further enhanced by aligning the project
with the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration (EDA) grant awarded
to the Commission, which include identifying and assessing the vulnerability of low-lying roads.
Co-benefits associated with this project include improved public health, public safety, and quality of life.
Reducing the risk of flooding and erosion on roads and road segments will allow people to relocate or get
to health care facilities. It also eases the way for emergency vehicles trying to reach climate vulnerable
populations.
Another co-benefit to the proposed project will be an increase in employment. Restoration work, road
construction and associated infrastructure improvements and adaptations support a wide range of jobs for
local residents.
• Up to 3 points if the project is regional/has regional benefits, including:
o If the project is being led by a regional partnership (i.e., two or more municipalities are submitting the application together). If yes, the application should include a letter of support from each partnering municipality.
o To what extent resilience benefits of the project go beyond the boundaries of one municipality.
Working in concert with efforts supported by an EDA grant, this project will take a regional approach and
will allow for a larger number of roads to be completed. Local perspectives and road segment solutions
will consider issues both within town boundaries and beyond. This ensures economies of scale at a
regional level with the goal of maximizing the benefits for the most people.
In addition, many of the road segments with known flood vulnerability are located on regional roadways
that currently provide the main (and in some cases, only) means of egress from the Outer Cape. By
addressing the threats to these regional roadways, access to and from jobs, homes, and emergency
services will be improved.
Recognizing that each town’s coastal resilience issues are a part of a much broader concern, Outer Cape
towns (including three of the towns participating in this grant opportunity – Eastham, Wellfleet, and
Truro) have formed an intermunicipal Shoreline Management Program to develop a cohesive approach to
maintaining the outermost stretch of the Cape Cod Bay shoreline. This includes evaluating and
monitoring resources such as salt marshes, dunes, and flood zones. This effort is complementary to the
low-lying roads project and demonstrates a collaborative commitment to improve the region’s climate
resilience.
5. Public Involvement and Community Engagement (12 points)
• To complete this section, include a narrative and fill out the matrix below. For guidance and an
example showing how to fill out this section and suggested principal and assisting print,
digital, and in-person strategies, see Attachment F. Please note that all tasks proposed here
should be clearly incorporated into the required Scope/Budget spreadsheet (Attachment B).
o 1 point for each principal strategy (up to 3 points total) as described in the narrative and table below. May have one per print, digital, and in-person category or distribute among those categories (e.g., two in-person, one print, no digital). The review team will consider the
effectiveness of each identified strategy and inclusion in the project scope/budget
when awarding points.
o 0.5 points for each assisting strategy (up to 3 points total) as described in narrative and table below. May distribute among print, digital, and in-person categories as desired. The review
team will consider the effectiveness of each identified strategy and inclusion in the
project scope/budget when awarding points.
o 1 point for each equitable engagement modifier (up to 4 points total) as described in the narrative and table below. May distribute among print, digital, and in-person categories as desired. The review team will consider the effectiveness of each identified strategy and
inclusion in the project scope/budget when awarding points.
o Up to 2 points for how stakeholder feedback will be incorporated into the project and mechanism by which stakeholders will be notified of the results of the public involvement and community engagement process and the final project deliverables (see examples in Attachment F).
NOTE: For Project Type 3: Construction and On-the-Ground Implementation – Applicants
may fill out the table/narrative and receive points based on community engagement strategies
that have occurred in earlier phases of the specific project and how feedback has been
incorporated into the final design. Applicants may also describe strategies that will be
employed during this project phase. Please make clear which strategies have been completed
and which are proposed to be conducted within the proposed phase of the project.
Public Involvement and Community Engagement Plan Narrative:
Data and information must be publicly available to build a sense of urgency on the Cape’s coastal hazard
issues. To that end, as depicted in the table below, numerous mediums will be used for outreach and
engagement including print, digital, virtual and in-person. Additionally, the Commission staff community
liaison will work with towns and local agencies, like the Wellfleet Energy and Climate Action
Committee, to determine best practices for engagement with the public.
For print engagement, informational posters will be posted at strategic locations throughout towns
providing details about the project and announcing the date, time and location of the public forum. Posters
and flyers will be translated into Portuguese (the primary language of the Cape’s Environmental Justice
population). Public service announcements (PSAs) will be sent to local newspapers, to community access
television and local radio stations.
Digital engagement will include posting information about climate resiliency and project details on each
Town’s website and other social media platforms. Project-specific interactive websites or online surveys,
such as Survey Monkey or Poll Everywhere, will be made available to solicit feedback and suggestions
from residents. The outreach workshops will be recorded, and the recording made available via the
project or Town’s website. The Commission has an ongoing podcast series about Climate Resilience
(Cape Cod Climate Action Podcast | Cape Cod Commission). Additional topics will be added to discuss
community resiliency, the project goals, low-lying road vulnerabilities and adaptation alternatives.
For in-person engagement, each Town will hold open workshops. There will be two public meetings.
One will be held at the beginning of the project to engage residents, business owners, and other
stakeholders in the project, to answer questions, to hear feedback and get suggestions on flooding
concerns. The initial sites, identified (3-5 per town) through the GIS spatial analysis, will be presented
and attendees will have the opportunity to discuss and prioritize the sites. A follow-up public meeting will
be held after the models have been run and three alternative solutions have been selected for two sites per
town. Attendees will have the opportunity to discuss the barriers and challenges, benefits, costs,
maintenance, and to raise any questions or suggestions. Virtual options will be available to people with
mobility issues, work, or family constraints, who lack transportation, or face COVID-19 restrictions.
There are several user-friendly virtual meeting platforms (i.e., Zoom, Google) that have made public
meetings possible, and in some cases preferred.
Public Involvement and Community Engagement Plan Table
Regional Low-lying Road Assessment and Feasibility Project Public Involvement and Community Engagement Plan Table Summary (summarized version of narrative) Print Digital/Electronic In-Person Principal Strategies Posters hung in strategic
locations throughout town
including local businesses,
community centers,
churches, and other publicly
accessible venues.
1. Post information about
the project with the date
and time of the
workshop on the Town’s
website.
2. Digital video
streaming of presentation
that addresses project
content, sites, and
solutions.
3. Interactive project
website with ability to
submit comments.
4. Podcast specific to the
project.
Conduct a workshop to present the
project and the concept of
resiliency. Solicit input with the
goal of obtaining consensus on the
top priority low-lying road sites for
the project. Listen to feedback and
suggestions from residents.
Assisting Strategies Public Service
Announcements (PSAs) or
an ad in local newspapers,
radio, and TV stations that
inform residents of the
project, climate resiliency
and the benefits of the
project.
1. Online survey such as
SurveyMonkey –
requesting input on roads
prone to flooding in their
community.
2. Social media
communication on
multiple platforms.
3. Post on local blog and
in digital newsletter.
Voting poll (e.g., Poll Everywhere)
to include workshop attendees in
the discussion about identifying
and prioritizing low-lying roads in
the community. This provides all
attendees with a voice.
Equitable Engagement Modifiers PSAs in Portuguese, will be
sent to the Brazilian radio
station, Rede A Brasiliera de
Rádio, Translation of content
into the most prevalent
language (Portuguese)
spoken in the community
and posted in Brazilian
churches.
1. Select meeting times to
correspond with hours that are
feasible for working parents.
2. Consider offering childcare
during workshop planning.
3. Record and later televise the
workshop on local TV channel
and/or the Town’s website.
4. Translate meeting materials into
the most prevalent language
(Portuguese) spoken in the
community.
5. Offer the survey polls in
Portuguese. How community feedback will be incorporated into project and mechanism by which results will be shared: Feedback will be incorporated to refine and prioritize the list of low-lying road sites. Answers to
questions about climate resiliency will be answered during the public forum and posted on websites after the
forum in a FAQ section. A follow up workshop will be held to present the final sites and possible solutions.
Feedback gathered during the second workshop will be used to select final solutions. Final sites and solutions
will be posted on the Towns’ websites and in the local newspaper in English, and Portuguese as appropriate to
the community.
6. Project Transferability, Measurement of Success, and Maintenance (8 points)
• Up to 4 points for projects that serve as a demonstration project and are transferable to other communities (i.e., innovative projects that provide deliverables that can be easily adopted by other communities or outline processes that will streamline other similar projects). Please outline what these deliverables are and how they will be shared with other communities.
The project is readily transferable to any community with low-lying roads subject to flooding, storm
damage and/or erosion. This project will provide twelve different low-lying road situations and likely
twelve different solutions for them. The learned lessons from this project can pave the way for other
communities to move forward by providing improved processes and procedures. Case studies of several
projects will be developed and incorporated into the resources page of the Cape Cod Coastal Planner tool
https://www.capecodcoast.org/, which is available for anyone to use.
Additionally, the process planned for this project will provide a workflow for other municipalities and
regions to identify and prioritize low-lying roads, present them to the public for discussion and input, and
move forward with concrete adaptations that are understood and supported by the public. Improving
public understanding and awareness of alternative approaches such as abandonment and nature-based
solutions, and the pros and cons is key to acceptance. All communities face issues with roadways that
travel through sensitive environments. The different solutions identified through this project will provide
innovative adaptations that may serve as universal case studies.
Additionally, the economies of scale in this regional approach will provide streamlined methods and
workflows for other similar projects on Cape Cod and across the Commonwealth.
• Up to 2 points for how project success will be measured and monitored. Please provide outcomes that can be linked to the project (e.g., reduction in flooding, increase in tree canopy cover, reduced risk of sewer overflows) and any metrics that the applicant will be able to track to indicate whether or not the project is accomplishing these outcomes over time. The review team is not looking for general statements around the completion of tasks in the scope of work (e.g., “the project is successful if we complete it on time”).
Project success for this phase will be measured by the participation from the community and the level of
support that the sites and solutions garner. Workshop attendance will be documented as well as responses
to surveys and online forms to provide tangible numbers and percentages. The best outreach methods will
be assessed based on response and community involvement. These will be added to the Commission’s
public outreach and engagement toolbox for future projects.
Additionally, finding viable solutions for two low-lying roads per town will be used to measure the
project’s success.
After sites have been identified and solutions have been chosen, the next phase of the proposed project
(not part of this grant application) will be implementation, which will involve bringing viable public-
approved solutions through permitting, professional engineer design, and finally construction. Updates
will continue to be posted to the Town and/or project website.
Ultimately, project success will be defined in terms of implementing adaptations for low-lying roads that
improve climate resilience, reduce flooding, and increase confidence in weather-safe travel accessibility.
• Up to 2 points for clear description of plans for how any future maintenance needs of or updates to the proposed project would be addressed to ensure the project’s goals continue in the long-term.
o For Project Type 1: Planning, Assessments, Capacity Building, and Regulatory Updates–
Describe how the project deliverables will be utilized to continue local resilience work (e.g., regular meetings to track identified plan actions, list anticipated town meeting dates and/or plan to approve updated regulations, how data collection or modeling will support current/scheduled local efforts, etc.)
If applicable, how will the plan, assessment, or regulation be updated in the future to make sure it stays current?
o For Project Type 2: Design and Permitting – Describe the path forward for the project – construction, further regulatory approval, potential funding sources. Describe any initial plans for how the asset would be maintained into the future if/when implemented.
o For Project Type 3: Construction and On-the-Ground Implementation – Will this project produce an operation and maintenance plan? If applicable, who is responsible for future maintenance? If applicable, what is the plan for replacing the asset at the end of its useful life and how will you ensure the replacement asset is also resilient?
The list of roads and road segments prone to flooding generated through this project will be scored and
prioritized. Critical elevations for the roads will be determined, model data extracted,
and road vulnerability assessed. The top priority roads will have several solutions or adaptations
proposed. This information can be used by the towns and the region for future climate resilience work.
Information will be updated, and models rerun as new or revised climate data become available. The
established workflow can be applied again to future low-lying road projects and other climate resilience
projects.
The final report will showcase workflow, lessons learned and various low-lying road solutions and
adaptations, from gray to green, as case studies for communities interested in pursuing road resiliency
projects. Additionally, the Commission will incorporate several case studies from the project into the
resources page of the Cape Cod Coastal Planner tool https://www.capecodcoast.org/.
The most successful outreach and engagement methods to bring in environmental justice and climate
change vulnerable populations will be documented and used for future outreach efforts.
7. Need for Financial Assistance (6 points)
• Up to 4 points based on the equalized valuation per capita, to be completed by EEA
• Up to 2 points for financial need as demonstrated through Applicant narrative, as described below:
o Demonstration that the municipal budget cannot accommodate this project, including specific examples beyond regular budgetary constraints.
o Demonstration that other grant programs were considered, and it was determined that MVP was the best programmatic fit.
o Demonstration that MVP funding would clearly address a funding gap that would make an otherwise robust project unlikely to be implemented.
As described in more detail below, the towns need financial help from the state. This is an adaptive first
step toward new climate change challenges, including sea level rise. Given the expense of fixing
infrastructure and the regionality of the project, multiple funding sources are needed. The public
engagement funding of the MVP grant would make it possible to gather public support and accomplish
climate resilient goals. An EDA grant has been awarded to Barnstable County and by partnering with the
Commission, will bring federal dollars to match MVP grant funds to help the towns defray the cost of
improving community resilience.
Cape Cod’s unique geography as a peninsula of sand surrounded by ocean and bays makes it a special
place. However, the natural beauty is highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Cape towns face
significant challenges each year due to increasing occurrence of flood waters, storm damage, and rising
sea levels. These challenges also pose a financial strain. In Wellfleet, for example, $7,500,000 was set
aside to cover a share of the cost of dredging Wellfleet Harbor, a vital economic resource for our shell
fishing and tourism industries.
On June 25, 2018, the President issued a major disaster declaration (DR-4372) under the authority of
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Six counties in Massachusetts,
including Barnstable County, were deemed a disaster due to severe winter storm and flooding on March
2-3, 2018. The storm included heavy snowfall, widespread coastal flooding, damaging hurricane-force
winds, and prolonged power outages that impacted homes and businesses across eastern Massachusetts
and Barnstable County. Unfortunately, this storm was just one of many that have impacted Cape Cod in
recent years.
In years past as well as more recently in 2018, Truro sustained damage to roads, culverts, and headwalls
causing widespread flooding on private property and town-owned roads. The roads impacted include
Truro Center Road, Mill Pond Road, Old County Road, Shore Road, Corn Hill Road, and Castle Road.
All of these represent emergency routes out of Truro and Provincetown in the event of a Route 6 closure.
Several of these roads are in the process of being field investigated and solutions assessed:
• Truro Center Road (phase 1 cost estimate is $114,000, construction estimate is $1.6 million),
• Mill Pond Road ($5,000 in emergency road repairs, phase 1 estimate is $44,800),
• Old County Road (estimated construction cost is $1.9 million),
• Shore Road (estimated phase 2 construction cost is $1.6 million)
In August 2017, part of Beachcomber Restaurant’s parking lot at Cahoon Hollow Beach in Wellfleet
collapsed and swallowed a car during a torrential rain. There were no injuries. A second collapse of a
massive sand dune next to the restaurant occurred in August 2018.
The "bomb cyclone" Nor'easter that hit the Boston area during the night of Oct. 16, 2019 reached gusts of
90 mph in Provincetown and caused power outages throughout the Cape. Fortunately, the storm surge of
nearly two feet coincided with low tide and spared many of the towns from serious flooding. However,
such good luck may not prevail the next time around.
In the past, severe storm-related issues have made Wings Neck Road and Circuit Avenue in Bourne
impassable. These roads are sole evacuation routes for hundreds of homes. Portions of these roads have
elevations that are below current spring high tide and have recently experienced high tide flooding events
on “sunny days.”
Several Cape towns have received and are applying for additional grant funds from MVP as well as other
state and federal entities. A top priority action in many towns’ MVP process includes identifying,
evaluating, and adapting low-lying roads. The Town of Eastham received a CZM Coastal Resilience
Grant to develop assessments and preliminary adaptation concept designs for four pre-identified
roadways. There are plans underway to apply for another CZM Coastal Resiliency Grant this year to take
one of these four roads into design. The Regional Low-lying Roads Assessment and Feasibility proposal
does not plan to reassess Samoset, Bridge, Dyer Prince or Smith roads in Eastham; and yet, additional
roads in Eastham are waiting to be assessed.
The Town of Barnstable plans to submit an MVP Action Grant application for a culvert replacement
through which Maraspin Creek runs under Commerce Road in the Millway Marina area of town. This
road segment of Commerce Road will not be assessed as part the Regional Low-lying Roads Assessment
and Feasibility project.
The Intermunicipal Shoreline Management Program has received a CZM Coastal Resilience Grant for
phase 2 of Increasing Coastal Resilience through Intermunicipal Shoreline Management. The MVP low
lying road assessments will not be duplicative of these ongoing efforts but will build upon this and the
other ongoing projects for a more comprehensive look, broader outreach, and enhanced mitigation
strategies.
As can be seen in these examples, low lying road vulnerability is a long-term and far-reaching issue and is
consistent with the MVP program core principles and the goal to plan for climate resiliency by
completing vulnerability assessments.
Both proposed and funded projects are just scratching the surface of the actual need on Cape Cod.
According to the NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer, most of the Cape and the entire coastline is mapped as
high vulnerability. With the extremely high cost of infrastructure repair and adaptation, the towns cannot
cover the cost to address these climate resiliency needs on a municipal budget. The regional nature of this
project provides economies of scale, allowing towns to reduce costs for assessment, modeling, and
adaptations. Working with the Commission additionally allows for a regional approach, to utilize their
existing outreach mechanisms, and the opportunity to expand upon the EDA-funded work for a more
impactful project.
8. Project Feasibility, Support, and Management (6 points)
• Up to 2 points for a description of the project team’s technical, financial, and management capacity. (Note: If your municipality has a previously awarded MVP Action Grant that will be ongoing at the same time as this proposed project, please list that grant and detail your municipality’s capacity to manage multiple grants in FY22.)
The project is feasible from a technical, financial and management perspective. The Town of Wellfleet is
the lead applicant and its Health and Conservation Agent, Hillary Greenberg-Lemos, has agreed to be the
project manager and fiscal agent for the project on behalf of the six towns. Ms. Greenberg-Lemos has
extensive experience managing grants for Wellfleet and working with colleagues in other Cape towns to
advance initiatives that cross town boundaries.
Commission staff have committed to conducting the initial spatial analysis and assisting the town with
workshop preparation and presentation. Planning staff at the Commission have long-time experience with
workshop design, preparation, and community outreach/engagement. The Commission will also assist the
Town of Wellfleet with managing the grant and the project. Parts of task 1 and all of task 4 will require
engineering expertise; the applicant plans to contract with an engineering consulting firm that specializes
in coastal resource management and nature-based solutions. The Consultant will have deep familiarity
with modeling that simulates coastal water levels as well as the most up-to-date guidelines and standards
for incorporating climate change adaptation, vulnerability assessment considerations, and resilience
designs.
This project has garnered much interest among town staff and local agencies, including a climate action
committee and conservation organizations. Please see the letters of commitment from each town, as well
as the letter of support from the Cape Cod Joint Transportation Committee. As sites have not yet been
identified, specific public support is not extant; however, the public outreach process is designed to gather
community input, address questions, and garner support.
Permitting is not proposed and is therefore not a barrier in this grant proposal. However, the permitting
feasibility may be addressed during the public forums as part of the discussion of benefits and drawbacks
of each proposed solution.
• Up to 2 points for letters of support from landowner, public, and/or community partners. Applications with 3+ letters of support from diverse groups (e.g., community-based organizations, local businesses, nonprofits, neighborhood groups, etc.) and a letter of support from landowner (if project is to take place on non-municipal land) will be scored highest. There is a place on the online form to upload support letters that have been combined into a single PDF document. Support letters should be submitted in this fashion and not sent in separately if at all possible.
Please see uploaded letters of support, combined into a single PDF document.
• Up to 2 points for good standing in the MVP program – based on timely submittal of progress reports, lack of project extensions, timely correspondence, and compliance with program guidelines,
to be completed by MVP program team.
End of project narrative. [Note: An additional 10 points will also be allotted based on overall
project quality at the discretion of the review committee.]
Brewster Select Board Meeting of September 20, 2021
Consent Calendar Items
1
8 Consent Agenda
Approve Regular Session Minutes from May 18, August 6, August 13, and September 3,
2021
ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION
We recommend the approve of the regular session minutes listed above.
Facility Use Approval of Drummer Boy Park, Alzheimer’s Family Support Center and
Breakwater Beach, Our Lady of the Cape Roman Catholic Church & Request of Fee Waiver
1-The Alzheimer’s Family Support Center is requesting to use the parking loop at Drummer
Boy Park on Sunday October 17, 2021, from 10am – 2pm. People will be driving through to
pick up t-shirts and other materials associated to a virtual fundraising walk. According to
our fee schedule, there is no charge for use of the parking loop.
2-Members of Our Lady of the Cape Church will be gathering for a public recitation of the
Rosary on Sunday October 10, 2021, from 3:45pm until 4:30pm. Expected total number of
participants is 30. They have also requested a waiver of the $50.00 facility use fee.
Both applications have been reviewed by multiple Town Departments and all feedback will
be shared with the applicants.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION
We recommend that the Board approves the use of both Drummer Boy Park and
Breakwater Beach as well as the fee waiver for Breakwater Beach.
Acceptance of Gift: Millsites Committee
A citizen would like to donate a Robert Brooks Original print of the Old Stony Brook Mill.
The Chair of the Millsites Committees has expressed interest in the print. The citizen will
mail the print to Town Hall.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION
We recommend that the Board accept the donation on behalf of the Millsites Committee.
Updated Election Clerk Appointments
Per the Town Clerk, the following appointed election workers have new job titles:
Precinct 1 Clerk – Glenda Normand
Precinct 1 Deputy Clerk – Joan Scheffer
Precinct 2 Clerk – June Cameron
Precinct 3 Clerk – Lauren Elliott-Grunes
Precinct 3 Deputy Clerk – Sharon Ryone
These appointments will expire on August 31, 2022.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION
We recommend that the Board approves the updated election clerk job titles.
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 05-18-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 1 of 2
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
MINUTES OF THE SELECT BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES
DATE: May 18, 2021
TIME: 3:00 PM
PLACE: Remote Teleconference
REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Chair Chaffee, Selectperson deRuyter, Selectperson Bingham, Selectperson
Whitney, Selectperson Chatelain, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Donna
Kalinick, Assistant Town Administrator Susan Broderick
Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement
Chair Chaffe called the meeting to order at 3:01pm. A quorum was declared, all Select Board members
present were announced, Chair Chaffee read the meeting participation and recording statements.
Consent Agenda
Letter of Support for Cape Rep Theater State Grant Application
Selectperson Bingham moved the consent agenda of May 18, 2021. Selectperson Whitney second. A roll call
vote was taken. Selectperson deRuyter -yes, Selectperson Bingham-yes, Selectperson Whitney-yes,
Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Chair Chaffee-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No
Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair
None
Next Meetings: May 24 and May 26, 2021
Executive Session:
To consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property if the chair declares that an open
meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body.
To approve executive session meeting minutes from September 10, September 21, and October 5, 2020.
Selectperson Bingham moved to enter Executive Session at 3:03pm and not to return to regular session.
Selectperson Whitney second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson deRuyter -yes, Selectperson Bingham-
yes, Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Chair Chaffee-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-
No
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 05-18-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 2 of 2
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
Respectfully submitted by Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant
Approved: _______________ Signed: _______________________________________
Date Selectperson Bingham, Clerk of the Select Board
Accompanying Documents in Packet: Agenda, Cape Rep Letter of Support
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 08-06-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 1 of 1
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
MINUTES OF THE SELECT BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES
DATE: August 6, 2021
TIME: 8:30 AM
PLACE: 2198 Main Street, Brewster MA 02631 and Remote Participation
REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Chair Bingham, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Chaffee, Selectperson
Hoffmann, Selectperson Chatelain, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Donna
Kalinick
Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement
Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 8:30am. A quorum was declared, all Select Board members
present were announced, Chair Bingham read the meeting participation and recording statements.
Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair
None
Consent Agenda
Pass Through Town Permission: Pan-Mass Challenge (August 8, 2021)
Selectperson Chatelain moved the consent agenda for August 6, 2021. Selectperson Hoffmann second. A roll
call vote was taken. Selectperson Hoffmann -yes, Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes,
Selectperson Whitney-yes Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No
Executive Session: To consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property if the chair declares
that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body.
Selectperson Chatelain moved to enter into Executive Session at 8:34am and not to return to regular session.
Selectperson Whitney second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-
yes, Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Selectperson Hoffmann, Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No.
Respectfully submitted by Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant
Approved: _______________ Signed: _______________________________________
Date Selectperson Chatelain, Clerk of the Select Board
Accompanying Documents in Packet: Agenda, Pass Through Town Permission Application
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 08-13-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 1 of 2
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
MINUTES OF THE SELECT BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES
DATE: August 13, 2021
TIME: 1:30 PM
PLACE: Remote Participation
REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Chair Bingham, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Chaffee, Selectperson
Hoffmann, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Donna Kalinick
Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement
Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 1:30pm. A quorum was declared, all Select Board members
present were announced, Chair Bingham read the meeting participation and recording statements.
Discuss and Vote Bonding Requirements for the Water Department Generator Project
Peter Lombardi reviewed that this project’s appropriation was approved by Town Meeting in May and that
the number that we were originally carrying was almost double the amount. He added that the scope was
revised, and costs were updated. Mr. Lombardi asked the Select Board to vote on the requirements per
Bond Counsel and Town financial advisor in order to issue this debt.
Selectperson Chatelain moved that the maximum useful life of the departmental equipment listed below to
be financed with proceeds of the $678,00 borrowing authorized by the vote of the Town passed May 15,
2021 (Article 9) is hereby determined pursuant to G.L. c. 44, § 7(1) to be as follows, purpose, generator-
water department, borrowing amount $678,000, maximum useful life, 30 years. Selectperson Whitney
second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Whitney -yes, Selectperson Hoffmann-yes, Selectperson
Chaffee-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No
Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair
None
Executive Session: To consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property at 3057 Main Street
and 500 W. H. Besse Cartway if the chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on
the negotiating position of the public body.
Selectperson Chatelain moved to enter into Executive Session at 1:35pm and not to return to regular session.
Selectperson Whitney second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Hoffmann-
yes, Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Selectperson Chatelain, Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No.
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 08-13-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 2 of 2
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
Respectfully submitted by Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant
Approved: _______________ Signed: _______________________________________
Date Selectperson Chatelain, Clerk of the Select Board
Accompanying Documents in Packet: Agenda, Pass Through Town Permission Application
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 09-03-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 1 of 2
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
MINUTES OF THE SELECT BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES
DATE: September 3, 2021
TIME: 8:30 AM
PLACE: 2198 Main Street, Brewster MA and Remote Participation
REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Chair Bingham, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Chaffee, Selectperson
Hoffmann, Selectperson Chatelain, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Donna
Kalinick
Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement
Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 8:30am. A quorum was declared, all Select Board members
present were announced, Chair Bingham read the meeting participation and recording statements.
Vote to Sign the September 25, 2021 Town Meeting Warrant for Posting
Selectperson Chaffee move that the Select Board sign the September 25, 2021, Town meeting warrant.
Selectperson Whitney second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Hoffmann-yes, Selectperson Chaffee-
yes, Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-
No.
Refer Proposed Stormwater Management Bylaw to Planning Board for Fall Special Town Meeting
Consideration
Selectperson Whitney move to refer the proposed stormwater management bylaw to Planning Board for Fall
Special Town meeting consideration. Selectperson Chaffee second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson
Hoffmann-yes, Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Chair
Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No.
Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair
Selectperson Hoffmann provided the following regarding Brewster’s Town Planner, Ryan Bennett who will be
leaving her position with the Town this month. Selectperson Hoffmann stated that as former member of the
Planning Board, having served two years as Chair, had the pleasure working closely with Ms. Bennett. Ms.
Bennett’s breadth and depth of knowledge along with her calm and profession demeanor provided the
Planning Board with competent leadership and skill. Selectperson Hoffmann continued, aided by her staff
Ms. Bennett transformed the department to one that strives to be user friendly, offering support and advise
to all applicants whether residents or not. Selectperson Hoffmann noted that the boards that Ms. Bennett
worked with, Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Board and Vision Planning all benefited from her skills and
guidance. Selectperson Hoffmann concluded that the Town of Brewster was fortunate to have her as part of
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
BoS 09-03-2021 www.brewster-ma.gov
Page 2 of 2
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
our team, we wish you fair winds and calm seas as you move on to other shores up cape.
Executive Session: To consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property at 3057 if the chair
declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public
body- 3057 Main Street and 500 W H Besse Cartway.
To approve the Executive Session minutes from December 8, 2020 and July 26, 2021
Selectperson Chaffee moved to enter Executive Session at 8:35am and not to return to regular session.
Selectperson Hoffmann second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Hoffmann-yes, Selectperson Chaffee-
yes, Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-
No.
Respectfully submitted by Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant
Approved: _______________ Signed: _______________________________________
Date Selectperson Chatelain, Clerk of the Select Board
Accompanying Documents in Packet: Agenda, Special Town Meeting Warrant, Stormwater Management Bylaw documents
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
Memo
To: Brewster Select Board
From: Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant
Date: September 17, 2021
RE: Facility Use Applications
The two applications for facility use have been reviewed by the following Town departments, Town
Administration, Health Department, Police Department, Building Department, Fire Department, Planning
and Zoning Departments and Natural Resources Department. The following feedback will be shared
with the applicants:
Per the Health Department:
Following the state guidance on masks being recommended for indoor use only for those who are
unvaccinated or immunocompromised, masks are not required outdoors, however, it is important to
respect personal space therefore I would recommend that the volunteers wear a mask when
approaching the participants attending the drive by pick up. Mask use would also be recommended if
social distancing is not achievable for the Breakwater Beach Public Reading.
Per the Building Department:
Tent regulations and permit was shared with both applicants in case they plan to put up a tent larger than
400 sq ft. They have also been advised to review the sign bylaws set by the Town and to ensure that they
do not violate these bylaws for any upcoming events.
All other departments had no concerns or feedback regarding the applications.
Alzheimer’s Family Support Center
of Cape Cod
Until there’s a cure, there’s community.
2095 Main Street, Brewster, MA 02631
September 1, 2021
Dear Select Board,
I am writing to request a fee waiver for use of Drummer Boy Park on Sunday, October 17, 2021,
10 am – 2 pm.
The Alzheimer’s Family Support Center is a 501(c)3 nonprofit (EIN#45-5545397), providing free
supportive services to families and individuals living with dementia diseases. About 80% of all
funds raised go to fund free services. Our largest fundraiser of the year is a charity walk that
takes place in Provincetown and attracts upwards of 500 people. However, due to the recent
uptick in COVID-variant infections, and the vulnerability of our population, we have decided to
offer the walk virtually, with hubs set up from Falmouth to Provincetown as sites for walkers to
pick up t-shirts and other give-aways and to drop off donations. We will be using Drummer Boy
Park as one of the hubs, and will only be using the parking lot so that participants can simply
drive in.
Thank you so much for your consideration,
Melanie Braverman
Co-founder, Cultural Director
(508) 896-5170
www.alzheimerscapecod.org • info@capecodalz.org
Archive d: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 12:15:14 PM
To: derickson@capecod.net
Subje ct: RE: Old Stony Brook Mill Robert Brooks Original Print
Se nsitivity: N ormal
From: derickson@cape cod.ne t <derickson@capecod.ne t>
Sent: Wedne sday, September 8, 2021 7:13 PM
To: Erika Mawn <e mawn@bre wste r-ma.gov>
Subject: RE: Ol d Stony Brook Mill Robert Brooks Original Print
Erika, I am sure the Mill Sites Commi ttee would li ke to see the town accept the donation of the print. Doug Eri ckson
From: Erika Mawn <e mawn@bre wster-ma.gov>
Sent: Wedne sday, September 08, 2021 2:36 PM
To: Faythe El lis <faythe.ellis@outlook.com>; derickson@cape cod.net
Subject: FW: Old Stony Brook Mi ll Robert Brooks Ori gi nal Pri nt
Good afte rnoon,
We re ceived the below email re gardi ng a possible donation of a photo of the Old Stony Brook Mi l l , i f this is some thi ng you may be i nterested i n, please l et me
know. We would have to go through the process of acce pting the donation vi a a Sel ect Board mee ti ng.
I wil l thank Karen for her offer and let her know we wi ll be in touch.
Thank you,
Erika
Erika Mawn
Executi ve As s i s ta nt to the Town Admi ni s tra tor
2198 Ma i n Str eet Brews ter, MA 02631
(508) 896-3701 ext. 1100
www.brews ter -ma .gov
Beginning July 6th, Brewster Town Offices will be open to the public Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday from 8:30 to 4:00pm. Beach and Recycle Permits are not
available in person but can be purchased online or through our mail-in program.
For the latest updates on Town services, please visit www.brewster-ma.gov
From: Kare n Konfe derak <chm6021023@gmail.com>
Sent: Wedne sday, September 8, 2021 12:21 PM
To: Kathy Lambert <klambert@bre wster-ma.gov>
Subject: Ol d Stony Brook Mill Robert Brooks Original Print
To Whom It May Conce rn,
My name is Karen Konf ede rak and I re cently came across some of my paternal grandmother's posse ssions (e ven though she passe d away in 2000). Among her
thi ngs was a Robert Brooks Ori gi nal of the Ol d Stony Brook Mill. Si nce I cannot l ocate a contact link for the Stony Brook Mi ll Si te s Committee, I am wri ti ng to
you.
The pri nt i s i n ex cel l ent condition. I've attached two photos for your reference. I remember seei ng thi s pri nt hangi ng on her wal l i n the 1970's, but I be l ieve it i s
much olde r than that. After al l thi s time, the col oring i s sti ll very vibrant.
If this print is somethi ng that might be of i nterest to the Town of Brewste r, the Chambe r of Comme rce, or any othe r town organizati on or age ncy, ple ase l et me
know. I am happy to donate i t to whiche ver agency or organizati on would like to have i t.
As a side note, my grandmother's lineage traces back through the Ame ri can Revol uti on and Mayflowe r passengers. As a resul t, I rece ntl y became a me mbe r of
the Mayfl ower Society as wel l as DAR. My passenge r conne cti ons are William Bre wster and the Howl and/Till eys. I visi ted Plymouth i n August and was
capti vated by the hi story and the be auty of the area. I was not able to make it to Brewste r, but that just gives me an e xcuse to come back to Massachusse ts.
Thank you for your time. I am looking forward to heari ng back from you at your conveni ence.
Si ncerel y,
Kare n Konfe derak
602-809-0290
Archive d: Friday, September 17, 2021 10:33:59 AM
From: Colette Williams
Se nt: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:35:26 +0000Authentication
To: Erika Mawn
Subje ct: Election Officers
Se ns itivity: Normal
Okay He re goes!
The y have al l al ready be e n appoi nted as election worke rs, they are just changi ng job ti tles.
Pre ci nct 1 Cl e rk – Gl e nda Normand
Pre ci nct 1 Deputy Cl e rk – Joan Scheffer
Pre ci nct 2 Cl e rk – June Cameron
Pre ci nct 3 Cl e rk – Lauren Elliott-Grunes
Pre ci nct 3 Deputy Cl e rk – Sharon Ryone
Expiri ng August 31s t.
Thanks
Thank you,
Cole tte M. Wi lliams, MMC/CMMC
Town Cle rk
Re cords Acce ss Office r
Bre wste r, MA
Be ginning July 6t h, Bre wste r Town Office s will be ope n to the public Tue sday, We dne sday, and Thursday from 8:30 to 4:00pm.
Be ach and Re cycle Pe rmits are not avail abl e in pe rson but can be purchase d online or through our mai l-i n program. For the
late st update s on Town se rvice s, ple ase visit www.bre wste r-ma.gov
*T he Commonwealth of Massachusetts Secretary of State has determined that e-mail is a public record
8. CCSC Press Release #5 re 2nd Public Forum:
CCSC Press Release #5: Public Forum #2
Publish after initial announcement to reinforce availability of public forum.
Must ensure maximum capacity for participants on Zoom.
__________________________________________________________
Brewster Achieves Negotiated Sale of Sea Camps Properties and Will Update
Residents at Second Public Forum
The Town of Brewster has reached a negotiated agreement to purchase the Cape Cod
Sea Camps properties and will host a second virtual public forum to inform residents on
recent developments in advance of Special Town Meeting on September 25. The forum
will include a presentation and a question-and-answer period.
Public forum date: Friday, September 17, 2021
Time: 6pm
Location:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83155000352?pwd=djlVbHVEczdlWExpSnhKMzVnR
UgzUT09
The Select Board and Town Administration remain committed to making sure that
voters are fully informed about all aspects of the potential acquisition. This forum will
address updated details about purchasing the two parcels, costs and proposed
financing plans, the impact of acquisition on property taxes, and potential partnerships.
The properties hold opportunities for significant public benefits including conservation of
land, coastal dunes, and wetlands; habitat and drinking water protection; beach access;
extensive recreational amenities; housing; and a home for a community center. The
Town is also seeking to acquire these parcels so that they will not be privately
developed.
Acquisition of one or both parcels requires approval by both Town Meeting and at the
ballot. If Brewster voters decide to acquire the Cape Cod Sea Camps, the Town will
facilitate a public engagement process inviting comment and recommendations on how
the public would like to see the property or properties used.
The September 17 public forum will be recorded, and the video will be available on the
Town website. More information on the proposed Town acquisition of these properties
can be found at https://www.brewster-ma.gov/cape-cod-sea-camps-properties.
PO Box 1584 Harwich MA 02645 w Tel. 508 430 2563 w www.pleasantbay.org
Memorandum:
To: Brewster Select Board
From: Carole Ridley, Pleasant Bay Alliance Coordinator
Date: September 15, 2021 (for Select Board meeting of September 20, 2021)
Re: Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit Update and Next Steps
Objectives of our presentation are to:
• Summarize progress since the 2021 Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit Annual Report
(attached);
• Share information on studies funded by the Southeast New England Program (SNEP)
Watershed Grants to support Watershed Permit implementation, including an update of
the Massachusetts Estuaries Project (MEP) linked model; and
• Discuss questions that the Town will need to address by year 5 (2023) of the Watershed
Permit.
Massachusetts DEP issued the Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit to the Towns of Brewster,
Chatham, Harwich and Orleans on August 18, 2018. The permit authorized a combination of
traditional (i.e., sewering) and non-traditional (i.e., shellfish aquaculture, permeable reactive
barriers) actions to remove the 17,700 kg/yr of nitrogen needed to achieve threshold loads over
the twenty-year permit term. The implementation schedule in the Watershed permit is structured
in five-year increments to provide towns the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions or new
information.
The Pleasant Bay Alliance is charged with compiling Annual Reports required under the
Watershed Permit. The purpose of the Annual Reports is to report progress toward nitrogen
reductions, monitoring information, public outreach, and municipal investments undertaken by
the towns to implement actions called for under the permit. The third Annual Report was
submitted to MassDEP and Cape Cod Commission on August 2, 2021. Wright-Pierce prepared
the Report for the Alliance, in consultation with the towns’ staff and technical consultants. The
Report shows the towns are on track to meet the first five-year nitrogen reduction target under
the Permit. However, some towns are considering refinements to their respective plans that could
modify the first and, subsequent, five-year incremental targets.
The Alliance obtained two grants from the SNEP Watershed Grants program to support
implementation actions. SNEP is a program funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency administered by Restore America’s Estuaries. The first grant award ($250,000) funded
PO Box 1584 Harwich MA 02645 w Tel. 508 430 2563 w www.pleasantbay.org
studies of nitrogen trading, a municipal denitrifying septic system management program, and
shellfish aquaculture, as well as an update of the MEP linked model conducted by the Coastal
Studies Program, School for Marine Science and Technology at UMASS-Dartmouth. Findings
are available on the Alliance website at:
http://pleasantbay.org/programs-and-projects/watershed-planning/pleasant-bay-watershed-permit
A subsequent SNEP grant ($132,178) will fund additional modeling scenarios using the updated
MEP linked model. The Alliance is seeking input from the towns’ staff and consultants to
formulate modeling scenarios that will help inform future local decision-making under the
Watershed Permit.
Cc: Peter Lombardi, Town Manager
Chris Miller, Director, Natural Resources Department
Mark Nelson, Horsley Witten
Pleasant Bay
Watershed Permit
2021 Annual Report &
SNEP Grant Implementation Progress
1
Presentation Objectives
• Report progress under the Watershed Permit
• Discuss findings of studies funded under
SNEP Watershed Grants to support non-
traditional technologies and update MEP
model
• Discuss next steps for Brewster to focus use of
additional SNEP resource in support of the
Town
Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit
• Issued to Towns in 2018; 1st in Massachusetts
• 20-year renewable permit; 5-yr increments
• Benefits
– Procedure for nitrogen reduction credits, including non-
traditional technologies
– MassDEP enforcement forbearance
– Priority for State Revolving Funds (SRF)
– Assurance that all watershed communities are meeting
required reductions
3
Establishes Nitrogen
Removal Responsibility
• Watershed-wide attenuated nitrogen load removal
need to meet TMDLs = 17,700 kg/yr (100%)
• Requirement by Town as set forth in Permit/TWMP:
– Brewster— 2,300 kg/yr (13%)
– Chatham— 4,100 kg/yr (23%)
– Harwich— 4,400 kg/yr (25%)
– Orleans— 6,900 kg/yr (39%)
• Based on 2006 (2010) MEP; 100% of new load
needs to be removed.
4
TWMP Removals in 5-Yr Increments
Brewster Chatham Harwich Orleans Total
Years 1 to 5 1,281 247 2,872 514 4,914
Years 6 to 10 118 1,565 4,204 5,887
Years 11 to 15 118 3,408 1,581 5,107
Years 16 to 20 118 1,597 675 2,390
A5er Year 20 236 7,807 103
Total 1,871 13,059 4,540 6,974 26,444
Towns have already made some changes to this schedule
Progress - 2021 Annual Report
SNEP-Funded Implementation
• Municipal Denitrifying Septic System Program
• Municipal Shellfish Aquaculture Program
• Nitrogen Trading Study
• Update of MA Estuaries Project (MEP) Linked
Model
• Information available at:
www.pleasantbay.org
MEP linked model
• Used to evaluate nitrogen load reductions needed for
healthy ecosystems
• Basis for Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
• What was updated:
– Changes in hydrodynamics
– New water quality data
– Watershed development/increase in load
– New data on sediment regeneration
• Better information on which to base future decisions
Scenarios with Updated Model
1. Town strategies outlined in Targeted
Watershed Management Plan (TWMP) and
Watershed Permit run through updated model
2. Composite of strategies modified by Towns
since the Watershed Permit run through
updated model
Results of Modeled Scenarios
SMAST-
2006/2010
Basis for
Watershed
Permit
SMAST-2021
Composite
Scenario with
updated model
SMAST-2021
TWMP Scenario
with updated
model
Una:enuated load kg/yr 54,460 54,894 56,389
A:enuaAon, kg/yr 5,960 4,623 5,104
A:enuated load, kg/yr 48,500 50,271 51,285
Load removal, kg/yr 17,720 25,947 17,720
Remaining load, kg/yr 30,780 24,324 33,565
SenAnel StaAon Compliance
Primary StaKons 2 of 2 2 of 2 2 of 2
Secondary StaKons 8 of 8 6 of 8* 7 of 8**
*WMO 5 (Pochet) and WMO 6 (Namequoit River) not a:ained
**WMO 5 (Pochet) not a:ained
What Do Findings Mean?
• Increase in watershed load appears to be offset
by increased tidal flushing, but for how long?
• New attenuation factors in Muddy Creek and Tar
Kiln Creek could influence Harwich and
Brewster plans.
• Unclear implications of Chatham over-removal.
• Further study of impacts of build-out,
attenuation warranted.
Brewster Progress - 2021 Annual Report
Brewster – Next Steps
• Document reductions in un-attenuated fertilizer load at
Captain’s; include estimates of the leaching fraction.
• Determine how much of Captain’s is located in Tar Kiln
sub-watershed and how this affects loads in Pleasant Bay.
• Identify additional nitrogen removal projects to replace/
augment municipal I/A systems (and account for possible
reductions in golf course credits due to attenuation.)
• Explore nitrogen credit trading opportunities.
• Show how updated plan accommodates growth in the
watershed load.
• Prepare a contingency plan for non-traditional elements of
program.
Questions & Discussion
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 1 of 29
PLEASANT BAY ALLIANCE
2021 Annual Report
pursuant to
MassDEP Watershed Permit dated August 3, 2018
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Under the terms of the 2018 Watershed Permit, the four towns in the Pleasant Bay watershed
are required to report to MassDEP annually on their collective progress toward meeting their
individual commitments for nitrogen removal. This document is the third annual report and
summarizes that progress through mid 2021.
Annual reports are called for in the Watershed Permit to track progress toward nitrogen
removal goals, document findings related monitoring of non-traditional technologies,
summarize special-purpose studies, and generally facilitate the adaptive management approach
that will enhance the overall nitrogen management program.
In the first three Annual Reports, the Alliance towns have documented these removals of
attenuated nitrogen loads:
x Prior to permit issuance: 1,769 kg/yr
x First year: 60 kg/yr
x Second year: 115 kg/yr
x Third year: 1,622 kg/yr.
The cumulative to-date load removal of 3,566 kg/yr represents 73% of the five-year removal
commitment of 4,916 kg/yr. Planned additional sewer work in Harwich and Chatham, and
additional shellfish harvesting in Orleans, are expected to be accomplished over the next two
years, allowing the 2023 target to be met.
The four watershed towns have benefited from funding from the U.S. EPA Southeast New
England Program (SNEP) Watershed Grants. In the first three years of the Permit, important
information on non-traditional technologies has been gathered:
x On-site denitrification: Through a SNEP-funded investigation, the towns have learned
more about the performance and cost of a municipal I/A program and that knowledge
will allow Brewster to modify its nitrogen removal plans.
x Shellfish harvesting. Orleans has used SNEP funding to better understand the technical
and business issues related to oyster harvesting in Lonnie’s Pond and to be able to
explore opportunities to expand this program elsewhere.
x Permeable reactive barriers. Through a town-funded investigation of a PRB outside
the Pleasant Bay watershed, Orleans has made progress toward the possible use of this
technology in the watershed.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 2 of 29
Investigations of nitrogen credit trading and credits for stormwater management are underway
and full reporting will occur in the upcoming year.
SNEP funding has also allowed the updating of the SMAST linked watershed-embayment
model to reflect growth in watershed loads, better estimates of natural attenuation, new
information on benthic loads, improved hydrodynamics, and recent water quality data. The
model update has shown that the current favorable hydrodynamics has nearly offset a small
increase in watershed loads. There is an ongoing assessment of the model update results and
the implications for potential modifications to town plans.
In addition to these important topics, this report summarizes current water use data, water
quality monitoring programs, town capital commitments, growth in watershed nitrogen loads,
and stakeholder involvement in the Bay restoration program.
Three basic goals of this third annual report have been accomplished:
x Compliance documentation
x Compilation of information to inform adaptive management
x Identification of key steps needed to ensure compliance with the 5-year nitrogen
removal goal.
At the end of Year 3, it is appropriate to conclude that:
x The towns are proceeding under the terms of the permit, and
x The towns are on track to meet the nitrogen removals stipulated under the permit.
This program of annual reports allows the presentation of a snapshot of current data and an
update of how new findings are being used to inform the towns’ adaptive management
approaches. Progress to date reflects the considerable effort and investments expended by the
towns to address nitrogen pollution in Pleasant Bay, and the recognition that new technical
information, changes in system dynamics and community needs must all be factored into local
decisions.
BACKGROUND
The Pleasant Bay Alliance has prepared this third annual report in accordance with the August
3, 2018 Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit issued to the Towns of Brewster, Chatham, Harwich,
and Orleans. This report is intended to address the annual reporting requirements identified in
the Watershed Permit, the Pleasant Bay Targeted Watershed Management Plan (TWMP) and
the Cape Cod Commission 208 Consistency Determination on the TWMP. This report was
authorized by the four towns.
The Watershed Permit sets forth aggressive goals for achieving nutrient reductions over the
twenty-year term of the permit. Adaptive management is one of the fundamental aspects of the
Watershed Permit. It is expected that every five years there will be an updated permit that
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 3 of 29
reflects progress already made toward nitrogen removal goals, as well as changes in the
watershed and Bay that may modify those goals. An annual report is required under the permit
so that key data are assembled as the five-year period unfolds.
The technical heart of the Watershed Permit is the May 2018 Targeted Watershed Management
Plan. Section 15 of the TWMP Plan contains a list of 10 items that were recommended be
included in the annual report. When the Cape Cod Commission issued its Certificate of 208
Compliance for the TWMP, it requested information in 8 areas, some of which are the same
as contained in the TWMP. There are 14 items contained in one or both documents, and each
item is addressed below.
A key part of the Watershed Permit is the one-page Implementation Schedule, which is
reproduced in this report as Table 1. It shows the specific nitrogen removal projects included
in each Town’s plan, and the associated nitrogen removal expectations. The projects are
shown in each of four five-year segments of the 20-year term of the agreement. This annual
report covers the third year of the first five-year segment.
The Annual Report required by the Watershed Permit is due to DEP on or before the
anniversary date of the Permit, August 3. (That deadline was extended to October 3, 2020 for
the 2020 report due to the turmoil created by the corona virus pandemic.) Each annual report
is to contain information and data for the previous calendar year. Given the fact that significant
actions are typically taken at annual town meetings in May, this report includes such
information even though it is several months beyond the end of the previous calendar year.
Further, some data are regularly reported on a fiscal year basis, that is, through the end of June.
Therefore, this annual report contains information spanning from August 2020 to July 2021.
WATER CONSUMPTION
Water consumption is the most important indicator of septic nitrogen load. Table 2 presents
water consumption data for the four towns in a format that shows the total metered water in
any year between 2014 and 2020, along with the per-service residential and commercial use.
The current version of Table 2 contains town-wide data. In future years, the Alliance will
work with town water departments to explore the feasibility of reporting watershed-specific
water consumption data. (Such data are not intended to be the basis for a new estimate of
watershed nitrogen load each year, but instead should be a straightforward way to identify
trends in the largest sources of load (residential and commercial septic flows).
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 4 of 29 Table 1 Implementation Plan as Contained in the 2018 TWMP (Expected Project Completion and Potential Annual Nitrogen Removals)
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 5 of 29
Table 2
Summary of Water Consumption Data
The calendar years 2016, 2018 and 2020 were relatively dry years. A review of water
consumption data indicates that summer (June through September) rainfall below 15 inches
may be correlated with higher water use for irrigation. Using summer rainfall below 15 inches
as an indicator, the deficits in these three years were 8.2, 5.3 and 10.8 inches respectively.
(The 5-year period of water consumption data being used in the SMAST update---2011 to
2015---has an average deficit of 2.8 inches. The bases for the TWMP and Watershed Permit
are 1.3 inches of deficit for Brewster, Chatham, and Orleans, and 4.8 inches for Harwich.)
The summer of 2020 was a very dry period. For all of 2020, the four towns together billed for
nearly 2.1 billion gallons in town-wide water use, the highest total for the 7 years of record
reported in Table 2. Average per-service residential use rose to 182 gpd, about 5% higher than
the dry 2015-16 period. The impacts of the corona virus pandemic are reflected in the 2020
per-service commercial water use, which was 30% below commercial usage typical of 2014
to 2018.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 6 of 29
STATUS OF NITROGEN REMOVAL ACTIVITIES AND ESTIMATES OF
REMOVALS TO DATE
Table 3 summarizes the nitrogen removals accomplished to date for each town. In the first
three years of the Watershed Permit, one new large-scale nitrogen removal project went on
line, a portion of Harwich’s sewer program accounting for 1,422 kg/yr of removal. In addition,
Orleans removed 75 kg/yr in the Lonnie’s Pond shellfish harvesting demonstration; Chatham
provided for 100 kg/yr though sewer construction in the Muddy Creek sub-watershed; and
Harwich enacted a residential fertilizer control regulation with an associated credit of 200
kg/yr.
The 2006 and 2010 MEP/SMAST reports have estimated that a load removal of 17,717 kg/yr
is needed to restore water quality. Watershed-wide, the four towns removed 1,769 kg/yr prior
to the Watershed Permit issuance. In the first five years of the permit, the towns have
committed to another 3,145 kg/yr, most of which (2,672 kg/yr) is attributable to Phase 2 of
Harwich’s sewer program.
Compared to the target load removal of 17,717 kg/yr, the overall status of TMDL compliance
is:
Load removed prior to Watershed Permit issuance: 10.0%
Additional load removed through FY 2021: 10.1%
Total load removed through FY 2021 20.1%
Targeted load removal through FY 2023 27.7%
The load removal through 2021 (20.1%) is 1,622 kg/yr higher than the 11.0% documented in
the 2020 Annual Report, due to the Harwich sewer construction and fertilizer regulation.
If Harwich completes its Phase 2 sewer program, the 2023 goal is achievable. Figure 1
illustrates the progress to date and shows the importance of Harwich’s sewering project to
achievement of the five-year goal. In the summer of 2021, Harwich completed two of the three
proposed construction contracts for Pleasant Bay sewering, an important step toward
achievement of the 5-year goal. The nitrogen removal credits included here should be
confirmed as Harwich connects homes to its new system, with most connections expected to
occur over the period of mid 2021 to mid 2023.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 7 of 29 Table 3 Summary of Nitrogen Removal Achievements and Goals
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 8 of 29
Figure 1
Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Removal Progress
Individual town performance toward the 2023 goal is listed in Table 3 and summarized as
follows:
x Brewster: With residential and golf course fertilizer controls in place at the time of
Watershed Permit issuance, Brewster had already accomplished its share of the 2023
watershed-wide goal. Additional reductions in fertilizer use on fairways and roughs at
the Captains Golf Course are planned for 2021 and the estimate of nitrogen removal
via fertigation is being refined.
x Chatham: Its existing residential fertilizer control ordinance addresses all of
Chatham’s goal for the first 5 years of the permit. In constructing the connection with
Harwich, and addressing a neighborhood in the Frostfish Creek area, Chatham will
provide sewer service to about 150 homes in the Muddy Creek and Frostfish Creek
subwatersheds, accomplishing another 500 kg/yr, allowing it to exceed its 2023 goal.
x Harwich: To accomplish its share of the required nitrogen removal, Harwich needed
to enact residential fertilizer controls ordinance and complete Phase 2 of its proposed
sewer system (East Harwich). On January 22, 2021, the Harwich Board of Health
adopted the Town of Harwich Fertilizer and Nutrient Control Regulation. Harwich has
now completed the first two contracts of its Phase 2 sewer construction and is ready to
take advantage of its agreement with Chatham to receive the wastewater collected from
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 9 of 29
the Pleasant Bay Watershed. Contracts 1 and 2 provide sewer service to about 440
parcels in the Muddy Creek (Upper and Lower), Mill Pond, and Muddy Creek Well
sub-watersheds; these sewers provide for 1,422 kg/yr nitrogen removal.
x Orleans: Through its residential fertilizer control ordinance and the Lonnie’s Pond
shellfish harvesting demonstration, Orleans has addressed about 60% of its 2023 target.
The remainder is expected to be achieved through additional shellfish harvesting in
Lonnie’s Pond or at new sites.
In its 2021 updates to the Linked Watershed-Embayment Model, SMAST has estimated that
recent nitrogen control measures by the towns have removed an attenuated load of about 1,000
kg/yr, exclusive of the East Harwich sewers and the 809 kg/y placeholder for residential
fertilizer controls. While this independent estimate of removal is relatively close to that
reported here, the individual segments of the SMAST-estimated removal are quite different.
Better estimates of natural attenuation in Tar Kiln Stream result in a reduction in the estimated
removal credits achieved by Brewster for the portions of the Captains Golf Course in that sub-
watershed. Anticipated load reductions by Harwich are now expected to be greater than first
estimated due to revised (downward) estimates of attenuation in Upper Muddy Creek) This
revised attenuation estimate will also increase the estimated removals by Chatham in that sub-
watershed.
Nitrogen removal progress reported in Table 3 and Figure 1 is based on prior estimates of
natural attenuation and will be revised as more details are obtained on the SMAST model
update. (Using the nitrogen thresholds established in 2010, it would appear that Harwich and
Chatham may gain more credit for their plans than previously thought, and Brewster may have
gained less, based on recent better attenuation estimates. However, if these better estimates of
attenuation had been known previously, different thresholds and removal requirements may
have been established. Therefore, more study is needed to inform possible changes in the
towns’ plans.)
PERFORMANCE OF SPECIFIC NITROGEN REMOVAL TECHNOLOGIES
Each town’s plan is based on a set of nitrogen removal technologies. The nitrogen removal
associated with each technology is determined by a few key parameters, as outlined in the
appendices to the TWMP. Findings to date are reported below. Monitoring and reporting
these key factors are an important part of the towns’ adaptive management programs.
Shellfish Harvesting
Orleans is evaluating the regulatory, ecosystem, and private business issues of using
aquaculture to remove nitrogen and improve water quality. Issues have included size and age
of oysters, their marketability, the nitrogen removal in shell and flesh, nitrogen removal rates,
sediment denitrification, scalability and transferability to other sites, and overall water quality
impacts. After three years of using a pilot project in Lonnie’s Pond to identify and evaluate
these parameters, the Town contracted with an aquaculture firm to move this effort to the next
step. Monitoring has shown that approximately 0.67% of oyster harvest weight is nitrogen
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 10 of 29
(combined shell/flesh). The Town documented 60 kg of nitrogen removal in 2019 and 93 kg
in 2020, for a two-year average of 76 kg/yr.
On-going monitoring will quantify the nitrogen removal and water quality improvements, as
well as continuing to develop information on denitrification in the sediments below the
aquaculture beds. Based on Fall 2020 monitoring, the additional nitrogen removal through
denitrification was at least 9 kg and perhaps twice as much. Further discussions are necessary
with DEP to determine the amount of that removal that can be applied to the overall goals.
Technical assistance to the Lonnie’s Pond project was partially supported by the funding from
EPA’s Southern New England Program (SNEP).
Public Sewering
For determining nitrogen removal credits for sewering projects in Chatham and Harwich, the
operative variables are the measured water use at a given home or business, the estimated 10%
consumptive use (water used outside the building that does not become wastewater), and the
26.25-mg/l estimate of septic system impact on the embayment (adjusted for natural
attenuation). No adjustment is needed for the nitrogen in the Chatham treatment plant effluent,
since the discharge location is outside the Pleasant Bay watershed.
Harwich has measured the water use at homes and businesses in East Harwich that are about
to be connected to be able to compute the nitrogen load re moved from the watershed. Chatham
is preparing a similar estimate. These estimates are expected to be completed in the fall of
2021 and reconciled with load removal estimates in the recent SMAST model update. (A
wastewater flow measuring device exists at the Harwich connection point into the Chatham
sewer system. Flow measurement can be used as a check against the computation above, once
adjusted for infiltration/inflow and the nitrogen removal that would have occurred in the
abandoned septic system).
A sensitivity analysis has been discussed for the future MEP modeling to address how several
key input variables might change the estimated septic load and the overall watershed load.
Those input variables include the 26.25-mg/l recharge concentration and the assumed
consumptive use.
Harwich’s initial estimates of nitrogen removal via East Harwich sewering were based on the
SMAST’s 2010 estimate of 57% attenuation in Upper Muddy Creek and 2% in Lower Muddy
Creek. The 2021 model update by SMAST uses better attenuation estimates (10% and zero,
respectively). Since the attenuation is now thought to be lower, Harwich’s sewer program in
these sub-watersheds will actually remove significantly more attenuated nitrogen load than
first thought. An estimate of that increased removal should be quantified so that the 2022
Annual Report can properly account for that change.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 11 of 29
On-Site Denitrification
For estimating nitrogen removal credits, the key variables are the measured water use at a
given home or business, the estimated consumptive use (water used outside the building that
does not become wastewater), and the effluent concentration compared to the 26.25-mg/l
estimate of septic system impact on the embayment (adjusted for natural attenuation).
Research conducted under the SNEP grant on behalf of Brewster has determined that on-site
denitrification systems would need to produce an effluent nitrogen concentration no greater
than 12 mg/l to achieve the TMDL for the major subwatersheds in the Town. For systems that
could potentially be used in Brewster, this indicates a potential removal credit of 14.25 mg/l
m.
Using SNEP funding, the Barnstable County Department of Health and Environment has
completed an analysis of performance data for more than 15 proprietary treatment systems in
use across the US. That analysis found no system with full Massachusetts approvals able to
reliably reach the 12-mg/l goal established by Brewster. Further, that analysis found two
systems with provisional approval that show the potential for better removals, albeit after
completing the extensive monitoring needed for the MassDEP approval process. The SNEP-
funded study found that the use of provisionally-approved technologies is not a cost-effective
option for meeting the Town’s targeted nitrogen reductions. Brewster continues to evaluate
the availability of systems to meet this goal in a reliable and cost-effect ive fashion. (Given the
current information on the costs for the dentification systems, Brewster is evaluating other
options to meet the watershed permit goals including additional fertilizer management at the
Captains Golf Course and/or the use of a neighborhood wastewater treatment facility.)
Captain’s Golf Course Fertilizer Reduction
MEP modeling established baseline conditions for calculating golf course fertilizer impacts,
including application rates and nitrogen leaching. Nitrogen removals from that baseline are
computed based on the reduction in applied nitrogen and the assumed 20% fertilizer leaching
rate. Brewster previously documented the 930 kg/yr removal already taken by Brewster for
fertilizer reductions at the Captain’s Golf Course.
In 2020, Brewster conducted further studies that indicate that additional nitrogen removal of
362 kg/yr be accomplished by reducing the applications to golf course fairways and roughs
and switching from granular fertilizers to sprayed fertilizers during the spring and summer that
have lower nitrogen application rates and are applied in a manner that promotes uptake by the
golf course turf. This is followed by one granular application in the fall. The new practices
were initiated in the fall of 2020 and will continue throughout all of 2021 and beyond. In 2020,
the nitrogen loading rate to the golf course fairways was reduced from 3 lbs./1,000 sq. ft. to
2.75 lbs./1,000 sq. ft. Overall, the nitrogen applied to the golf course (factoring in the 20%
leaching rate) was 157 kg/year lower in 2020 than in 2019.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 12 of 29
Brewster’s long-term credit for nitrogen removal at Captains depends on documented
reductions in fertilizer use, a reassessment of the leaching rate, and refined estimates of
downgradient natural attenuation. The current credit of 930 kg/yr is based on the prior estimate
that no downgradient attenuation occurred, but the recent SMAST model update uses a more
current attenuation estimate of 60% in the Tar Kiln sub-watershed. An updated estimate of
Brewster’ removal credit at Captains must include both recent fertilizer application data and
the increased attenuation that applies to a portion of the golf course.
The Town is working with the Golf Course to collect fertilizer data from the last few years and
to develop a standardized process for recording and analyzing the information.
Captain’s Golf Course Fertigation
To estimate the nitrogen removal credit, the key variables are the annual volume of
groundwater withdrawn for golf course irrigation, the average nitrogen concentration of that
groundwater and the nitrogen leaching rate. Brewster has estimated that an annual load
reduction of 230 kg can be accomplished with this approach and that figure is included in the
Watershed Permit and in Table 3 of this report.
Brewster compiled the following data in support of that estimate:
x 2018: 44.429 million gallons pumped @ 2.1 mg/l: 282 kg/yr removed
x 2019: 41.999 million gallons pumped @ 2.3 mg/l: 293 kg/yr removed
The pumping records for the irrigation well at the golf course indicate that 50.866 million
gallons were withdrawn in 2020. Due to an oversight, the irrigation well was not sampled for
total nitrogen in 2020. This issue will be corrected in 2021. However, regular sampling of six
existing monitoring wells at the golf course continued in 2020 and the average nitrogen
concentration in the wells was 2.7 mg/l for total nitrogen. (The highest measurement in the
six wells was 4.1 mg/l and the lowest nitrogen concentration was 0.98 mg/l.) The average
number is similar to the 2.3 mg/l measurement from the irrigation well in 2019. Given the 2.7
mg/l average nitrogen concentration in the monitoring wells, the nitrogen removal from the
irrigation well in 2020 was likely similar to that removed in 2019, and above the 230 kg
removal estimated in the Watershed Permit. Testing of the irriga tion wells in subsequent years,
along with the upcoming leaching rate study for the golf course will help refine this number
moving forward.
Brewster’s long-term credit for nitrogen removal at Captains depends on the quantity of
nitrogen recovered in the irrigation well, a reassessment of the leaching rate, and refined
estimates of downgradient natural attenuation. The current credit of 230 kg/yr is based on the
prior estimate that no downgradient attenuation occurs, but the recent SMAST model update
uses a more current attenuation estimate of 60% in the Tar Kiln sub-watershed. An updated
estimate of Brewster’ removal credit for fertigation at Captains must include multi-year
nitrogen removals through the irrigation well and the increased attenuation that applies to a
portion of the golf course.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 13 of 29
Permeable Reactive Barriers
PRB performance is determined by the groundwater nitrogen load entering and leaving the
reactor. Orleans has installed a PRB at the Nauset Middle School (located in the Town Cove
watershed) and has monitored its performance through an on-going demonstration project;
preliminary performance has indicated total nitrogen concentrations of 1 to 2 mg/l on the
downgradient side of the PRB. Additional monitoring is necessary to resolve other related
issues, such as quantification of overall nitrogen removal, predominant groundwater flow
directions, and the portion of wastewater nitrogen flowing through the PRB. Orleans has
established a long-term target removal of 80% as the trigger for the renewal of the injected
carbon source.
WATER QUALITY MONITORING DATA AND HABITAT ASSESSMENTS
Embayment Monitoring
The focuses of ongoing monitoring programs are:
x Water column nitrogen and dissolved oxygen: The Alliance’s Water Quality
Monitoring Program is currently conducting its 22nd monitoring season in 2021.
Monitoring occurs at approximately 24 stations selected to track TMDL compliance. A
DEP-approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) is in place and includes the
following parameters: nitrogen (DON, PON, DIN, TON, TN), oxygen, temperature,
salinity, and phytoplankton pigments. Sample collection occurs five times annually
from July through September. Water samples are analyzed by the Coastal Systems
Analytical Facility at the UMass Dartmouth School for Marine Science and Technology
(SMAST) and results are reported to the Alliance. The Alliance issues periodic reports
reviewing the sampling results and conducts in-depth statistical trend assessments on a
five-year basis. The most recent statistical trend assessment was further evaluated by
SMAST to recommend assessment improvements to better address ecological and
regulatory implications. The Alliance monitoring program is funded annually by the
towns and will continue.
The most current report on statistical trends in water quality data is the Cadmus Group
report, July 2015 (Pleasant Bay Alliance Water Quality Monitoring Program:
Statistical Analysis of 2000-2014 Water Quality Monitoring Data). Water quality data
are being further reviewed as part of the updating of the SMAST linked model as
funded by a grant from SNEP. Subsequent to this model update, the Alliance plans to
resume updating of the statistical trend assessment on a five-year basis.
Alliance-generated water quality data for the period 2015 to 2019 were used by SMAST
in its 2021 update of the linked watershed-embayment model.
x Eelgrass coverage and vitality: Eelgrass coverage is a key parameter for TMDL
compliance. The Alliance and its member communities have utilized eelgrass surveys
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 14 of 29
conducted by the MassDEP Eelgrass Mapping Project. The project conducted mapping
using aerial imagery and field verification methods. Data are available for the following
years: 1994, 2001, 2006, 2010, 2012 and 2019. The MassDEP reports for 1994 to 2012
can be found at:
https://docs.digital.mass.gov/dataset/massgis-data-massdep-eelgrass-mapping-
project?_ga=2.170582688.1209249591.1560872870-1878295305.1557759152
The 2019 report is not yet available at this site.
The Alliance will work with the MassDEP and others to identify the schedule and
extent of future mapping needed to effectively monitor future changes in Pleasant Bay
eelgrass beds and to gauge restoration needs.
An analysis of eelgrass coverage from 1951 to 2019 is presented in the 2021 SMAST
update of the linked watershed-embayment model.
x Benthic infauna health and diversity – The diversity and species in the sediment
animal population is a key indicator of ecosystem health in Pleasant Bay. As part of the
integrated MEP assessment, quantitative sediment sampling for benthic animals was
completed at 34 locations throughout the Bay and this information was compared with
water quality and eelgrass measurements. This information was utilized in the
characterization of ecosystem health and the development of Pleasant Bay TMDLs. In
2008, as part of the Muddy Creek inlet improvement plan, SMAST conducted an
updated assessment of benthic infauna at six locations. In 2014, the Center for Coastal
Studies (CCS) collected benthic infauna samples at all MEP locations except Muddy
Creek. (The samples were collected at a different time of year, using different protocols
from prior MEP work.) This effort was undertaken in concert with a benthic mapping
project for the Cape Cod National Seashore. The results of this CCS study are provided
in a report entitled Below the Surface of the Bay, Marine Ecosystem Assessment of
Pleasant Bay, Cape Cod, MA, and is available at:
https://fopb.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/FCRV/FoPB-
Below%20the%20Surface-CLEAN.pdf
The SNEP-funded SMAST model update was based on assessments of water quality
and eelgrass and includes the appropriate benthic infauna data needed for assessing
ecological health in Pleasant Bay.
Project-Specific Monitoring
Monitoring programs related to mitigation measures for specific projects are:
x Orleans worked with SMAST to develop a management plan and monitoring
program for an oyster growing pilot project in Lonnie’s Pond. Orleans’ latest
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 15 of 29
reporting of monitoring data related to the first two years of the Lonnie’s Pond
oyster growing project is contained in an SMAST report dated February 1, 2021.
x Brewster agreed to monitor groundwater irrigation water quality at the Captains
Golf Course and to evaluate the ongoing reductions from fertilizer management at
the golf course. This includes a two-year study to confirm the leaching rate for
nitrogen applied in fertilizers at the course. Funding for this study was approved in
May 2021, and the project is currently beginning with the installation of monitoring
wells and pan lysimeters to measure nitrogen in water leaching through the golf
course turf.
x Chatham and Harwich are undertaking bacterial and nitrogen-related water
quality monitoring and vegetation monitoring to evaluate changes in water quality
resulting from the Muddy Creek Restoration Bridge Project. The first Muddy Creek
comprehensive monitoring report, and a vegetation monitoring report, are available
at
http://pleasantbay.org/programs-and-projects/wetlands-protection/muddy-creek-
restoration/muddy-creek-restoration-monitoring-results.
Copies of Alliance-sponsored reports are available on the PBA website, www.pleasantbay.org.
CAPITAL COMMITMENTS AND EXPENDITURES
The four towns’ financial commitments and intentions are summarized in Table 4. The high
points are as follow:
Brewster
Since 2011 Brewster has invested approximately $1,100,000 in the development and
implementation of the Town’s Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (IWRMP). The
IWRMP evaluates all the water resources in town, including management of the nitrogen load
to Pleasant Bay from Brewster’s portion of the watershed. The funding includes the golf
course leaching rate study approved in May 2021 for $140,000 that is currently underway. The
results of this study will help guide what additional nitrogen removals will be needed using
either onsite denitrification systems or a neighborhood wastewater treatment plant. At that
point funding for additional steps needed to meet the permit obligations will be requested.
Brewster is also developing a preliminary concept plan for a traditional neighborhood
wastewater treatment facility as required under the watershed permit. Over the next few years
this plan will be updated once more information is developed at the golf course and a better
estimate of the facility’s size can be developed.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 16 of 29 Table 4 Summary of Capital Commitments
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 17 of 29
The option of using this traditional facility to manage future nitrogen loads under buildout will
be considered and will be evaluated in context with the onsite denitrification option
recognizing that new information on these systems’ performance will likely be available at the
five-year point in the watershed permit.
Chatham
The Town of Chatham has an approved CWMP that partitioned the Town into two phases;
Phase 1 includes areas to be sewered to achieve TMDL compliance in all Chatham watersheds
(including Pleasant Bay), and Phase 2 calls for sewering of the remainder of the Town not
needed to meet TMDLs. To date, the Town has appropriated over $130 million dollars toward
these goals, and most recently appropriated approximately $15 million to address areas
targeting the Pleasant Bay Watershed, including support of the Harwich CWMP through the
connection project that will allow portions of East Harwich to be sewered and treated at the
Chatham Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF).
The Chatham-Harwich Regionalization Connection Project is essentially complete, and
construction will be finished by August 2021. This will serve as the connection for East
Harwich in addition to serving 60 properties within the Muddy Creek sub-watershed of
Pleasant Bay. The Phase 1C 3&4 project that includes a neighborhood in the Frostfish Creek
subwatershed is also nearing substantial completion and will be complete by September 2021.
Finally, the Phase 1E Stony Hill/Crowell Road Infrastructure Improvements Project is
approaching substantial completion with the sewer portions of the project completed and
awaiting acceptance by the Town. That project will be complete by October 2021, serving an
additional 10 properties within the subwatershed.
The Town also has one other sewer projects: Phase 1D-2: Route 137 – Morton Road Sewer
Extension Project is in design. The Phase 1D-2 project will sewer 30 properties within sub-
watersheds to Pleasant Bay (whereas the bulk of this project addresses the Town’s southern
facing estuaries).
Harwich
The Town of Harwich has an approved Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan
(CWMP) that calls for sewering large sections of the Pleasant Bay watershed located in East
Harwich. Town Meeting in 2018 approved over $20 million of spending on the construction
of a sewer system hooking in approximately 640 parcels in this area. The area known as Phase
2 of the CWMP was designed to include two construction contracts. Contract 1 was awarded
to the Robert B. Our Company which commenced work in summer of 2019. As a result of a
bid overrun associated with Contract 1, Contract 2 was reduced in scope to maximize the
Town’s existing appropriation. Contract 2 was awarded to RJV Construction which
commenced work in January of 2020. Both construction projects progressed during 2020 and
final completion is imminent. Contracts 1 and 2 will serve 440 parcels and the remaining 200
Phase 2 parcels beyond the limits of Contracts 1 and 2 have been incorporated in to a third
construction contract to be completed upon a supplemental appropriation. Accordingly, the
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 18 of 29
schedule for Contract 3 is uncertain. The Phase 2 sewer system will connect into the Chatham
wastewater treatment facility upon completion. Harwich was successful in obtaining a state
revolving fund (SRF) loan at a 0% interest due to its nitrogen removal efforts as well as
regional cooperation with Chatham.
The Town of Harwich is currently undergoing a review of its CWMP with a potential to re-
sequence some of the phases of the plan. Phase 3 was anticipated to also be in the Pleasant Bay
watershed, but this East Harwich work may be delayed until a future phase. Harwich is
currently in the process of developing a town-wide SewerCAD model which will inform re-
sequencing efforts and provide updated construction costs. The Towns of Dennis, Harwich
and Yarmouth continue discussions regarding the DHY Clean Waters Community Partnership;
however, no action has been taken.
Orleans
Prior to the Watershed Permit issuance, Orleans spent $3.4M on the design and installation of
downtown sewers in the area of a Mass DOT construction project to avoid a road opening
prohibition. Another $2.7M was spent in the design of a new WWTF. At the 2019 and 2020
Annual Town Meetings, voters approved a total of $59.1M for the construction of downtown
sewers and the wastewater treatment plant. Construction began in September 2020. While
these expenditures do not immediately accrue to the benefit of Pleasant Bay, they are part of
the infrastructure that will eventually serve portions of Orleans in the Pleasant Bay watershed.
In May 2021, the Town Meeting authorized $658,000 for final design of sewers in the
Meetinghouse Pond sub-embayment of the Pleasant Bay system. Final design will be
completed in FY 2022, enabling the $17M construction to begin in FY 2023. Upon completion
in FY 2025, septic nitrogen from households in the Meetinghouse Pond sub-watershed would
be removed from this area and treated/disposed outside the Pleasant Bay watershed, at the
WWTF mentioned above. The goal is the removal of an annual load of 2,015 kg, or about 30%
of Orleans’ share of the TMDLs. Under the current plan, those removals would begin in the
second 5-year segment of the Implementation Schedule, consistent with the Watershed Permit.
Orleans has continued with its shellfish harvesting demonstration project in Lonnie’s Pond.
The Town has established an initial nitrogen removal target of 75 kg/yr through the Lonnie’s
Pond Management Plan. The Plan is implemented through an aquaculture contractor and a
monitoring contractor. Ward Aquafarms of Buzzards Bay was selected as the aquaculture
contractor, while SMAST was selected as the monitoring contractor. The Plan provides the
option to place 5.5 million small oysters or 2.1 million larger oysters in the Pond to achieve
the nitrogen removal target. The oysters will be grown for the summer and removed by the
end of the growing season in the same year. Oysters will be grown to market size in another
location. In CY 2019, the demonstration project removed 60 kg of nitrogen from the Pleasant
Bay Watershed. This represents about 3% of the Town’s overall goal for multiple shellfish
harvesting operations in the Pleasant Bay watershed. The Watershed Permit’s Implementation
Schedule calls for 273 kg/yr removal in place by the end of FY 2023, which translates to three
other harvesting areas of comparable size to the Lonnie’s Pond operation.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 19 of 29
Based on the results of a PRB demonstration at the Middle School, Orleans is now planning
to add this technology to its plan, and its 5-yr CIP includes $3.4 million in FY 2024 for
constructing one or more PRBs in the Pleasant Bay Watershed.
The Orleans Amended CWMP is in draft form and the Town plans to complete it before the
end of FY 2023, consistent with the Implementation Schedule.
(The Commission has requested annual documentation of each town’s ability to support the
level of funding that is proposed, as well as the financial impact on users. That request will be
addressed in subsequent annual reports.)
PROGRESS IN NON-STRUCTURAL AND NON-SEWERING OPTIONS
Non-structural options include such techniques as residential lawn fertilizer controls, land set-
asides, rezoning, etc. Non-sewering approaches include on-lot denitrification, inlet widening,
etc. Progress through FY 2021 includes:
Brewster
Brewster has approved the funding to conduct the leaching rate study at Captains Golf Course
and has begun implementing the project which will extend over the next two years. The Town
has also developed the framework for an advanced onsite septic system program and evaluated
the level of treatment needed from each septic system in the main subwatersheds that are
located within the Town. The framework includes recommendations for a general bylaw and
Board of Health regulation to implement the onsite system requirements. It also includes initial
approaches for managing the operation, maintenance and monitoring of systems that would be
installed for nitrogen removal. This progress is well documented in the July 2020 report by
the Horsley Witten Group, Inc. entitled SNEP Task 1A: Onsite Denitrification Systems
Summary Report. That report was funded in part by SNEP.
In addition, since 2008, the Town, along with the Brewster Conservation Trust has
permanently preserved approximately 250 acres of open space in the Pleasant Bay watershed,
removing land from development that would impact the buildout nitrogen load to the Bay.
Preserving this land reduces the impact of buildout development on the future nitrogen load to
Pleasant Bay.
Chatham
Chatham continues to investigate opportunities to address stormwater infrastructure
improvements throughout the town as part of its MS4 program. The Town adopted its
Fertilizer Regulation in November 2014 and continues to support and enforce these
requirements.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 20 of 29
The Town, in cooperation with Harwich, completed construction of the Muddy Creek Bridge
several years ago. The two towns in coordination with the Pleasant Bay Alliance are
monitoring the success of that project. The project changed out small culverts which limited
flow with a clear span bridge to allow for increased tidal flow during each tide cycle.
Chatham is purchasing additional open space adjacent to Goose Pond as part of its Land Bank
Open Space, and closing is expected by year-end 2020 A conservation restriction has been
approved by the Conservation Commission and the Board of Selectmen and is awaiting final
state approval. This purchase will preserve an additional 4.17 acres within the Pleasant Bay
Watershed.
Harwich
In 2016, the Town, in cooperation with the Town of Chatham, removed an earthen dike and
culvert structure that blocked tidal flow between Muddy Creek and Pleasant Bay, and replaced
it with a new Muddy Creek Bridge. The two towns in coordination with the Pleasant Bay
Alliance are monitoring the success of that project. As a result of the project, tide range in
Muddy Creek has increased and is nearly the same as for the main basin of Pleasant Bay.
The Harwich Board of Health adopted its Fertilizer and Nutrient Control Regulation in January
2021 to provide a regulatory framework that results in reducing nutrient loadings from the
application of fertilizers.
The Town of Harwich, working through its Board of Selectmen and its Conservation
Commission, works closely with Harwich Conservation Trust to purchase property or obtain
the necessary conservation restrictions to protect environmental resources throughout the
town. Over the past fifteen years this partnership has led to the purchase of the 43-acre
Monomoy River Woodlands and the 49-acre Pleasant Bay Woodlands properties in the
Pleasant Bay watershed. More recently this partnership led to the protection of the 17-acre
Marini property adjacent to Muddy Creek in the Pleasant Bay Watershed.
Orleans
In 2020, the Town Meeting voted to acquire a 2.6-acre parcel fronting on Arey’s Pond,
preventing development of the parcel. There are no current zoning changes anticipated in the
Pleasant Bay watershed, although 2017 rezoning in the downtown area is expected to help
concentrate growth there, outside the Pleasant Bay watershed.
GROWTH IN NITROGEN LOAD
Growth in the watershed nitrogen load, to the extent not already accounted for in a town’s plan,
represents both a financial burden and the need to expand/modify the plan. Growth is defined
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 21 of 29
as increased nitrogen load since the baseline years that are part of the 2006 MEP report and
the 2010 update related Harwich water use. Those baseline years are:
Brewster: 2002 to 2004
Chatham: 2002 to 2003
Harwich: 2004 to 2007 (updated from 2004 in MEP-2006 report)
Orleans: 2002 to 2003
A broad assessment of growth trends is possible through analysis of the water use data
described above and in Table 2. That assessment will be include d in later-years’ annual reports
once watershed-specific data are available.
Reporting by SMAST, under the SNEP-funded update of watershed nitrogen loads, indicates
an approximate 3.5% increase in watershed-wide un-attenuated load between the 2010
SMAST report (data mid-point of 2003), and the 2011-to-2015 basis for the 2021 update (data
mid-point of 2013). The associated increase in attenuated load is approximately 5.7% over the
10-year period. The increase in attenuated load reflects both the increase in un-attenuated load
and revised estimates of attenuation that are, in the aggregate, less than 2010 estimates.
In their CWMPs or other planning studies, the towns have projected nitrogen loads out to either
build-out or to an earlier planning horizon. Those projections are for a 27% increase in
nitrogen load watershed-wide, with individual town projections ranging from 19% to 41%.
The towns have not clearly laid out their plans for accommodating the growth in load that has
already occurred (2003 to 2013) or the further growth anticipated through their planning
horizons. Accommodating growth in watershed loads is an important task that the towns must
address.
MODELING OF WATERSHED LOADS AND EMBAYMENT WATER QUALITY
The SMAST/MEP technical report on Pleasant Bay was completed in 2006 and was
supplemented with further analysis in 2010. That report formed the basis for the Pleasant Bay
TMDLs, and with the updated information allowed the establishment of the nitrogen load
removals requirements of each by towns. With funding from the 2018 EPA SNEP grant, the
Alliance has overseen the updating of the watershed loads and a re-modeling of receiving water
quality under current hydrodynamic conditions. This effort has allowed the input of additional
water quality and consideration of habitat data accumulated since the early 2000s. This
remodeling was completed in June 2021 and is summarized in the SMAST report Linked
Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the
Pleasant Bay System, Orleans, Chatham and Harwich, Massachusetts.
The 2021 SMAST study updated all the key components of the Pleasant Bay MEP assessment
including:
x An update of watershed water-use and nitrogen loads
x Updating nitrogen recycling from Bay sediments
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 22 of 29
x Assessment of status of eelgrass habitat based on MassDEP surveys
x Revised estimates of attenuation of two sub-basins (Muddy Creek and Tar Kiln
Stream/Salt Marsh)
x Updated system tidal hydrodynamics, including new inlets (post-2006) and new
bathymetry
x Scenarios to predict changes in water quality under current town nitrogen removal plans
There are three fundamental variables considered in the 2021 SMAST study, and their impacts
on predicted water quality provide insight into potential changes in the Watershed Permit:
x An increase in watershed loads
x Better estimates of attenuation and benthic recycling, and improved hydrodynamics
x Implementation of town nitrogen removal plans, full and partial.
The “Composite Scenario” considered by SMAST reflects full sewering in Chatham
(removing much more than Chatham’s responsibilities under the Watershed Permit) and
removals in Brewster and Orleans that are significantly less than their commitments. The
“TMDL Scenario” considers just the specific nitrogen removal requirements of the Watershed
Permit.
The SMAST study involved these two primary future scenarios, which are compared here with
the 2010 work which is the basis for the Watershed Permit.
SMAST-2010
(basis for
Permit)
SMAST-2021
Composite
Scenario
SMAST-2021
TWMP
Scenario
Un-attenuated load, kg/yr 54,460 54,894 56,389
Attenuation, kg/yr 5,960 4,623 5,104
Attenuated load, kg/yr 48,500 50,271 51,285
Load removal, kg/yr 17,720 25,947 17,720
Remaining load, kg/yr 30,780 24,324 33,565
Sentinel station compliance
Primary stations 2 of 2 2 of 2 2 of 2
Secondary stations 8 of 8 6 of 8 7 of 8
Comparing the first 2021 SMAST model run (Composite Scenario) with the 2010 evaluation
shows the effect of increased watershed loads and a partial, unbalanced set of town load
removals in the face of improved hydrodynamics. In this scenario, two of the secondary
stations are predicted not to meet the target concentrations, even though the remaining load
(after town removals) is only 79% of the threshold loads. This is because the load removals,
although larger than required under the Watershed Permit, are heavily influenced by larger-
than-required removals in Chatham. The less-than-required removals in Brewster and Orleans
do not allow two of the northerly secondary stations to reach their target concentrations.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 23 of 29
Comparing the second 2021 SMAST model run (Composite Scenario) with the 2010
evaluation shows the effect of increased watershed loads and the balanced set of town load
removals that the towns have committed to in the Watershed Permit. In this scenario, the
Watershed Permit removals (17,720 kg/yr) result in a remaining attenuated load (after town
removals) of 33,565 kg/yr, 7% higher than the threshold load. In this scenario, only one of the
secondary stations is predicted not to meet the target concentrations. The near full compliance
at the sentinel stations indicates that the improved hydrodynamics nearly offset the 5.7%
increase in attenuated watershed load if the town remove their 17,720 kg/yr commitments.
Neither scenario considers the effect of future growth on any town’s ability to meet nitrogen
reduction targets.
In the upcoming year, it is proposed that the SMAST model will be run to help estimate
possible new threshold loads that would apply to current hydrodynamics, and to consider
added watershed loads through build-out. The results of these further studies will be reported
in full in the fourth annual report due in August 2022.
GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE PERMITS AND I/A SYSTEMS
There are 16 Groundwater Discharge Permit holders in Brewster, Chatham, Harwich, and
Orleans. There are four facilities with GWD permits located in the Pleasant Bay watershed:
x Pleasant Bay Health & Living Center (Brewster), 26,500 gpd permitted maximum
x Chatham Bars Inn (Chatham), 60,000 gpd permitted maximum
x Wequassett Inn (Harwich), 45,000 gpd permitted maximum
x Nickerson State Park (Brewster), 50,900 gpd permitted maximum
Each of the first three facilities has a total nitrogen discharge limit of 10 mg/l of total nitrogen.
In 2020, The Pleasant Bay Health & Living Center regularly met its permit requirements with
no exceedances. The Chatham Bars Inn regularly met its permit requirements with no
exceedances. The Wequassett Inn has experienced some minor excursions, but generally
produces very good effluent with respect to nitrogen and its other permitted parameters. The
SMAST 2021 model update reports that the aggregate nitrogen load from these three facilities
is 705 kg/yr.
The permit for Nickerson State Park allows Title 5 discharges up to the stated maximum and
limits total nitrogen recharge to 2,120 kg/yr. Not all of the permitted activities are in the
Pleasant Bay watershed.
As of July 2021, there are no applications pending for new GWD permits in the watershed.
There are two other GWD permits of note in the region. The municipal wastewater treatment
facility in Chatham discharges outside the Pleasant Bay watershed but is soon to receive
wastewater and nitrogen load from the Pleasant Bay watershed in Harwich. Similarly, the
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 24 of 29
Town of Orleans has obtained a GWD permit for the under-construction Orleans municipal
WWTF discharge at a site off Lots Hollow Road. That Orleans facility will receive and treat
wastewater and nitrogen load from at least the Meetinghouse Pond sub-watershed.
SMAST has reported that there are now 119 I/A systems in the watershed (3 in Brewster, 84
in Chatham, 5 in Harwich and 27 in Orleans). Analysis of reported effluent data indicates an
average total nitrogen concentration of 21.9 mg/l, or an average 17% reduction from the 26.25
mg/l baseline for traditional septic systems.
Each Town’s Health Department has provided data on new (between January 2019 and
December 2019) Title 5 systems and new private wells in the Pleasant Bay watershed, as
follows: The counts of new Title 5 permits include both new systems and system repairs and
upgrades.
All Title 5
Permits Issued
Town-wide
New Title 5
Systems in
Pleasant Bay
Watershed
New Private
Potable Wells in
Pleasant Bay
Watershed
Brewster 126
Chatham 71 0
Harwich 135 5 30
Orleans 110 6 1
DATA FROM BUILDING DEPARTMENTS AND ASSESSORS
In future annual reports, town departments will provide information on development and
redevelopment as derived from the towns’ traditional annual reports that are released before
Town Meetings. The Commission has also requested data on the location and square footage
of new structures and the number of new bedrooms in the watershed. The Alliance and the
towns will work with Commission staff during the fourth and fifth years of the permit to
develop a practical cost-effective approach toward meeting this reporting goal.
EVALUATION OF NITROGEN TRADING OPPORTUNITIES
The Alliance is investigating “nitrogen trading”, whereby one town could remove more than
its share of nitrogen load on behalf of another town that would remove less th an its share. The
second town would pay the first town for the nitrogen load removed on its behalf. That
investigation is funded in part by the 2018 EPA SNEP grant.
In early 2021, data were obtained from the towns to compute overall costs for nitrogen control
and to estimate expected annual nitrogen removals. These costs and removal estimates were
adjusted for a common set of assumptions to allow comparison of each town’s plans on a
“dollar per pound of nitrogen removed” basis. Of the five technologies being used or
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 25 of 29
considered by the towns (sewers, I/A systems, permeable reactive barriers, golf course
fertilizer controls and shellfish harvesting), these unit cost were found to vary from less than
$10/lb to over $700/lb. The cost differentials between technologies can provide the impetus
for nitrogen trading.
The investigation identified three trading scenarios, wherein towns would scale back their use
of the relatively more expensive technologies (I/A systems and permeable reactive barriers)
and other towns would increase their use of relatively less technologies (principally sewers).
The identified scenarios would result in savings in equivalent annual costs of $660,000/yr to
the “buyers” and an equivalent cost benefit to the “sellers”.
The report summarizing this investigation is undergoing final review and is expected to be
completed in early fall 2021. Should towns elect to pursue trading opportunities, a change in
the Watershed Permit would be needed to modify towns’ nitrogen removal commitments. It
is unlikely that nitrogen-trading-related changes would be known before the end of the first 5-
year period of the current Permit.
CONSIDERATION OF NITROGEN REMOVAL CREDITS FOR STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
None of the watershed towns has proposed to gain nitrogen removal credits from their
stormwater removal activities, on the premise that such removals are apt to be small. The
attenuated nitrogen load from impervious surfaces estimated in the 2006 MEP report is 3,796
kg/yr (9% of the total load from all sources), and only about one-third of that load originates
from town roadways. Nonetheless, towns are required to address stormwater issues under the
EPA General Permit for Municipal Small Storm Sewer Systems (the MS4 Permit) and the
nitrogen removal from those activities might be worth documenting. Using funds from the
2020 EPA SNEP grant, the Alliance is estimating the nitrogen removals from several Best
Management Practices (BMPs), including non-structural practices (such as street sweeping
and catch basin cleaning) and structural facilities (such as grassed swales and rain gardens).
The nitrogen removal capabilities of some BMPs can be estimated from EPA performance
curves, largely for structural BMPs. A computational procedure is being developed by the
Alliance to account for non-structural BMP removals. Initial investigations show that current
Cape Cod practices may remove about 5% of the total impervious load, and that about 15%
removal may be possible with enhanced practices. A draft report on this investigation is being
reviewed by the SNEP Technical Assistance Network and is expected to be complete by the
fall of 2021. If agreement is reached on a methodology, and if towns are able to provide
pertinent data, then the Alliance may be able to document some small credits for stormwater
management in the 2021 Annual Report.
POSSIBLE CHANGES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND PERMIT
The Watershed Permit anticipates “mid-course corrections” in any of the towns’ nitrogen
removal plans by allowing changes to the implementation schedule at the end of each 5-year
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 26 of 29
segment of the permit term. After the first three years, there have been no formal
announcements of proposed changes, but there have been informal discussions that changes
are being contemplated, as discussed above.
The Town of Harwich is currently undergoing a review of its CWMP with a potential to re-
sequence some of the future phases, due to the recent large increases in construction costs.
Nitrogen removal activities in the Pleasant Bay watershed may be impacted in the first 5 years
of the Watershed Permit.
The Town of Chatham may be providing sewer service to some homes in the Pleasant Bay
watershed earlier than first anticipated. If so, Chatham will remove about 10% of the load that
the Watershed Permit shows occurring in the last 10 years of the permit term.
Orleans and Brewster have yet to fully define the technologies or approaches that will be
employed to complete their five-year load removal requirements.
Each annual report will contain an update on possible modifications to the implementation
schedule. Expect further reporting on these potential changes next year.
STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
Over the past year, outreach activities undertaken by the towns and Pleasant Bay Alliance have
been curtailed due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It is anticipated that outreach efforts will be
renewed now that public meeting restrictions have been relaxed.
Since the issuance of the Watershed Permit in August 2018, the following public meetings
and hearings have been conducted related to Pleasant Bay nitrogen reductions:
Brewster
Meetings were held with the Select Board and Board of Health to discuss
implementation of the Town’s IWRMP, including the actions proposed for Pleasant
Bay.
Chatham
Chatham is well into implementation of Phase 1 of its Comprehensive Wastewater
Management Plan that was completed in 2009. The Town has had many successful
votes at Town Meetings to support multiple projects (totaling over $130 million to
date), including the most recent vote of an additional $7 million dollars for wastewater
authorization and debt exclusion that passed in May 2019. A portion of these funds is
for work related to sewering in the Pleasant Bay watershed.
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 27 of 29
The Town also maintains a detailed site on its webpage that provides information
regarding the approved plan and links to current sewer infrastructure projects.
https://www.chatham-ma.gov/comprehensive-wastewaternutrient-management-
plan
In addition, the Town through its consultant GHD provides a construction
implementation webpage to inform residents of ongoing work related to the sewer
implementation that can be found at:
https://chathamscproject.info/
Harwich
The Town’s wastewater project is actively covered on the Town website and regularly
discussed by the Board of Selectmen. The Town hired Weston & Sampson (whose
representative is Charlie Sumner a former administrator in the town of Brewster) to
assist in outreach efforts along with CDM Smith pertaining to the Pleasant Bay
watershed area improvements contained in Phase 2. The Board of Selectmen, Board of
Health and the recently approved by town meeting Water/Wastewater Commission will
continue outreach efforts throughout this project.
Orleans
Orleans developed a Consensus Plan to move forward with wastewater management
solutions through a comprehensive public process involving local boards, citizens, and
regional and state officials. The public process was critical to a successful program.
Since adopting a plan for limited public sewers augmented by non-traditional
remediation technologies, the Town made all wastewater planning decisions at the
Board of Selectmen level, with opportunity for public input at every step.
With approval of a downtown public sewer system in May 2019, responsibility for
implementing the construction program was transferred to the Board of Water & Sewer
Commissioners. The Town is presently working to develop sewer regulations and will
seek public input before they are approved.
Lonnie’s Pond residents have been advised of the Town’s ongoing demonstration
project to grow oysters in Lonnie’s Pond. All pond abutters were notified as part of the
Conservation Commission approval process.
Alliance
The Alliance has made public presentations on the Pleasant Bay watershed permitting
approach at well-attended conferences:
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 28 of 29
x The Cape Cod Commission’s OneCape conference in Harwich in August 2018
(an update presentation occurred at the 2019 OneCape conference.)
x WBNERR’s Cape Coastal Conference in Hyannis in December 2018, and
x The Annual Conference of the New England Water Environment Association in
Boston in January 2019.
In the upcoming year, additional stakeholder involvement will occur as follows
Brewster
Additional meetings with the Select Board, Board of Health and the public are planned
in 2021 and 2022 to discuss the implementation of the Watershed Permit and how
Brewster will meet its nitrogen reduction goals. The options for using advanced onsite
systems will be presented and input will be solicited on issues related to the
implementation of the Town program, including financing options and the
requirements of the operation, maintenance, and monitoring of the onsite treatment
system.
Chatham
The Town continues as an active member of the Pleasant Bay Alliance, the Cape Cod
Water Protection Collaborative, and the Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund
Management Board.
In addition, the Town actively engages the public through its Board of Selectmen
meetings, Town Meeting process, and the Water & Sewer Advisory Committee, who
provide advice and recommendations to the Water & Sewer Commissioners (Board of
Selectmen) regarding the water and sewer systems of the Town, and neighborhood
meetings related to implementation of the CWMP.
Harwich
The Town’s past efforts will continue to be modified and improved to seek additional
input from the various stakeholders involved in the town’s compliance with its
Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan. The Town is currently in the process
of revising its CWMP, and it is anticipated that several stakeholder meetings will be
scheduled over the next year to provide an opportunity for public input regarding the
proposed revisions. The Town continues to be an active member of the Pleasant Bay
Alliance.
Orleans
The Board of Water & Sewer Commissioners will hold regular, formally-noticed
meetings to review progress on public sewer construction. Regular reporting to the
Town regarding the Lonnie’s Pond oyster project will be made to the Water Quality
Pleasant Bay Alliance –2021 Annual Report for Watershed Permit – July 30, 2021 Page 29 of 29
Committee, and all reports will be posted on the Town website. The Town’s
engineering consultant will meet with the Board of Selectmen to report on progress of
a demonstration Permeable Reactive Barrier currently installed at Nauset Middle
School. Planning for future installation of PRBs at strategic locations will take place
during 2021-2022.
Alliance
A public outreach program is part of the watershed permit implementation activities
funded by EPA under the SNEP grant and is now ongoing. That outreach program will
be rolled out in the second half of 2021. The Alliance is preparing a series of video
recordings to provide a citizen-friendly summary of each task funded by the 2018 SNEP
grant:
x Municipal program for I/A systems
x Orleans shellfish harvesting program
x Opportunities for nitrogen trading
x The 2021 SMAST update to the linked watershed-embayment model
These and other public outreach materials are available on the Alliance website:
https://pleasantbay.org/programs-and-projects/watershed-planning/pleasant-bay-
watershed-permit
Key issues for the public are:
o The large cost of nitrogen removal programs
o Fairness in allocation of costs among users and non-users and between
residential and commercial property owners.
o Proper incorporation of non-traditional approaches to nitrogen removal.
FYI ITEMS (MAIL) September 20, 2021
1.CVEC Electricity Generation Period July 9 – August 8, 2021
2.Cape Cod Healthcare Blood Drive Flyer
3.Hearing Notice for Chapter A Amendments to the Enabling Regulations
Thursday, September 23rd
11 am – 5 pm
Brewster Police Department
631 Harwich Rd
Amazon gift card for all donors!!
*******Appointments are required. To make an appointment,
please visit our website listed below.
Archive d: Friday, September 17, 2021 11:49:03 AM
From: Lisa Dillon
Se nt: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:11:08 +0000ARC
To: Lisa Dillon
Cc: Sheila Lyons; 2021-03-30-1125 Testing 4
Subje ct: Hearing Notice - Chapter A Enabling Regulations Amendments, Thursday, October 7, 2021
Se ns itivity: Normal
Attachme nts :
2021-10-07 Chapter A Amendments.pdf;
Good Afte rnoon,
Attached i s the hearing noti ce for Chapter A Ame ndme nts to the Enabl i ng Re gulations be i ng he l d on Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 3:00 p.m.
The meeti ng will be held virtual l y, with members of the Cape Cod Commission participating re motely, pursuant to Chapte r 20 of the Acts of 2021, An Act
Relative to Exte ndi ng Ce rtain Covid-19 Measures Adopted Duri ng the State of Eme rge ncy, si gned i nto l aw on June 16, 2021. Instructions to participate are
liste d on the he ari ng notice.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Lisa
Lisa Dillon
Com m ission Clerk
Cape Cod Com m ission
3225 Main Street
Barnstable, MA 02630
Direct 508-744-1 209
Main 508-362-3828
www.capecodcom m ission.org
NOTICE: To view the posting date/time and materials related to agenda items, please visit the
Cape Cod Commission’s official posting location at www.capecodcommission.org/meetingnotices
HEARING NOTICE
CAPE COD COMMISSION
CHAPTER A/CODE OF CAPE COD COMMISSION REGULATIONS
Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 3:00 p.m.
The Cape Cod Commission will hold a virtual public hearing on Thursday, October 7, 2021 @ 3:00 pm. At this hearing,
the Commission will consider and potentially vote whether to submit to the Assembly of Delegates for adoption
proposed technical amendments to Chapter A of the Code of Cape Cod Commission Regulations of General Application,
the Enabling Regulations Governing Review of Developments of Regional Impact, Barnstable County Ordinance 90-12, as
amended. The purpose of these proposed technical amendments is to correct Schrivener’s/clerical errors within the
document.
Note: The meeting will be held virtually, with members of the Cape Cod Commission participating remotely, pursuant to
Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021, An Act Relative to Extending Certain Covid-19 Measures Adopted During the State of
Emergency, signed into law on June 16, 2021
The public can join and participate in the meeting using one of the following methods:
• By clicking on the following zoom meeting link: https://capecodcommission.org/ccc/join, passcode: join
• Going online to www.capecodcommission.org/ccc and clicking on “Join Virtual Meeting.” Participants wishing to
speak should click “Participants” icon on the lower toolbar and then click “Raise Hand” in the dialog box to notify
the chair.
• Calling in to (929) 205-6099 and entering meeting ID 968 0382 00871. Participants wishing to speak should
press *9 to notify the chair. It is recommended that participants access materials in advance of the meeting.
Please join the virtual hearing at least fifteen minutes before it begins; please call (508) 362-3828 for assistance if you
have any issues joining the meeting.
Anyone wishing to testify orally will be welcome to do so. Written comments may also be submitted by email prior to
the hearing to regulatory@capecodcommission.org.
A copy of the proposed amendments is available for review at http://www.capecodcommission.org/meetingnotices and
also at the Cape Cod Commission office during regular business hours. For further information or to schedule a viewing
appointment, please contact the Commission office at (508)362-3828.
If you are deaf or hard of hearing or are a person with a disability who requires an accommodat ion, contact the
Cape Cod Commission at (508) 362-3828; for Telecommunications Relay Services (TRS) dial 711.
Caso estas informações sejam necessárias em outro idioma, por favor, contate o Coordenador de Título VI da
MPO pelo telefone (508) 362-3828 or Para serviços de retransmissão de telecomunicações, disque 711