The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0000 OCEAN AVENUE `�-4ora.�j on 7�D FILE BACK IN ATTIC BANKERS BOX FILE ALPHABETICALY BY STREET PLEASE DO NOT FILE IN STREET FILE aQ:forms/largeplansbankersbox t s 5�--� �� GC GLti1 ��E_' `G . C� �-- ��f��Dy� � �,� �G � � ��/� Ei k � �' � FINAL Environmental Assessment; Finding of No Significantimpact, and Clean. Water Act, Section 404(b)(1 ) Evaluation Stewart s Creek Restoration Barnstable, MassachusettsUS ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS � , january ,2005 . New En�and Dislrid FINAL Environnientat Assessment, Clean.Water Act Section 404(b)(1)'Evaluation, f and Finding.of N6 Significant Impact, 'Stewart's Creek ~Barnstable, Massachusetts Prepared by: Engineering/Planning Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New England District Concord,Massachusetts JANUARY-2005 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANTINIPACT The proposed Stewart's Creek Restoration Project will restore a variety of estuarine habitats of Massachusetts' coastal ecosystem. Approximately 4.0 acres of salt marsh,4.5 acres of open water,and 1.5 acres of intertidal flat will be restored to provide habitat appropriate for benthic invertebrates,fish, and wildlife. Four alternatives were considered.for the project. The alternatives included: 1)a no action alternative which would make no improvements to the project area,and therefore,the marsh and open water areas of Stewart's Creek would continue to degrade;2)the installation of a culvert and the dredging of a channel into the pond to restore salt marsh;3)the installation of a culvert and the dredging of the pond(with on site disposal)to restore salt marsh and open water habitat;and 4)the installation;of a culvert and the dredging of the pond(with off site disposal)to restore salt marsh and open water habitat. This Environmental Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and all applicable environmental statutes and executive orders. My determination that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required is based upon the following information contained in the Environmental Assessment and the following considerations: 1. Based on physical analyses,the material in the project area will have no significant adverse effect upon existing water quality at the construction,dredging,or disposal areas. 2. The project will not affect any State or Federally threatened,endangered,or rare species,pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. 3. Impacts to significant cultural resources as a result of dredging or restoration will be avoided as a result of coordination.with the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer(MA,SHPO),Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources (BUAR)and the Wampangag Tribe of Gay Head(Aquinnah). 4. A construction window of 7 September to 30 April will be used to avoid peak beach use season.. Based on my review and evaluation of the environmental effects as presented in the Environmental Assessment,I have determined that implementation of the proposed Stewart's Creek Restoration project will have no significant direct, indirect,or cumulative impacts on the quality of the human or natural environment. Because no significant environmental impacts will result, an.Environniental Impact Statement is not required and will not need to be prepared. Date Thomas L. Koning Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer i FA-1. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number I. INTRODUCTION , 4 II. PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE HISTORY 4 III. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION 4 IV. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE'ACTION 5 V. PROPOSED PLAN 9 VI. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 9 VII. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 17 1. General and Historic Conditions 17 2. Wetlands,Vegetation,and Cover Types 17 3. Benthic Invertebrates and Shellfish 18 4. Fish 19 5. Wildlife 19 6. Threatened and Endangered'Species: 20 7. Recreation and Aesthetics 20 8. Water Quality 20 9. Sediment Composition and Chemistry 21 10. Air Quality 22 11. Essential Fish Habitat 22 12. Historic and Archaeological Resources 22 13. Flooding; 23 14. Traffic 23 VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 24 1. General 24 2. Wetlands,Vegetation, and Cover Types 24 3. Benthic Invertebrates and Shellfish 25 4. Fish 25 5. Wildlife 26 6. Threatened and Endangered Species T` .27 7. Recreation and Aesthetics 27 8. Water Quality 27 9. Sediment Composition and Chemistry" 28 10. Air Quality 28 11. Essential Fish Habitat - 28 12. Historic and Archaeological Resources. 28 13. Flooding 29 14. Traffic 30 Ell-2 VII. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 30 VIII. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS/SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 30 IX. MONITORING 30 X. COORDINATION -. 31 XI. REFERENCES 32; XII. COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL Y FEDERAL STATUTES AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS 33 CLEAN WATER ACT, SECTION 404(b)(1)EVALUATION AND FINDING OF COMPLIANCE APPENDICES A. Pertinent.Correspondence and Comment Responses B. Project Area Sediment Test Results C. Benthic Report D. Hydraulic Analysis f EA4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT I. INTRODUCTION The purpose,of this Environmental Assessment(EA)is to present information on the environmental features of the project area and to review design information to determine the potential impacts of the proposed aquatic habitat restoration project. This Environmental Assessment describes project compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)and all appropriate Federal and State environmental regulations,laws,and executive orders. Methods used to evaluate the environmental resources of the area include biological sampling,sediment analysis,review of available information,and coordination with appropriate environmental agencies and knowledgeable persons. This report provides an assessment of environmental impacts and alternatives considered along with other data applicable to the Clean f. Water Act Section 404(b) 1 Evaluation requirements. II. PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE HISTORY Stewart's Creek(Figure 1) is located on Cape Cod in the town of Barnstable, Massachusetts in the village of Hyannis. The existing natural area of Stewart's Creek is. approximately 55 acres. The features of the Stewart's Creek ecosystem include a 20-acre salt pond and tidal creek system, and approximately 35 acres of wetland(0.2 acres of Spartina marsh,4.0 acres of brackish marsh,and 28 acres of freshwater emergent and shrub wetland). The affected project area(the area affected by project-related changes in tidal hydrology) will encompass approximately 14 acres of the Stewart's Creek system. The system is connected to Hyannis Harbor(Nantucket Sound)through a 60 foot-long, 3 foot-diameter concrete culvert that passes under Ocean Avenue. This.culvert is located between two public, beaches,.Keyes Memorial Beach and Hyannisport East Beach: Historically,a meandering tidal creek fed the system However,with the Qz ;f 1ST be; Ocean.Avenue,the tidal-creek was-routed through a concrete culvert This tidal restriction`is one of the main causes.of the degradation of the surrounding ecosystem. The salt pond created by the restriction/impoundment of the tidal creek frequently experiences extensive algal blooms and subsequent water quality problems such as hypoxia and the surrounding salt marsh areas show signs of habitat degradation(loss of Spartina dominated marsh). III. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION This project is authorized under Section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 PL 104-303 entitled'Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, which states in part, The Secretary[of the Army] may carry rout an#aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection;project"if the Secretary determines that the project will restore the.quality of the environment and is in the public interest, and is cost effective. a EA-4 } IV. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION The purpose of this project is to restore aquatic resources'in the Stewart's Creek ecosystem including degraded salt marsh and estuarine embayment(open water and benthic) habitat(Figure 2). The restoration of salt marsh ecosystems(including associated open water components) is a priority of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Federal government. Based on the available information, it appears that Stewart's Creek historically passed through Ocean Avenue via a bridge slightly to the west of its present location. It,appears that. the road was resurfaced at a later date and the creek was rerouted through a culvert. Subsequently(between 1938 and 1960) a groin was placed alongside the culvert, apparently to maintain an open channel. These changes resulted in a restriction of tidal flow in and'out of the system. Consequently,various changes in the ecosystem occurred resulting in the degradation of the surrounding wetlands and the expansion and shoaling.of the open water component. Inadequate drainage of the s stem ears.to have drowned marsh plants t. � qY aPP P . causing the marsh to deteriorate and be replaced by salt pond. An 1880 map of Stewart's f Creek shows that the.site was entirely composed of salt marsh with the creek located along N193 estern edge of the area now occupied by the pond. Based on aerial photography from and 1960 (Figure 3), lower Stewart's Creek once contained.a larger proportion of salt marsh than currently exists. The marsh appears to have begun to deteriorate in the 1970's.VP ! yin At present,there is only a small island of marsh and marsh fringe in lower Stewart's Creek. Changes in the flushing rate-of the system because of the lack of tidal exchange has reduced the average salinity conditions in the`system-and fostered conditions favorable for the growth of common reed(Phragmites australis),hereafter referred to as Phragmites. . Phragmites,which has a lower.wildlife value, out-competes higher quality salt marsh species (Spartina alterniflora and Spartind patens) in these conditions leading to dense monotypic stands of this species,thus reducing habitat quality. The coverage of Phragmites appears to b e_have increased over-the-last several ears,a arentl "--as a-resultof further--reductions in-the e Y PP Y doc u�m��► tide range due to the accurn ation`�of a flood tidal shoal of sand at the culvert inlet. Therefore,this project is needed to reestablish system conditions favorable for Spartina marsh growth to increase the habitat value of the marsh and pond' From a national perspective,salt marsh restoration is very important because of the high ecological value of the marsh and the relatively limited zonewithih which theycanoccur. f Water in the existing salt pond is currently impeded from adequately mixing with water from Hyannis Harbor and draining.efficiently from the pond because of the restriction caused by the culvert and sediment that has accumulated atits upstream side. As a resuh,the waxer in the salt pond is generally oligohaline_(low salinity): Additionally,the reduced mixing and impoundment have caused several-physical problems associated with the pond habitats. The benthic habitats of the pond have an extremely high organic detrital content and low in . benthic(secondary)productivity,because of the drowning of former marsh`vegetation and sedimentation. Decreased mixing also allows excessive nutrients to accumulate in the pond,. which allows for nuisance algal blooms. These algal blooms in turn cause'hypoxic and anoxic conditions to occur in the pond waters. EA-5 Figure 1. Stewart's Creek Project Location. Stewart.'s Creek, .�' ��^��x'�a i;'' N � • �� rweNeAl�a;em�wt- w� 4 .,� 2i '��1.�y fry' G PJ' �r3 6.�T�c•F ,3 j� t O-. 0 �� Y '1 I��Th 1..�?�"�MJ7�4��J��^aa'� - "e 1 �f ,,',✓`;;k��' A r Y7lQP r '\ �sQ,mnwe 7 d N E S , EA-8 r3 m 2 x As NMI Ifu Aid All Ask 004 RZ �a�� a F � 52N� s r tis I Ar RA Ir m I—E � x w9 n ;r 6SS y_ .. a tff4'hFSaJ;i1 T.,. .L l v 2 '"`�^ ,^ �'.✓_yt5...-4 �:. } F 0. i _ ,,yam H VIM a Figure 3. 1960 Aerial Photograph of Stewart's Creek Project Area -k Oft x :L' '�� * �`� s rr�a�'y �'' Jr �.� �f L��1►fig,.'' �" - ":. Y w � y rm dart i,B> 1L �y re fr F'; 1�`FG.I.+�: >� u V� , .a ., r .fi• !- e`�=5 �,ry_ Oi f NO,] - k # � r 7 �,-� fps �7° �` '`{� '�� c�."�r �(}r�� 3�� >• -B - ,. V. PROPOSED PLAN, The proposed plan(Alternative 3 described below) involves restoring tidal flushing to the salt pond/marsh system by replacing the existing culvert under Ocean Avenue. Pond and intertidal flat habitat will be restored to conditions suitable for high:quality benthic invertebrate, fish,and wildlife habitat. In addition, salt marsh habitat in the northern portion of lower Stewart's Creek will be restored using material dredged to restore the pond. The pond would be dredged to a maximum de th of 0.5 to 1.0 feet at mean'low water `1. p° g p N (MI.V)to create appropriate conditions for dabbling..waterfow Jhe pond size would be -� limited to the maximum size that would not re' -off-site disposal. Approximately 3, so c,ti s . cubic yards(cy) of material would be excavated to create the salt pond. The material excavated to restore the pond would be placed in the areas to the north raising their elevations to approximately 2.0 feet NGVD. Large deposits of suitable sand may be placed on the beach. A coir fiber roll would be placed around the perimeter of the excavated 7 sediments(approximately 1.8 acres)to hold the material placed within it and the:perimeter would be planted with salt marsh cordgrass to encourage it to colonize the area. VI. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Various alternatives were considered for this project and are detailed below. 1. ALTERNATVE 1-NO ACTION If no action is taken to restore the salt pond and estuarine habitats,the marsh in the lower Stewart's Creek pond will persist as a degraded estuarine pond with low benthic productivity. Conditions in the Stewart's Creek ecosystem will continue to degrade as tidal mixing continues to decrease as a result of sedimentation. Increased sedimentation will also raise elevations�and promote the growth of brackish marsh.-The improvements in fish and wildlife resource value that would be generated with the project would not be-achieved if the no action alternative is chosen. The improvements in fish and wildlife resource value that would be generated with the project would"not be achieved. Currently, habitats within the proposed 14-acre project area consist of approximately 4.0 acres of brackish marsh, 2.0 acres of freshwater marsh; 0.7 acres of shrub/forest communities, 0.2 acres of Spaztina spp.salt marsh, and 7.1-acres of open water and tidal creek. " 2. ALTERNATIVE 2 - REPLACE CULVERT AND DREDGE CHANNEL TO RESTORE SALT MARSH This alternative would restore flushing to the salt pond/marsh system. The inlet channel would be dredged to the minimum depth, width,anflength required to restore the maximum --tidal range and appropriate dissolved oxygen and salinity conditions to the system(Figure.4). Habitatswit .the project area based on this alternative would consist of approximately L5 acres of freshwater marsh, 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community, 2.0 acres of brackish marsh, 1.0 acre of high marsh, 5.0 acres of low salt marsh, 1;0 acre of unvegetated intertidal habitat, and 3.0 acres of subtidal salt pond and tidal creek.. t ER ` f This alternative consists of replacing the existing culvert under Ocean Avenue, constructing a channel by removing approximately 300-cy of material to convey tidal flow, spreading sand excavated to construct the channel over the surface of the marsh to increase the bulk density of the marsh substrate, and planting the perimeter of the marsh with salt marsh cordgrass. Elevations throughout most of the lower pond are within the range that will allow most ofthe area to support low.(salt marsh cordgrass) salt marsh when the tidal range is restored. No material would be placed on the beach or moved offsite under this alternative. The new channel would have a 4 ft bottom width. The channel will have'an invert of—1.5 feet NGVD at its confluence with the Hyannis Harbor,a culvert invert of-1 0 feet NGVD and maintain a channel-invert'of-1.0 through the salt pond. The side slopes will be cut 1:4 and allowed to develop a natural side slope: This alternative would change the tidal range in the pond from 1.40 to'1.55 ft NGVD' recorded on 20 June 2002 to a range of 0.11 ft to 1:74 ft NGVD,an-overall increase of 1. 48 ft. See Appendix D Hydraulic Analysis for detailed explanation of existing and proposed,, tide elevations,flow volume and velocities. a 3. ALTERNATIVE 3 REPLACE CULVERT AND DREDGE POND TO DEPTHS , SUITABLE FOR FISH `AND WILDLIFE, RESTORE MARSH-,.ON-SITE ry WITH EXCAVATED MATERIAL This alternative would restore flushing to the salt pond/marsh`system by replacing the existing culvert under Ocean Avenue,restore a pond of appropriate depths for fish and. wildlife,expose suitable substrates for optimum benthic communities,.and restore salt marsh in the northern portion of lower Stewart's Creek using material dredged to restore the pond (Figure 5). Habitats within the project area would consist of approximately 1.5 acres,of freshwater marsh,0.5 acres of shrub/forest community, 2.0 acres of brackish marsh, 2.0 acres of high marsh,2.2-acres of low salt.marsh, 1.5.acres of unvegetated intertidal habitat, and 4.3 , acres of subtidal salt pond and tidal creek. The area of marsh created with dredged material would be approximately 2 acres. 4 The pond would be dredged to a maximum depth of 0.5 to 1.0 feet at 'mean,low,water 0 . (MLR)to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl. The pond size would be-. -7 limited to the maximum size that would not require off-site disposal Approximately,3,200 ' cubic yards(cy) of material that would be excavated to create the salt pond. The material excavated to restore the pond would be placed in the area designated SALT MARSH in L,�s Figure 5,raising its elevation to approximately 2.0 feet NGVD. Large deposits of suitable sand may be placed on the beach. A coir fiber roll would be placed around the perimeter of � the SALT MARSH area(approximately 1.8 acres)to hold the material placed within it and the perimeter would be planted with salt marsh cordgrass to encourage it to colonize the area. Elevations within the SALT MARSH area and surrounding areas on Figure 5 would`be: within the range that would support low(saltmarsh cordgrass) salt marsh and mudflats when the tidal range is restored. This alternative would change the tidal range in the pond`from'1:40-1.55 ft NGVD recorded on 20 June_2002 to,a range of 0.11 ft to 1.72 ft NGVD.See Appendix D Hydraulic Analysis for detailed explanation of existing and proposed tide elevations, flow volume and velocities. 4. ALTERNATIVE 4 - REPLACE CULVERT AND DREDGE POND TO DEPTHS . SUITABLE FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE, OFF-SITE DISPOSAL OF,DREDGED MATERIAL This alternative would restore flushing to the salt pond/marsh system,dredge silt from the pond to restore appropriate depths for fish,and wildlife and expose suitable substrates for optimum benthic communities(Figure 6). Under this alternative habitats within the project area would consist of 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh,2.0 acres of brackish marsh, 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community, 1.0 acre of high marsh,2.0 acres of low salt marsh, 1.0 acre of unvegetated intertidal habitat, and 6.0 acres of subtidal salt pond and tidal creek. The pond would be dredged to a maximum depth:of 1.0 to 1.5 feet MLW to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl. The pond size would be approximately 2.0 acres. Of approximately 6,800 cubic yards(cy)of material that would be excavated to create the salt pond, approximately 3,200 cy would be placed in the area designated as SALT MARSH in Figure 6, raising its elevation to approximately 2.0.feet NGVD., Sand within the excavated area will be used to increase the bulk density of the substrate. Large deposits of suitable sand may be placed on the beach. A coir fiber roll would be placed around the perimeter of the SALT MARSH area(approximately 1.8 acres)to hold the material placed within it and the perimeter would,be planted with salt marsh cordgrass to encourage it to colonize the area. Elevations within the SALT MARSH area and surrounding areas would be within the range that would support low(salt marsh cordgrass) salt=marsh and mudflats when the tidal range is restored. The remaining 3,600 cy of mud excavated to restore the salt pond would be removed from the site'and disposed of at the Bourne Landfill(approximately . 30 miles from the site). This alternative would change the tidal range in the pond from 1.40-1.55 ft NGVD recorded on.20 June 2002 to a range.of 0.11 ft to.1.72 ft NGVD. See Appendix D Hydraulic Analysis for detailed explanation of existing and proposed tide elevations, flow volume and velocities. COMMON CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ACTION ALTERNATIVES Under all action alternatives, the existing culvert would be replaced with a larger 5-foot by 5-foot culvert, which would increase the upper and lower limits of the tide range and reduce the velocity of water entering Stewart's Creek(Figure 7). The reduced velocity through the culvert would reduce sediment transport into the pond, helping to m--J.e future restrictions of tidal flow. A sedimentation basin would be constructed at the upstream side of the culvert to capture sand transported into the marsh from the beach: For ease of maintenance,the sedimentation basin would be a 10-foot long by 3-foot deep basin with 1:3 side slopes. An access ramp would.be constructed to allow maintenance equipment to access the sedimentation basin.'The culvert would be equipped with a stop log structure on its downstream side, which would be closed during storms to reduce the potential for tide water to flood surrounding uplands. The stop log structure would also reduce.the accumulation of sediment in the marsh and pond by reducing inflow during high-energy events. The stop log structure would be closed to the size of the pre-project opening when a major tidal storm EA-2 such as a hurricane or northeaster is predicted. The stop logs would be removed after the storm subsides to allow interior runoff to drain from the site. The culvert would:be equipped. with removable grates to prevent human entry. The construction sequence would be:,.l)Install culverts, stoplog structure, and grates;2) Dredge interior to appropriate elevations;'3) Condition marsh soils as necessary and plant the l i disposal area. Any salt marsh plants excavated during construction would be stored on-site and replanted flowing site grading. DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES. c V4 Any sand compatible.with the sand,on.the beach and not used in conditioning the marsh substrate would be placed on the beach to the west of the groin near the existing culvert. Upland landfill sites were considered for off-site disposal alternatives. The only available off-site.disposal option for excavated silt is the Bourne Landfill. The landfill is located approximately 30 miles from the Stewart's Creek project site. L -12 Figure 4. Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 2. 7�15, __W- 1 r c� \ - AGIN SVU q SKon\e (` f t ,� \ - y '�'} :LWA i AREA-. 4 I"P_CAL CFAVNcL SLC 1;:N i .�s.. `••,l 1 - J - 1 N I(; Sou e 1 ' -� - tilt. C.II v=RT : j ♦ � 4.:_ /ice-:=�` —4 14G'iD h rroras 7 I C :IIAKNCL _ ! 1;� iv^'LCVG SE7IVEN cal LAS=V (N:a , ;cal or Ex ST NC LVEk- Oz XILZ '-':�GG�.;' . _..r,r...•V j ��,. �\\- �� r�_��/' }.��l�`/.i � ..GRAPHIC SCALE 100, -H:I I-: Sa-ic sc.'Iac 18 .r f am:1 gi I P. N._Pal I. �P.c1f t1 '��. Ili! )F W?IMINI Q> 4 AX y xninc nxvwc.es uev_eb♦i nx .. . P '♦ __ :EW V V,-CI TRgL 11 FV VAEWI US171 S' 2- �I'� Cltl•S CM 11G P_!1'.5 S L,,'I 'ti CkaaK - AlterrmFve 2 wWc wcvc-.ctiis » PROPOSED CHANNEL• 5 A-13 Figure 5. Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 3. . Al i�2 9 I i f } STAGING AND \\ .I DEWATERING X, SALT MARSH- / I n REMOVE TO i.lR.9 \ ABOUT 1..t MI-LW \',rJ .►Ty,'.i-.,. x I ` ER 4LEV.=I. 1.-0.5 NGVDJ W S4 T.POND , R.- I. -,1 �1 - + � 17.10 EXISTING CULVERT -- WPSH 0�AVe - .v'., GRAPHIC SCALE: 100 200 EWENT ARE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY x��EN ugSSnCrtU5ETT5�C1 4 REPL AC REN' ERGLAND OtsTRII:T STEWART'S CREEK I. PND CORPS OF ENGMEER$ - Alt—.,I 3 ' cra+cwo.u�ss+c«�n*s PP.OPOSED SALT POND FA- - .. Figure 6. Stewart's Creek conceptual plan=for Alternative 4. a , L 19F` 9 • p. _ 12•G STAGING. -0EWATER ING X1 � AREA SALT MARSH i�7.0 REMOVE TD ' ABOUT 5 VMLLW D). _x WATER Ev.I.82 1'0. NGDI SALT,PONU t lY tO EX!ST!NG CUL VERT TO BEHREPLACED ' WITH 4'x 6' O BOX CULVERT - GRAPHIC SCALE U �'n - ACEM'Eto PRE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY YA'.H A""'S 95nCHUSET75 ei -4 0 pEPL NEW ENCLe++O DISTRICT t - STEWART'S CREEK - c�AN CORPS Of Eucn+EERs Alternotme 4 coxcorm.ulss.auscns PROPOSEED SALT POND 5 EA_5 Figure 7. Proposed culvert for Stewart's Creek. CHAP 1 t %/ 7�'7— r•OvsAC t} l.h"u__ C 5 SHEETING CON A EU . .� '.Olt IHLN:: 3L'( BDX GRATINC 11e?AR o" O.C. 't'i..SANi LEVE_INC -AYcR Saolr I" SD''. i .` \te' �'� - z I' C3MPAC.'TED GRAVE_ loe (WAIL ' (:HAV -I D s ::Ill DI t -! � 22" {CtiL eAY_ - \ —O C= LJG SLD- .�. CRATE , j L ^0' GtAI CRA7- - ;KO;T�-ERN 75, FA, 50 50 100 SOI.- =RVH=AiN-A ,0- h- a-NY rasuu<an�_virv ;_ ,.. I'.TtAV\1.10-i-I,S TTS•1S-_ADWA__ - :;+qx cF as veeRs S-_'kAR-S ;R__K . CULVERT DETAILS 5 LA'11 VH. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 1. GENERAL,AND.HISTORIC CONDITIONS The existing natural area of Stewart's Creek is approximately 55 acres. These 55 acres consist of approximately 20 acres of open water(salt pond/tidal creek), 02 acres of salt marsh,4 acres of brackish marsh and 28 acres of freshwater marsh,and 2 acres of shrub/forest habitat(swamp and upland). The affected project area(affected by tidal flushing under the project alternatives)will encompass approximately 14 acres in the southern portions of the Stewart's Creek system. Historically, Stewart's Creek contained larger areas of salt marsh than are currently present. Changes in the flushing rate of the system because of the lack of tidal exchange has reduced the average salinity conditions in`the system and fostered conditions favorable for brackish water marshes.. These marshes are dominated by species such as Phragmites and cattails(Typha spp.). The effects of Phragmites expansion are generally believed to be negative. Recent scientific literature has suggested that: 1)Phragmites detritus may of poor quality and low availability to consumers;2)Phragmites alters the normal hydrology and hydroperiod of the marsh, 3)reduced tidal exchange--may allow Phragmites to extend its range into lower elevations and replace other macrophytes;and 4)the expansion of Phragmites results in isolated islands of Spartina and other native species with diminished functions(Able and Hagan 2000,Angradi et al. 2001). Additionally, dense stands of Phragmites appear to restrict free movement of aquatic organisms'into the marsh.. The lack of tidal flushing has also had detrimental effects on the intertidal and subtidal bottom habitats of the Stewart's Creek salt,pond and tidal creek. Decreased mixing allows excessive nutrients to accumulate in the pond,which allows for nuisance algal blooms.. . These algal blooms in turn cause hypoxic and anoxic conditions to occur in the pond waters and add to the extremely high organic detrital content of the salt pond sediments. The salt pond sediments are very high in organic material because of the remains of previously existing salt marsh plants that were drowned as the salt pond expanded. These conditions `(low oxygen and-highly organic sediments)lead to low benthic(secondary)productivity. 2. WETLANDS,'VEGETATION,AND COVER TYPES The plant communities at the southern portion of the Stewart's Creek system exhibit characteristics of a degraded salt marsh ecosystem.'. However,the plant communities in the northern portion of Stewart's Creek exhibit characteristics of a healthy freshwater marsh system. The vegetation in the southern zone(downstream) of the Stewart's Creek system is represented by typical degraded New England salt marsh species. The dominant vegetation type in southern marshes is currently Phragmites. Small patches of saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens) exist in the areas immediately adjacent to:the existing inlet culvert. Patches of narrow-leaved cattail(Typha angustifolia) are also present between the Phragmites stands and the pond. EA-9 A transition zone from the Phragmites dominated southern portion of the creek to the northern freshwater swamp zone exists. Phragmites stands are present in this area, however. they are not as robust as the stands in the southern portion of the system. Plant species found in the transition zone include: sweet'gale(Myrica gale),purple loosetrife(Lythrum salicaria), swamp loosestrife(Decodon verticillatus),marshmallow(Althaea ofcinalis),` rosemallow(Hibiscus moscheutos), rose(Rosa sp.), grape(Vitis sp.), sedge(Carex sp.), olney three-square(Scirpus americanus),poison ivy(Toxicodendron radicans),and aster (Aster sp.). Sweet gale was the dominant species in this area ' The northern portions(upstream)of the system are dominated by freshwater wetland_ species. Qualitative sampling found the following species in the northern marshes: winterberry(Ilex verticillata), sweet gale, marshmallow,rose(Rosa sp.), soft-stemmed bulrush(Scirpus validus), marsh St. 6Ws-wort(Hypericum virginicum),-alder(Alnus sp.), willow(Salix sp.),woundwart(Stachys sp.),hedge bindweed(Calystegia=sepium), sensitive fern(Onoclea sensib_ilis), royal fern(Osmunda regalis), and chokeberry(Pyrus sp.). The- northern freshwater wetland appears to be healthy;and non-degraded. No submerged aquatic vegetation(SAV..(i.e., eelgrass(Zostera marina) or widgeon grass(Ruppia maritima)) is present.mi the salt pond or creek. The beach to the south of Ocean Avenue contains patches of Rosa sp. on both sides of the culvert. Dune plants are present to the east and west of the inlet,to Stewart's Creek. However,there are none in the project area. 3. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES AND SHELLFISH f Benthic Invertebrates Subtidal benthic. invertebrate communities in the existing salt pond and creek'areas were sampled on September 12, 2002 in order to determine the.functionality of the habitat. Two(2)samples were located in the salt pond proper and two(2) samples were located in the creek northward of the salt pond (see Appendix Q. Benihic samples were collected using a 0.016 n 2"stainless steel box-corer'(12.5 cm on a side) covered with 0.5mm screen tops to a depth of20-25 cm(9 inches). ne_� _ kD ' � e^e�� $ All samples analyzed had'low diversity. 'Samples located in the southern portions of the salt pond were extremely poor quality containing only one. species and one, individual . organism(a Capitellid polychaete) between them.. Samples taken in northern portions.of the pond and the creek had a,slightly higher diversity than,the southern,portions: However, diversity and abundance were still very low. The benthic fauna of the northern portion of the system was 'represented by chironomid larvae, :capitellid polyehaetes, and the polychaete Hobsonia florida. Shellfish, Crabs and Lobster Shellfish resources in the immediate project area.are minimal. Soft-shelled clam,, quahog,oyster,and mussel populations are not present in the pond or creek areas�as salinity values are extremely low. Juvenile oysters and oyster spat were observed on the concrete EA-18 culvert opening into the creek. However,densities were very low. .The salt pond and upper creek areas are closed to shellfishing. Oyster beds are present to the southeast and southwest. of the Stewart's Creek inlet channel. However,they are not in the project area. Blue crabs were observed in the lower portions of the salt pond. No suitable lobster habitat was observed in the project area. a. FISH Stewart's Creek and its associated open water habitat support typical near coastal New .England fish assemblages. Killifish(Fundulus spp.),'silversides(Menidia spp),and sheepshead minnows(Cyprinodon variegatus)can be found in the narrow mixing zone that exists between the salt pond and the culvert. Some of these species can also tolerate very low- salinities and may be found fiuther upstream of the,mixing zone.. Fish species of note for their commercial and recreational fishery.value.that may potentially be present in the salt pond include winter flounder(Pseudopleuronectes americanus),white perch(Moron americana), and American.eel(Anguilla rostrata) 5. WH DLIFE Mammals Mammals with historical accounts in the area and appropriate`geographical ranges that are likely to occur adjacent to the projectarea include red fox(Vulpes fulva),mink (Mustela vison),raccoon(Procyon lotor) skunk(Ml phitis sp.), chipmunk(Tamias striatus), coyote(Canis latrans), several species of.squirrels, and white-tailed deer(Odocoileus virginianus): Birds The bird population of Stewart's Creek is represented by typical resident and migrant species found in New England. Species noted on site include herring gulls(Lanus argentatus), great black-backed gulls(Larus marinus), laughingt gulls(Larus.atricilla), common terns(Sterna hirundo), double-crested cormorants(Phalacrocorax-auritus), green heron(Butoridesstriatus),blue heron(Ardea herodias),osprey(Pandion halietus), kingfisher(Megaceryle alcyon), black duck(Anas rubripes), mallard(Anas platyrhynchos), and starlings(Sturnus vulgazis). Amphibians and Reptiles K Amphibians do not occur within.the tidal portion of the coastal environment as salt water has detrimental effects upon their highly permeable skin. Reptiles, including turtles and snakes,are common inhabitants of the salt marsh areas. Snapping, spotted,and eastern painted turtles generally inhabit the upland freshwater areas of the watershed,,but have been documented to range into brackish water and saltmarsh habitats:The northern diamond back terrapin(Malaclemys terrapin) is an estuarine turtle that may be found in the area. Only the northern water snake is known to exist in the semi-aquatic fresh and/or-saltwater habitats in the area. ` EA-t 6. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES Stewart's Creek and its surrounding areas do not support any Federal or State threatened or endangered species,except for potential transient species such as bald eagles(Haliaeetus leucocephalus). National Marine Fisheries Service,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protectionconcur with this assessment of threatened and endangered species. See Appendix A for correspondence. 7. RECREATION AND AESTHETICS' Stewart's Creek is a valuable ecological resource that`is utilized by the public.for recreational fishing,bird watching, canoeing, kayaking,and hiking. The aesthetic coastal scenery of Cape Cod not only benefits the.'residents of the coastal communities,but also attracts tourists from around the world. Currently the Phragmites areas of the marsh interfere with the aesthetic value of the system. The large plants block the-scenic view of the marsh.and salt pond for many area residents and the dense nature of the Phragmites stand makes the marsh difficult to access. ` Limited tidal mixmg within the system creates conditions that are appropriate for nuisance macroalgal growth and the accumulation of large amounts of organic material in the pond. These blooms,and subsequent decay of organic matter,create foul odors and smells that detract from the aesthetic value of the system. Additionally, decreased benthic productivity limits fish and duck usage,thus reducing fishing and bird watching' r opportunities 8. WATER QUALITY Currently,the waters of Stewart's Creek and the salt pond are classified as Class B waters-according to Commonwealth of Massachusetts water quality standards.. These waters, are designated as a habitat for-fish,other aquatic life,and wildlife,'and for primary and secondary contact recreation. They are suitable for irrigation and other agricultural uses, " compatible industrial.cooling,navigation, and have good aesthetic value. Salinity within the pond is generally very low(<5 ppt). Data collected in the project WJ% area indicated that during flood tides salinities in excess of 32 ppt were flowing into the salt ��' pond through the existing culvert._ A very.limited mixing zone was observed in the salt pond ,aCW (to the west and east of the culvert)with salinities ranging from 18—20 ppt. Salinity values dropped to <5ppt approximately 20 feet past the culvert and were observed to be similar . throughout the rest of the pond. Medium(normoxic)"to low dissolved oxygen levels(hypoxia)occur in the subtidal portions of the salt pond and in the creek. Hypoxic conditions tend to occur during the spring and summer months. Properties surrounding the creek are currently on septic'sewer systems that contribute to the organic loading of the Stewart's Creek system. However,plans,for municipal sewer lines are in place and installation is anticipated to begin within the next two years. U_20 . 9. SEDIMENT COMPOSITION AND CHEMISTRY Sediment sampling in the marsh areas of the project was conducted on August 26, 1998. Sediments were analyzed for grain size, water content,and bulk chemical analysis. Two sediment samples(S 1 and S2)from marsh areas in the southern portion of the Stewart's Creek marsh were collected and composites of each individual core were analyzed for grain size and contaminants of concern(Appendix B). All contaminants tested for(Table 1)were below detectable limits or fell within Massachusetts dredge material Category I classification. Category I material is material with little or no contamination. Sediments were characterized as poorly graded sands with the majority of the material being fine to medium sands. Additional sediment samples were"collected in September 2002 for grain size analysis. Three samples were taken south of the culvert in the inlet channel and 4 samples were taken immediately north of the culvert. Material south of the culvert was medium to coarse sands. Material north of the culvert was predominately medium sands. Table 1. Summary of chemical testing from Stewart's Creek marsh sediments. (ND=non-detect). S-1 S-2 Arsenic(ppm) <1.0 < 1.0 Cadmium(ppm) <'1.0 < 1.0 Chromium(ppm) 3.4 2.2 .Copper(ppm) 5•3 12 Lead(ppm), 33 12 Mercury(ppm) 0.077 0.074. Nickel(ppm) 4.1 3.4 Zinc(PPm) 24 9.5 PCBs(PPb) ND ND Pesticides (pph) Varies with contaminant Varies with contaminant PAHs(ppb) Varies with contaminant Varies with contaminant TPH(PPm), ND 10. AIR QUALITY The entire state of Massachusetts is designated a non-attainment zone of ozone(03) and is part of the Northeast Ozone Transport Region which extends northeast from Maryland and includes all six New England states. Non-attainment zones are areas where the National Ambient Air Quality Standards(NAAQS)have not been met. Nitric oxide(NO), hydrocarbons,oxygen(02), and sunlight combine to form ozone in the atmosphere. Nitrogen oxides are released during the combustion of fossil fuels. 11. ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT A preliminary assessment of the project area'in the creek indicates that there mill be no more than minimal negative impacts to Essential Fish Habitat, as defined by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996,with this project. "Essential fish habitat" is broadly defined to include"those waters and substrates necessary to fish for spawning,breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." As stated in NMFS EFH source documents(NMFS 2002),thirteen federally managed species have the potential to occur within the project area These include: Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua);winter flounder (Pleuronectes americanus); windowpane flounder (Scopthalmus aquosus); long-finned squid (ioligopeali);'Atlantic butterfish(Peprilus triacanthus);Atlantic mackeral(Scomber, scombrus);summer flounder(Paralicthys.. dentatus); scup (Stenotomus chrysops); black sea bass(Centropristes striata); surf calm (Spisula solidissima);king mackeral(Scomberomorus cavalla); Spanish mackeral (Scomberomorus maculatus);and cobia(Rachycentron canadum). 12. HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Barnstable is a resort community,.a regional commercial center, and the county seat of Barnstable County, Massachusetts. Located on primary-east-west overland corridors,the town spans the.width of Cape Cod with extensive coasts(-100 miles of shoreline)on both Cape Cod Bay and Nantucket Sound. Many coastal and pond-side Native American site concentrations are reputed to exist. First European settlement occurred in 1639-on Lothrop Hill at"Matakeese"region on the north side at Barnstable Harbor, with the first meetinghouse site established by 1646, and the first mill location at Marstons Mills circa 1653. The significance of Barnstable Village as a regional administrative center was established in 1685 with the creation of Barnstable County. Dispersed 17."and 18`b century agricultural settlement concentrated on the north side,with a secondary focus at West Parish created in 1715. Early 19'h century prosperity from,fishing, saltmaking, shipbuilding, and- shipping stimulated south side village development at Cotuit,Osterville,Centerville,and especially Hyannis. Mid-19th century rail connections with southern terminus at Hyannis assured its growth as a primary commercial center and southern port.. Late 19th century development of the south side coast intensified with the rise of the resort communities including'affluent Hyannisport and Wianno, Christian camp meeting at Craigville, and 2e century estate district at Osterville. Dispersed late 19t''century cranberry bog development and West . r Barnstable brickworks drew Portuguese and Finnish immigrant labor populations. Resort boom and expansion of.Hyannis as a regional commercial center continued with the establishment of the Route 28 automobile corridor. Intensive postwar development has continued with completion of a high-speed Route 6 corridor and widespread suburban development. Much of the,historic south coast resort landscape remains intact with partially preserved mid-19m century village centers(taken from the Massachusetts Historical Commission(MHC)Reconnaissance Survey Report for Barnstable1984,p. 2): According to preliminary project coordination with the MHC,the project area is archaeologically sensitive and is likely to contain historic and archaeological resources. Ina letter dated March 19,2002,the MHC stated that"the area's archaeological sensitivity is determined by its favorable environmental characteristics including areas of well-drained soils and relatively level terrain,proximity to Stewart's Creek and wetlands, and cultural features such as known archaeological sites which are located in similar nearby, environments. Review of MHC's inventory indicates that Native American archaeological sites are often found in similar environmental settings, and that proximity to known archaeological sites is a strong indication that an area is likely to contain archaeological resources." The Hyannisport°Historic District is located at the periphery of the Stewart's Creek project area. This district is composed of 222 individual properties that demonstrate the transition from sea captains' residences to that of summer visitors and'residents' . The Hyannisport Historic District was established in 1990 through the efforts of the Barnstable Historical Commission. Formal coordination in accordance with'Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,as amended, and implementing regulations 36 CFR 800, has been conducted with the MA SHPO,MA BURR, and the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah),the ancestralaribe for the Cape Cod region. 13.FLOODING The area surrounding theproject area is primarilyresidential and public property. Residential traffic in the area is moderate. Public traffic in the area is heavy during the' summer due-to the proximity of the Keyes Memorial Beach and moderate in non-summer , months. 14. TRAFFIC The culvert that,currently feeds Stewart's Creek passes under Ocean Avenue. Ocean Avenue is used-moderately by residents to the west of the'project area and for public access to a residential beach.located west of the project area.. Alternative access to the neighborhoods west of the project area is available. EA-28 VI. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 1. GENERAL The purpose of this project is to restore,benthic productivity to the Stewart?s Creek salt pond and to restore high quality Spartina marsh to an estuarine area that is increasingly dominated by brackish water marsh,species(i.e.,Phragmites), Restoring,benthic productivity to the system would add a forage base to the system and encourage the use of the area by numerous fish and wildlife species. Restoring Spartina marsh to this estuarine system would also have positive effects on the environment. Spartina marshes function ecologically as sources of high nutrient and biological productivity,nursery grounds for. many species of marine and estuarine organisms; and. habitat for many estuarine dependent species. These functions are believed to be diminished.when marshes become dominated by Phragmites. The targeted effect of this restoration project'is to restore previously existing ecological functions to the Stewart's Creek estuarine system to increase the habitat quality for fish and wildlife. From a national perspective, salt marsh restoration is very important because of the high ecological value of the marsh and the relatively limited zone within which they can occur. Detailed effects of the project are described in the following sections. 2. WETLANDS,VEGETATION,AND COVER TYPES This ro' t would vastly improve the_vegetation resources in the project area. The p 3� goal of the restoration project is to increase the amount of high-quality marsh inthe creek and to reduce the amount of low-quality Phragmites dominated marsh. ,Approximately 4.0 acres of salt marsh would be restored at Stewart's Creek. The benefits of restoring high quality marsh to,Stewart's Creek include:*1)increased biological productivity; 2) creating critical habitat and breeding ground for a variety of marine-and estuarine'species-; 3) . increasing the recreational fishing potential of the ponds by I providing habitat for a number of important fishery.species(e.g.;blue crab, summer flounder,winter flounder, and mussels);4) increasing-the-natural nursery potential-of the-area,fora variety of marine species;and 5) increasing the filtering system&of the creek by using the marsh's ability to trap and filter sediments and pollutants from the water. There would be temporary'impacts to wetland,beach,-and upland vegetation during the construction period. The size and disturbance of the staging area and access roads would be limited to the minimum necessary for construction access and a line of erosion control devices would be established along the perimeter of the areas. The most direct effect of the project would be the creation of approximately 4.0_acres of Spartina marsh within the pond. Colonization of the area by marsh vegetation would be once elevations have been created that are favorable for Spartina. Elevations that allow frequent flooding of the marsh by brackish water and in turn,maintain the soil pore water salinity of the marsh at or above about 20 ppt(Mitsch and Gosselink 1986,Sinicrope et al.' 1990)would permit Spartina to flourish. } FA-ia The increase in the flow of high salinity water into the system would affect the distribution of the existing brackish water and freshwater marsh components. It is anticipated that the overall amount of brackish water marsh(Phragmites and Typha dominated)would decrease by approximately 2 acres and the distribution of the brackish marsh would shift slightly to the north into the transitional zone described in Section VI1-2. This transition zone may also shift north and replace a small portion of the freshwater marsh. Species such as marsh St:John's wort, sensitive fern, and royal fern that cannot tolerate d by species similar to those found in transition oligohaline conditions would be replace zone(e.g.,rose,marsh mallow,rose mallow). No submerged aquatic vegetation(SAV) is present in the system Therefore,no " impacts to SAV are anticipated: 3. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES AND SHELLFISH Benthic Invertebrates The project would have minimal effects on benthic resources in the project area during in the direct footprint of construction activities construction. "Immobile benthic organisms (dredging and disposal)would be destroyed. However, given the fact that the benthic resources in the system are minimal,adverse impacts are not expected to be significant. Positive impacts to benthic communities would be'incurred following the.replacement of the culvert and the construction activities. Larval and adult recruitment would.colonize the substrates in the system and lead to a community that is higher in species composition,population density, and biomass than was previously present. Shellfish The few:oysters and oyster spat located in and on the existing culvert would be destroyed during culvert replacement. No other shellfish exist in Stewart's,Creek. Therefore,adverse impacts to shellfish resources are expected to be minimal. -occur to shellfish populations.` The restoration of tidal flow and Positive impacts would the redistribution sediments in the'system would create subtidal and intertidal habitat that can be used by various shellfish species such as soft-shelled clams(Mya arenaria) and hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria). 4. FISH The potential adverse impacts of the project to fish resources is expected to be limited to physical effects, as dredging and construction operations are not likely to have long term effects on water chemistry. The physical effects of the construction effort would be the turbidity in the water associated with the-replacement of the culvert and the dredging effort along with potential burial by,the redistribution of material The increases in turbidity levels around the dredging areas are expected to be short term.`' Since fish are mobile,they can avoid the areas of increased Turbidity that may result from ER-ffi construction. Additionally,,fish would be able to avoid areas where removal of sediment is occurring. Some fish may be buried during the redistribution of material to create salt marsh. Multiple positive impacts to fish resources in this area are anticipated. An increased forage base for fish resources would become available as the benthic communities in the intertidal and subtidal areas colonize and undergo successional changes(Le., increase productivity). The newly created estuarine marsh habitat would provide refuge for those fish species that utilize marsh habitat as nursery areas. Consequentially, larger predatory fish species would enter the system as the"bait fish"populations grow. Section V1.11 documents the impacts to fish species that have essential fish habitat designations in the area. 5. W ELDLIFE Mammals Mammals inhabiting the areas surrounding the restoration site may experience minor disturbances from the construction activities associated with replacing the culvert and dredging. These impacts are expected to be minimal as most mammal species are highly mobile and would be able to avoid construction areas. Following restoration activities,raccoons, skunks, and mink may experience increases in the quality of available food resources associated with the higher quality Spartina salt marsh and intertidal flats habitats. Birds Impacts to the avian communities associated with Stewart's Creek wouldbe short-term and minimal,while the long-term benefits are expected to be positive. The impact for all types of wildlife, including bird species,would be the temporary disturbance of habitat during the field construction period. Any threat to local bird species, continued existence, or decline in populations is not anticipated. The benefits associated with this project for bird-species include'the-increased productivity of the ecosystem,which should increase the foraging potential'of the habitat. Amphibians and Reptiles No significant adverse impacts to amphibian and reptile populations are expected. The impact for all types of wildlife in the brackish water habitats will be the temporary disturbance of habitat during the field construction period. Wildlife can temporarily leave the project area and retreat to the adjacent surrounding habitats. Populations-in the.0.5 acres of freshwater swamp that will be impacted by increased salinity conditions will encounter a permanent loss of habitat. 6. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES No Federal or State threatened or endangered species are expected to be impacted by this project. See Appendix A for correspondence regarding the National Marine Fisheries Ell-40 Service,the U.S.. Fish and Wildlife Service,and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts concurrence with this assessment of threatened and endangered species. 7. RECREATION AND AESTHETICS. The restoration of productive subtidal and intertidal habitat and high quality salt marsh to Stewart's Creek should greatly enhance the recreational value of the creek. 'Spartina marshes and their associated open water habitats would attract recreationally important fish species to the area as well as a more diverse bird fauna for passive recreational use such as bird watching. Dense stands of Phragmites block the scenic view of portions of Stewart's Creek. The restoration of tidal flow and Spartina marsh to the creek would allow it to be viewed as well as add to the scenic value. Additionally,the removal of the Phragmites and the restoration of the intertidal.and subtidal habitats would allow greater access to the marsh and greater shorebird activity. Noise impacts from the construction of the proposed project should be minimal as all construction will take place'during daylight,hours. 8. WATER QUALITY The intent of this project is to improve the tide exchange to the marsh to increase salinity and dissolved oxygen(DO) concentrations for habitat restoration. All of the alternatives with the exception of the No Action Alternative substantially increase the volume of flow and tidal exchange to the marsh area. This analysis concludes that the action alternatives would increase.salinity concentrations to levels favorable for habitat restoration within the proposed salt marsh: Dredging-and disposal operations in the project area would impact the turbidity levels in the water in the existing salt pond and creek. The amount of turbidity generated during a dredging operation depends upon the physical characteristics of the sediments-to be removed'. ambient currents, and the type of dredging equipment. A hydraulic dredge would likely be used to dredge'a deeper tidal creek and to deepen the salt pond The.material_would be relocated by pumping it to a disposal area in the pond to establish elevations appropriate for salt marsh vegetation. Since the material,to be dredged consists of medium to fine sands and silts and the. disposal area would be in close:proximity to the'dredging area,turbidity levels are expected to be elevated in the project area.-However,turbidity levels can be contained within the pond by closing the stop log structures on the newly installed culvert. Since biological resources in the pond are minimal, no significant adverse impacts from elevated turbidity levels are anticipated'. To minimize water-quality impacts during the culvert replacement phase,appropriate controls of erosion and sedimentation would be'employed to isolate areas of disturbance: 9. SEDIMENT COMPOSITION-AND CHEMISTRY Sediment would be redistributed in the project area to create deeper tidal creeks, a deeper salt pond, and to establish elevations for salt marsh vegetation. Appropriate material(sand) would also be placed on the beach located southeast of the project area. Sediments in the tidal creek are anticipated to remain similar in character to the existing material(poorly sorted sands). Sediments in the salt pond'are expected to be sandy once the overlaying organic/silty material is removed. `The material removed from the salt pond and placed on areas to promote salt marsh growth would be-topped with dredged~sands to increase the bulk density of the substrate to make it appropriate for colonization by marsh grasses. No impacts as a result of sediment contamination are anticipated as the material has little or no contamination. 10. AIR QUALITY STATEMENT OYCONFORMITY, The project would have no Tong=term impacts on air quality. During construction equipment operating on the site would emit Pollutants including nitrogen,oxides.that can lead construction, to the formation of ozone. In order to mminim air quality effects during construction activities would comply,with applicable provisions of the Massachusetts Air Quality Control Regulations pertaining to dust,odors,construction,noise, and motor vehicle emissions. This project therefore conforms to the Federal requirements for activities under the Clean Air Act within the Massachusetts State Implementation Plan. Y1. ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT Thirteen species have EFH designated within the NOAA-Fisheries designated quadrat that contains Stewart's Creek. However,because of the oligohaline conditions that currently exist in Stewart's Creek,only two of the designated species have a realistic probability of occurring in the projecYatea: winter:flounder and the windowpane flounder. Potential at from this restoration project impacts to winter and windowpane flounder essential fish habit include temporary increases in turbidity from the culvert replacement and'dredging activities and potential burial during material disposal. Temporary loss,of benthic organisms associated with the dredged material would be minimal as existing benthic communities are of poor quality. No more than minimal negative impacts on all life stages of winter flounder and windowpane.flounder EFH is anticipated as a result of this project. sitive impacts to fish r As previously stated,multiple po esources in.this area are r anticipated. All fish that have EFH designations(and have the potential to.occur)in the project area would benefit for,this project. 12. HISTORIC AND.ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Upon review of the project alternatives and during a site visit, it was apparent that the proposed project would not impact.undisturbed contexts-'of the Stewart's Creek environment. The primary impediment to proper tidal flushing is a concrete culvert built in the 1930's during the construction of Ocean Avenue. Construction of a larger culvert(5 X 5. foot)at the same location should not impact significant cultural resources. Under Alternative 2,the current inlet channel that empties into Hyannis Harbor would be dredged to the ' "Undisturbed contexts"refer to instances where the ground surface(soils,sediments).are intact and have not been modified by grading,earth moving,landscaping or natural processes such as erosion. FA;21 minimum depth,width,and length required to convey tidal`flow, in this case, approximately 1 or 1.5 feet deep. Sand excavated to-construct the channel would be spread over the surface of the marsh to increase the bulk density of the marsh substrate. The perimeter of the marsh would then be planted with salt-marsh cordgrass: Under Alternatives 3 and 4,dredged material acquired through deepening of the pond for fish and wildlife benefits(sand, silt, mud)would also,be used to increase the bulk density . of existing salt marsh and mudflats that fringe the area Some of this material(sand)would also be used for beach nourishment. The remainder of the mud excavated to restore the salt` pond would be removed from the site and disposed at the Bourne:Landfill,a previously utilized disposal site(Alternative 4). cted at the u stream side of the culvert o constructed ion basin would be c p A sedimentation capture sand transported into the marsh from the beach. For ease of maintenance,the sedimentation basin would be a 10-foot long.by 3-foot deep basin with 1.3 side slopes. This basin would be dredged into the existing marsh bottom. The culvert would also be equipped with a stop log structure on its downstream side,which would be closed during storm events to reduce flooding in surrounding wetlands. An access ramp will be constructed to allow maintenance equipment to access the sedimentation basin and remove accumulated sediment. Constriction of a 4-foot wide boardwalk for wildlife viewing and fishing access parallel to' Ocean Avenue.is also unlikely to impact cultural resources. Any sand compatible with the sand on the beaches and not used in conditioning the. marsh substrate will be.placed on the beach to the west of the groin near the'existing culvert. Due to continued erosional processes in this area,beach nourishment should serve to protect the existing shoreline. Any resources,in this area would have been previously disturbed or destroyed Lastly,the project staging and dewatering area will be located within an existing paved parking area at Keyes Memorial Beach. Therefore,we feel that the proposed ecosystem restoration project at Stewart's Creek would have no effect'upon any structure or site of historic, architectural, or archaeological. significance as defined by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and implementing regulations 36 CFR 800. The MA SHPO,in a letter dated July 2,2003,has. concurred with this determination..The Corps assumes concurrence`from the MA$UAR and Wampanoag Tribe based upon no response within the 30 day comment period. 13. FLOODING The project would be operated to ensure that there would be no increase in flooding to adjacent structures. The new culverts-would be equipped with stop log structures that would be closed,to the size of the existing opening in advance of a storm with the potential to increase flood damages. The project would have no impacts on the existing,100-yr floodplaia since flood waters overtop Ocean Avenue under these conditions. (Detailed results of the flood analysis are presented in Appendix D. EA-21 14. TRAFFIC The project would have temporary effects on traffic during the 4 '/Z to 6 month construction period. Ocean Avenue would need to be closed in the vicinity of the construction and staging areas during the culvert replacement. This is expected to last for approximately one month. Traffic would be routed away and around the construction and staging areas.- Access to areas west of the project area is accessible through other roads. Therefore;traffic may encounter minor delays during the periods that Ocean Avenue is closed,but no long-term impacts to traffic flow are expected. VII. CUMULATIVE'EFFECTS Cumulative impacts are those resulting from the incremental impact of the proposed action when added to other past,present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Past and current activities in the Stewart's Creek ecosystem are limited to passive recreational uses such as fishing,hiking,and bird watching. Reasonably foreseeable future actions include the , continuation of past and current activities. This project is expected to benefit the overall ecological health of the.Stewart's Creek ecosystem by reestablishing productive subtidal and intertidal flat habitats and by the*-' marsh. Therefore;fro adverse cumulative impacts are restoration of a high quality Spartina projected as a result of this project. VIII. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS/SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT No'significant adverse impacts to'children,minority or,low income populations are t r anticipatedThe environmental effects of this project are occurring in coastal areas without-- disproportionately large populations of children, minorities,or low-income people.. The project Of a feature impacted during previous(circa 1930) development. represents restoration- 1X. MONITORING The USAGE will establish a monitoring program to evaluate the project. 'Approximately ten permanent sample:stations will be identified along transects throughout the restored marsh. The following will be recorded: 1) surface elevation;2)depth of flooding relative to surface elevation at high and low water during spring phase;and 3)plant species composition,percent cover,and maximum height of each species at the sample site. Monitoring will be conducted immediately following project construction and will be repeated during August of the three years following implementation, EA-30 3 X. COORDINATION A public notice was released for this project on July 16,2004 and coordination meetings have been held between Federal and State agencies to discuss various aspects of this project. Refer to Appendix A for coordination letters. The following agencies that have been contacted for this project include: ° Federal A gg_ncies: U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Region 1,Boston,MA` U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Concord,NH National Marine Fisheries Service,Gloucester,MA State Agencies: Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management Massachusetts Department of Marine Fisheries ' Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management , State Historic Preservation Office Local Mcies: Barnstable Conservation Commission Barnstable Selectmen EA'M XI. REFERENCES Able,K. W., and S. M.Hagan. 2000. Effects of commonreed(Fhragmites australis) invasion on marsh surface macrofauna: response of fish and decapod crustaceans. Estuaries 23: 633-646., S. M.Hagan, and K. W.�Able. 2001. Vegetation type and the intertidal Angradi,T.R., ag ` macroinvertebrate fauna of a brackish marsh: Phragmites vs. Spartina. Wetlands 21:75- 92. Lissner,J.,and H. Schierup. 1997. Effects of salinity on the growth of Phragmites australis. Aquat. Bot. 55:247-260, Massachusetts Historical Commission. 1984. Reconnaissance Survey Report for the town of Barnstable,Massachusetts. Mitsch,W.J. and J. G. Gosselink.. 1986. Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,Inc. New York 539 pp., NMFS.2002. Essential Fish Habitat Designations. htta//www nmfs noaa gov/ess fish habitat htm National Marine Fisheries EFH Homepage. Sinicrope,T.L.,P. G.Hine,R. S.Warren, and W. A.Niering. 1990. Restoration of an impounded salt marsh in New England. Estuaries 13: 25-30. EA-3Y I11. COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL FEDERAL STATUTES AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS . Federal Statutes 1. Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, as amended, 16 USC 470 et se . Compliance: Issuance of a permit from the Federal land manager to excavate or remove archaeological resources located on public vpr Indian lands signifies compliance. Not applicable to this project. 2: Preservation of Historic and Archeological Data Act of 1974,as amended, 16 U.S.C.469 et Compliance: .Project has been coordinated with the State Historic Preservation.Officer. Impacts to archaeological resources will be mitigated:: 3. American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 19787.42 U.S.C. 1996. Compliance:'Must ensure access by'native Americans to sacred sites,possession of sacred objects,and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites. Not applicable to this project. 4. Clean Air Act,as amended;42 U.S.C.7401 et s Compliance:'Public notice of the-availability of this report to the Environmental Protection Agency is required for compliance pursuant to Sections 176c and 309 of the Clean Air Act. 5. Clean Water Act of 1977(Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of.1972) 33 U.S.C. 1251 pLm- Compl A Section 404(b)(1)Evaluation and Compliance Review will been incorporated shall be filed for State-Water Quality Certification into the project report. An application pursuant to Section 401 of the.Clean Waxer Act. 6. CoastalZoneMapagement Act of 1972, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1451 et sea. Compliance: A,CZM consistency determination shall be provided to the State for review and concurrence that the proposed project is consistent with the approved State CZM program. 7. Endangered Species'Act of 1973,as amended, 16 U.&C. 1531 gt s Compliance: Coordination with the US.Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS)and/or National Marine Fisheries Service(NW- S)will'determine formal consultation requirements pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. • t _33 8. Estuarine Areas Act, 16 U.S.C. 1221 eta.. Compliance: Applicable only if report is`being submitted to Congress. 9. Federal Water Project Recreation Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 460142 et Compliance:Public notice of availability to the project report to the National Park Service (NPS)and Office of Statewide Planning relative to the Federal and State,comprehensive outdoor recreation plans signifies compliance with this Act.' 1.0. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act,as amended,16 U.S.C. 661 et_m. Compliance: Coordination with the FWS,NMFS,and State fish and wildlife agencies signifies compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coorduiation Act. 11. Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965,as amended, 16 U.S.C.4601-4 et se4. Compliance:Public notice of the availability of this report to the National Park Service(NPS) and the Office of Statewide Planning'relative to the Federal and State comprehensive outdoor recreation plans signifies compliance with this Act Sanctuaries Act of 1971,as amended,33 U.S:C. 1401 et 12. Marine Protection,Research,and Compliance: Applicable if the project involves the transpostation or dis poral of dredged material in ocean waters pursuant to Sections 102'and 103 of the Act,respectively. Disposal of dredge material in ocean waters will not occur. 13. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,-as amended, l6 U.S C..470 et e 'Compliance: Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office signifies compliance. -14. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act(NAGPRA),25 U.S.C.3000- p 3013,18 U.S.C.<1.170 h . .. . Compliance: Regulations implementing NAGPRA will be followed if discovery of human remains and/or funerary items occur during implementation of this project. 15. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,as amended,42 U.S.0 4321 et s Compliance:Preparation of an Environmental As signifies_partial compliance with NEPA. Full compliance shall be noted at the time the Finding of No Significant Impact or { Record of Decision is issued. IVU 16. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, as amended,33 U.S.C. 401 et sea. Compliance:No requirements for projects or programs authorized by Congress. The proposed aquatic ecosystem restoration project is being conducted pursuant to the Congressionally-approved authority. 17. Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act as amended, 16 U.S.0 1001 et se Compliance: Floodplain impacts must be considered in project planning. No floodplain impacts will occur. 18. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act,as amended, 16 U.S.0 1271 et seq. Compliance: Coordination with the Department of the Interior to determine projects impacts: on designated Wild and Scenic Rivers must,occur. 19. Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et sea. Compliance:Coordination with,the National Marine Fisheries Service and preparation of an Essential Fish Habitat(EFH)Assessment signifies compliance with the EFH'provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Executive Orders 1. Executive Order 11593,Protection and,Enhancement of the Cultural Environment; 13 May^ 197E Compliance:. Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer signifies compliance. 2. Executive Order 11988,F000dplain Management,24 May'l977 amended by Executive Order 12148 20 July 1979.' Compliance: Public notice of the availability of this report or public review fulfills the requirements of Executive Order 11988,'Section 2(a) (2): 3. Executive Order 11990,Protection of Wetlands, 24 May 1977. Compliance: Public notice of the availability if this report for public review fulfills the requirements of Executive Order 11990,Section 2(b). v 4. Executive Order 12114,Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal"Actions,4 January-1979. Compliance: Not applicable to projects located within the United States: s y EA-3i 5. Executive Order 12898,Environmental Justice, 11 February 1994. Compliance: Not applicable,the project is not expected to have a significant impact on minority or low income population,or any other population in the United States. 6. Executive 13007,Accommodation of Sacred Sites, 24 May 1996 Compliance: Not applicable unless on Federal lands,then agencies must accommodate. access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners, and avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites. 7. Executive Order 13045,Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and: Safety Risks. 21 April, 1997. Compliance: Not applicable,the project would not create a disproportionate environmental health or safety risk.for children. 8. Executive Order.13175,Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,6 November.2000. Compliance:Consultation with Indian Tribal Governments,where applicable, and consistent with executive memoranda,DoD Indian policy, and USACE Tribal Policy l?rinciples signifies compliance. Executive Memorandum Analysis of Impacts on Prune or Unique Agricultural Lands in Implementing NEPA, I I August 1980, Compliance: Not applicable if the project,does not involve or impact agricultural lands. White House Memorandum, e t-to-Government Relations with Indian Tribes, 29 Government-to-Government April 1994. Compliance: Consultation with Federally Recognized Indian Tribes,where appropriate, signifies compliance. EA-3 NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CONCORD,MA CLEAN WATER ACT. SECTION 404(b)(1)EVALUATION PROJECT: Stewart's Creek Restoration Project PROJECT MANAGER: Mr. Larry Oliver EXT. 978=318-8347 FORM COMPLETED BY: Mr:Todd Randall EXT. 978-318-8518 DESCRIPTION: The proposed plan involves restoring tidal flushing to the Stewart's Creek salt pond/marsh system by replacing the existing culvert under Ocean Avenue. Pond and intertidal flat habitat will be restored to conditions suitable for optimum benthic invertebrate, fish, and wildlife habitat: In addition, salt marsh habitat in the northern portion of lower Stewart's Creek will be created and restored using material dredged to restore the pond. A construction window of 7 September to 30 April will be used: The existing culvert will be replaced with a larger 5-foot by 5406t culvert to increase the upper and lower.limits of the tide range and reduce the velocity of water entering Stewart's Creek. A sedimentation basin will be constructed at the upstream side of the culvert to capture sand transported into the marsh from the:beach.-.For.ease of maintenance, the sedimentation basin will be a 10-foot long by 3-foot deep basin with 13 side slopes. An access ramp will be constructed to allow maintenance equipment to access the sedimentation basin. The culvert will be equipped with a stop log structure on its downstream side,which would be closed during storms to reduce the potential for tide water to flood surrounding uplands. The culvert will be equipped with removable grates to prevent human entry. Additionally, a 4-ft wide boardwalk will be constructed parallel to Ocean Avenue to allow wildlife viewing and fishing access. The pond would be dredged-to-a maximum depth of 0.5 to I.0 feet at mean low water (MLR)to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl. The pond size would be limited to the maximum.size that would not require.off-site disposal._.Approximately.3,200 cubic yards(cy).of material would be excavated to create the salt pond. .The material excavated to restore the pond would be placed in the areas to the north raising their elevations to approximately 2.0 feet NGVD. Large deposits of suitable sand may be placed on the beach. A coir fiber roll would be placed around the perimeter of the excavated sediments(approximately 1.8 acres)to hold the material placed within it and the perimeter would be planted with salt marsh cordgrass to encourage it to colonize the area. EVU NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT U.S.ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,CONCORD,MA EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1)GUIDELINES OJECT: Stewart's Creek Habitat Restoration Project PR 1.Review of Compliance(Section 230.10(4)-(dll_, . a. The discharge represents the least environmentally damaging Practicable alternative' and if in a special aquatic site,the activity associated with the discharge must have direct access or proximity to,or be located in the aquatic ecosystem to fulfill its basic purpose, X a YES NO b. The,activity does not appear to: 1)violate.applicable state water quality standards or effluent standards prohibited under-Section 307 of the CWA;2)jeopardize'the existence of Federally listed threatened and endangered species or their critical habitat`,and 3)violate requirements of any Federally designated marine sanctuary(if no,see section 2b and check responses from resource and water quality certifying agencies); X - YES . NO e. The activity will not cause or contribute to. significant degradation of waters of the U.S. including adverse effects on human health,life stages of organisms dependent on the aquatic ecosystem,ecosystem diversity,productivity and stability,and recreational,aesthetic,and:economic values(if no, see section 2); X .YES' NO d. Appropriate:and practicable steps have been taken to minimize potential adverse impacts of the discharge on the aquatic ecosystem(if no,see section 5). X YES NO EA-Si 2. Technical Evaluation Factors(Subparts C-F). Not N/A Signif Signif icant icant a. Potential Impacts on Physical and A t Chemical Characteristics of the Aquatic Ecosystem(Subpart Q. 1) Substrate k . ix I 2) Suspended particulates/turbidity X i 3) Water _JX- 4) Current patterns and water circulation IX 5) Normal water fluctuations X. 6) Salinity gradients IN I' •b. Potential Impacts on Biological Characteristics of the Aquatic Ecosystem(Subpart D). 1) Threatened/endangered species ix t. , 2) Fish,crustaceans,mollusks and other aquatic organisms in the ` = food web I i 3) Other wildlife IX c. Potential Impacts on Special Aquatic z Sites(Subpart E). 1) Sanctuaries and refuges IX 2) Wetlands , _I 3) .Mud flats 4) Vegetated shallowsX. ,5) Coral reefs IX i 6) Riffle and pool complexes , IX. d Potential Effects on Human Use Characteristics(Subpart F). - 1) Municipal and private water supplies ix:-.-- 2) Recreational and commercial fisheries LX 3) Water-related recreation °� 4) Aesthetics ,; LIX 5) Parks,national and historic monuments,national seashores, wilderness areas,research sites, and similar preserves` I,_ X -- EA•91 3. Evaluation and Testima(Subpart a- a. The following information has been considered in evaluating the biological availability of possible contaminants in dredged or fill material(Check only those appropriate.), 1) Physical characteristics........... ....... Z) Hydrography in relation to known or anticipated sources of contaminants..... X . 3) Results from previous testing of the material or similar material in the vicinity of the project ......... ........... ...... 4) Known,significant sources of persistent pesticides from land runoff or percolation... ....:... ......... :::...... 5) Spill records for petroleum products or designated hazardous substances(Section 31 I'd CWA)...... X 6 Public records of significant introduction of contaminants from industries,municipalities,or other sources............ ...... .. ...... 'n Known existence of substantial material deposits of substances which could be released in harmful quantities to the aquatic environment by man-induced discharge activities.. 8) (ether sources(specify). *............ ............. List auuroyriate references. The Environmental Assessment of Stewartt's Creek Restoration Proiect Barnstable. Massachusetts. b. An evaluation of the appropriate information in 3 a above indicates that there is reason to believe the proposed dredge or fill material is not a carrier.of contaminants, or that levels of contaminants are substantively similar at extraction and'disposal sites-and not likely to require constraints. The material meets the testing exclusion criteria; X YES NO EA:40. 4. Disposal Site Delineation(Section 230.1MA. a. The following factors,as appropriate,have been considered in evaluating the disposal site. i) Depth of water at disposal site.:.......... ......X 2) Current velocity,direction, and variability at disposal site.........:...........X 3) Degree of turbulence...........:......... ..:..,.:....X 4) Water column stratification.:.....................X 5) Discharge vessel speed and direction..... ............ ....... ......... 6 Rate of discharge.................................. . 7) ;Dredged material characteristics (constituents,amount,and type Of material,settling velocities)..... .........X 8) Number of discharges per unit of r time.... ......... ..:... ........ ..:... ..... 9) Other.factors affecting rates and patterns,of mixing(specify) ... List appropriate references. The Environmental Assessment of Stewart's Creek Restoration Project,Barnstable, Massachusetts. b.An evaluation of the appropriate factors in 4a above indicates that the disposal site and/or size of mixing zone are acceptable. X YES NO 5: Actions To Minimize Adverse Effects(Subpart Hl. All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken;" through application of recommendation of Section 230.70-230.77 to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed discharge. , X YES NO 6. Factual Determination(Section 230.11). A review of appropriate information as identified in items 2-5 above indicates that there is minimal potential for short or long term environmental effects of the proposed discharge as related to: FA-a1 a. Physical substrate (review sections 2a,3,4,and 5 above):.; X YES NO b. Water circulation,fluctuation and salinity - (review.sections 2a,3,4,and 5). X YES NO c. Suspended particulates/turbidity (review sections 2a,3,4,and 5). X YES NO d. Contaminant availability (review sections 2a,3,and 4). X YES NO e. Aquatic ecosystem structure,function and organisms(review sections 2b and c,3,and 5) X YES NO f Proposed disposal site -(review sections 2,4,and,5). X YES NO g. Cumulative effects on the aquatic ecosystem x YES NO h. Secondary'effects on the aquatic x ecosystem. YES NO' 7. Findings of Compliance or Noncompliance. a. The proposed disposal site for discharge of dredged or fill material complies with the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. X YES NO Date .Thomas L. Koning Colonel, Corps'ofEngineers District Engineer EA-42 APPENDIX A-PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE AND COM WNT RESPONSES EA- W APPENDIX B GRAIN SITE RESULTS ;k § EA GeotechnicaI Test Report Stewarts Creek Salt Marsh Restoration Project Barnstable, MA f Prepared,for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers concord, MA. Prepared by: t GeoTestng Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA November 20, 2002 �d r t CD n y a f t t CIL ---------------- r 1 Y � 1 , :J ` . - n - -`_ - O }{ rN00 r , GeoTesting Express, Inc. Soxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 GEOTECFNIC'AL LABORATORY TEST 2ATA- . \ Stewarts�Cree-:-:alt Marsh.Restelat.ion \p. �"'X_4i2R Deptt : _ E1-\ r - _ \c. Test Date 1i.I=1/02 Test a by �CF' Plc. Sample. A Test Method :'ASTM D 422, ,Ch.,). a by .TUT Barnstable. MA - =, Desciiptzra'. Moist. likjbt yellowish brown sand with gravel .FINE SIEVE Sill - - Sievr Opening, W'fight Cumulative r - Inc es �:illimeters Retain=d Weight Retained tnm) (gm) f _ - _ i' .. ?e ,'m - _ .o .._ sir. •. . - _ classification ASTY. Gra.10 Symbol SP - - - ASTPS Group Name.. Poorly graded sand with gravel AASHTO Group Symho_ A-1-bin) _ AASHTO Group Same Stone. Fragments,.Gerivel and Sand GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 _....," f IC 13 tt f , _ r .- id 1 i - l r x - - _ - - cl GeoTesting Express, Inc: Boxborough, MA (978) 635=4424 Fax (978) 635-0.266 x GECTECHNICAL :.ASORATORY TEST .DATA Strwarts Creek Salt Marsh Restoration - J1J, •i - Nc. 37X-4328 Depth - a inq Po. - Test.Date it/11102_ )\o. Sample B Test' Method AST' D 422. Barnstable, MA - .. Cescription Moist, light: gray sand with gravel FINE SIFT_ a57 wei ht Cumulative ;ievc OpeninaP 4 :nc3:es mpcers Retain,:ci w icht Retained. g:. -- -- - - F.P. ! .mil-. _. .. , ...tll xY' -N/ • e - .. . 0.5387 mm z 0.1-386 tm - J.3110 mm •714gcii lca-iU!'. _ • - iUTM- ou>1 Svmbnl• SP • _ _ A.STM nrnao Name.,... Poorly grad,-d s.u:d.-laicL ga'nve•1 - _ cz^O Ir- y-0x01 A 141110AA- Fra m,ant it, ,_•lvel and :and , Slone _ .. AAah: �rou6, hat:, 9 . GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA- • (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 i s I ' Y } Cl .a, 1 • e , 1 r i I •rl -� - - r — 1 l 1 I 1 '-F L s s y — i _ s _ ' ' t 1 l r — — J; - � v _ k r - ''✓ .. - :-HF) .tit:; {J.1.1 I 1 i•i_-� .C 1..1!'i L _ GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 • Fax (978),635-0266 r GEOTECHNICAb1-A30RATORY TEST.DATA :°rr:�ect Stewarts Creek Salt Marsh Restoration - Fi:rn.-, SANPLF(. _ No. GTX-4328 depth Elt vat No. Test Data : 1l/11/02 Te=r ci y : F)n ii) .nr1.. �o. SamPi'" Test method ASTM D 422 Ch=' ./•• �)•• ldr - - � .. -:t Eon : 6arrstahie, MA ' - - •. .?scription : Noicr, oliva gray sand with giavel Lesc thaj. I.,., fjjje=, Hydrometer not .nei firmed FINE SIEVE S;.T Sieve Openings -Weight - Cumuln[ive Inches Nillimet?rs Retained Weight Retained (ym, (gm) , a.2£, H - i - .,r; .. ..1.3SS1_Lf•at ic)ii - A_STv ';iouP Symbol S? ASTM -,;v)up Name Poorly gradr3 sand with gravel A�cHTO a;rou}5 Symbo'_ A-1-b(0) - - A,A-qcTO 3roup Name _ Stone Fragm,nte;.:Gravel and Sand - GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 . : r i ♦� G - _ _ .. t.. __ - .................. •_-• - ij : i _ - c J '_• Y r 1 - - \. .. - t x - p Y .; .. .. - ------------- 1 A ......: --._. ... -.. _ .. .. Lnr ' �S GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 f GEOTECHRICAL [.ASORATORY ?EST DhTA - -- - - srer:arte Creakt Sal Marsh Rester at ion' D-pth Test Pate 11/11/O2. -�1- N"; Samolz D Test Method ASTM D 421 ,_-..r. sa,,nstat••n, MA r sc_ipt:or. Dtoi=-t,, da:k Clive gray sand tts : :,esS.xhar 10i .Eiaes; Fydrometer not performed FINE SIEVE SM . Sieve Openings Weight'- .Cumulative''_ - ..,;,-' Inches Mi_lLmeters Retained Height Retained 24 r i.. U s. ql - 92 n Classi: catir. - - - - ASTY. Group Symbol Sp, ASID. Group ^game. Poorly graded sand " AMPTO Group cymboi� A-1-bt0) AASP.T•)'Grok)n Acme S^one�Fragment- ,. Giav_1.and Sand 6 GeoTesting Express; In6. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-6424 Fax (978) 635-026 i a _ c 7 J y: s ' : 1 :. :._ y --- O L 00 r c cc ,< • r .\ 11 ... -...... .... _ Ali _—_ - CO iD - : is j r r 7 1 r- r. ,., i GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 GPOTECdNICAL.1,A9DRATORY--TEST.DATA a Stewarts Creak Salt Marsh Restorat'u;i vTX-43'lH Depth .'.ny No. --- . Test Date 72/11/O2 e S ;••ole No. Sample E Test Method.; ASTM D.422 - _.•ca^Eon. : Barnstable, MA - - - Desc-iption Xoist, dark olive gray sand - 3. res Less than in,% fines, N.ydrometer not net forned. FINE SIEVL St''' - - - _ Sieve Openings We:ght u 11,u C.i V ea.: -nches N.illime[ers Retained ----------- 4..7 Jll - n23 ...50 10...39'.' !.B7 p 30 .29. ... G.25 ..5.13 i.4S - 0.15 0..41. , ..',. l;rq v. ight'df 187.07 al '1a55'_f=C'ari:5 AS?R ::roue rrchc; .. ASTt. f:rouo \amp Poorly gradrd.sat:[i _ AASFIT:; Group Syl^br: C A-Y-b(b) AA.SET; G:�cut NATne :...Stone Fragm ht_.., Gt ivel and GeoTesting Express,Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 : r- _ .. i '- j I v s - , _ t S - GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 GEOTECFNICA!, iMORATORY.TEST DATA - eat. stawarts Creek Salt Marsh.Resteration .'..�ca. No. 3"•X-4s's Depth na No. Test Dato _1/11/02 Vo. Sanple F - Test method. i 'ASTM, D 4%2 -IipK•7!'�pt icr. Pkiist, -i:lack sand .r ,_i(s - Lp_�S than 10% fines, -Hydrometer not. Ile iformed - .:TINE SIEVE.SET .. - Sieve Openings Weighr Cumuiativc Inches Millimeters RFtained _ Weight -Retained (gm) (gm) ' -- --- - --- 1-isg.f tca`for 1S711' :Troup,Vawi-_ Poorly grad,-d sand _ AAg1ITn ;tour. Symbo:. A-i-h'01 - AASS' ` 3rom. Vane S-one Fragmrnt�s-, Gt•ivel and Sand - - GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 , x a O .... i,. J ' 7 N ' r L c LLJ J � - fc, _..._., r - _ t - - a b • - , c t - .. - -` -------- ....- - } 1 GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA, (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 �; :; 1 ATTERBERG LIMITS ----------- PROJECT IPROJECT NUMBER IT--ST-D BY BORINC NUMBER Stewarts Creek Solt Marsh Restoration tea. C"CCK-.D B" SAMPLE NUMBER Barnstable, MA I:jd' Sample G S,vrr:,. -,1CK: :`OD; _..------ - ------- ----- -- i ,F?r 'f1LEMAME --- I. Most,block clayey sand and vconics ' 1 Cled Nov 20 2002 SAMPLC Y _ LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATIONS CONTAINER NUMBER Z-11 P-3` L— --------------- W, WET SOIL T TARE [ 2414 23.84 WT, DRY SO•L + -ARE 1 17.7 17.63 S 7.63 I - — — - WT. !VAi FR 6.44 6.2: TARE to 15.67 15.69 i .r 5 S - _ WT. DRY SOiL ( 203 1.911 WATER CONTLNT• !1, (%) 317.24 t . 320.10 3222.53 NUMBER OF BLOWS, \ 35 22 16 1 k ONE-LOiNIT LIQUID OMIT, L_ 330.a2 r, 315:19 — 50567 • °t ASTIC LIMI- DETERMINATIONS CONTAINER NUMBER r I K WT. !VET SOIL '- TARE 34,71 _ 36.52 r --— - - 32 1 33.68 _ A `..P - -..-- — - 231 � — 284 TARE ':I 28.74 { 30.24 7 .. I — -- ---- WT. DRY SOIL 3.26 3 39 - -_ - - - WATER CONTENT{%) 83.13 83.787 ~ -- — — — SUMMARY OF RESULTS ;'LOW CURVE -= - - 15 NATURA. VJA' 2 CONTENT. i" (7) 6!: - - 11�' z t - - ? f ri o- 7 O a - • _ y__ GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 Fax (978) 635-0266 - GEOTEC4IP`ICAL-LABORATORY TEST DATA _ ;arc Stew-arts Creek Salt Marsh Restoration .. � � Filemmr SAMPLE - -.,-ert No. GTX-4328 Depth F;r:nq No. Test Date 11/11/02 Te•.^r.;i Ply (7ro/nj*n rr•c•. tc. Samole G Test Mrthed ASTM D 422 Ch=rt).: ty 7dt Earnstahle, MA Description Moist., blare, clayey sa::d and <rganics Moisture Content - .. weight of Wet Sr1:l = 0 gm Weight of Dry.Soil = 0 gn. Moisture Content Reading Temperature.' Cc•rrected Particle rrbnl Ad ,r.-d (mill: ldeg. C) Reading Size Imm) P.11-1 i Palciclp Sia, ------------ FINE SIEVE Sieve Openings Weight Cumulative-. Lnch.:s 'Mil:imeters Retained Weight Retained r tvm) 2.00 0.:)33 0.84 0.62 1.36 G _ �•:,, - 3.023, 0.60 0.29 -.,; ., - -1.65. . - 0.017'. 0.42 0.42 2.07 . . 0.012 0.30 r..39 2.4 0.01D 0.25 0.30 2.76 0-.006 D-.iS -. 1.U6. 3.82 0.^03 0,07. 1.27 5.09 T Dry Weiv,-t of.Sampl 126.06 ClaSsif`cacion - .1Tu :roup SymbnI SC :V_37v, :roup Nagle-. Clayey+sand AASRTn Grot:o Svnoo"- A-7-5(129) - AASFS-�+roue Nave.. :-Clayey Soils GeoTesting Express, In. f Boxborough, MA (978) 635.0424 .• fax (978) 635-0266 Y Moisture, Ash, and Organic Matter of Peat and Other Organic Soils by ASTM D 2974 Client US Army Corps of Engineers GTX# 4328 Project Name: Stewarts Creek Salt Marsh Restoration Test Date: 11113/02 Project Location: Barnstable, MA Tested By: jlg/njh Checked By: jdt Boring Moisture Ash Organic Sample ID Depth,ft Visual Description Content,% Content,% Matter,% -- Sample D - Moist,dark olive gray sand 20.6 99.5 0.5 -- Sample E — Moist,dark olive gray sand 20.7 99.3 0.7 Sample F Moist,black sand 24.4 99.1 0.9 -- Sample G — Moist,black clayey sand and organics 513 6Z5 3T5 Notes:Moisture content determined by Method A 8 reported as a percentage of oven-dried mass;dried to constant mass at temperature of 110 C Ash content and organic matter determined by Method C:dried to constant mass at temperature of 440 C , Motes These results apply only to the sample tested for the specific teU mndtttons The test procedures employed Follow accepted industry prance and the indicated test method t;eo7 estma F.zcress has no specd c knowledge as to conditioning ongin"sampling procedure or intended use of the material- - GeoTesting Express, Inc. Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 •, Fax (978) 635-0266 Specific Gravity of Soils by ASTM D 854 Client: US Army Corps of Engineers GTX#: -4328 Project Name: Stewarts Creek Salt Marsh Restoration Test Date: 11/13/02 Project Location: Barnstable, MA Tested By: jig/njh Checked By: jdt Specific Gravity Boring# Sample 10 Depth,ft• Visual Description - @ 20 C --- Sample G — Moist,black clayey sand and organics 2.01 Notes: Specific gravity performed by using method A(oven dried specimens)of ASTM D 854 Notes:These results apply only to the sample tested for the specific test conditions. The test procedures employed follow accepted industry practice and the indicated test method..GeoTesting Express has no speck knowledge as to conditioning.origin, GeoTesting Express, Inca • Boxborough, MA (978) 635-0424 • Fax (978) 635-0266 APPENDIX C-BENTHIC REPORT; EA-4 . + , MACROBENTHIC SURVEY OF STEWARTS CREEK (Barnstable, Massachusetts) November, 2002 . w ��r� � r . fat � ...,�"��s� r• k"'1 a',--,., f y.��'.�'��'' �� tisr r err a ��,. fit+., r� � u x � 3 i %?aj'`� -si4 ,yr ,wna "er?` 4' r ;'F.�.�."K'�" 3� 'y+- v'"`t3 a.i.r t•'"S' rRa. �itey, y,'��m r'�Z g4+�Y ; ;'�r4 �,'�Y 3, xS r-t:s ♦5 "�' c,f. t q k'e - c 9 y US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL, RESOURCES SECTION f: l I. Introduction Benthic infaunal communities are composed of a variety of small organisms including worms, clams, snails, crustaceans and insects:. The major ecological functions of the benthos include the production of biomass as food resources for higher.trophic levels and the bioturbating (mixing) of sand and mud-- Benthic organisms are good indicators~of environmental disturbances, as their'sessile nature precludes them from fleeing areas with declining environmental quality. Benthic communities can therefore provide a useful environmental.monitoring tool to evaluate estuarine systems. U. Objectives The objective of this study=was to document the benthic community structure of the Stewart's Creek salt pond(Figure 1). M. Methods ' were r k areas m 'e existi ng salt ond'and c ee communities th Subtidal bentluc.mvertebrate g p sampled on September 12,2002 in order to determine the functionality of the habitat. Two (2) samples were located in the salt pond proper and two (2) samples were located in the creek ; northward of the salt pond(Figure 1).' Benthic samples were collected using a 0.016 m2 stainless steel box=corer(12.5 cm on aside) covered with 0.5mm screen tops to a depth of 20- 25 cm(9 inches).- Sediment samples were washed through a 0.5 mm mesh screen, stained with a,biological dye(rose bengal) and fixed.in 10% buffered formalin'. Specimens were then. sorted;transferred,'and stored in 70% ethanol. All organisms were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic category and counted. IV. . Results .: All samples analyzed had low diversity. Samples located in the,southern portions of the salt pond(stations 3 &4)were.extremely poor quality containing only one species and one individual organism(a Capitellid polychaete) between them. Samples takeain northern portions of the pond and the creek(stations 1 &.2)were slightly higher than the southern portions. However, diversity and abundance was still very low, The benthic fauna of the northern portion of the system was representedby chironomid larvae, capitellid polychaetes, and the polychaete Hobsonia florida. The benthic;structure-of the four sampling stations'is summarized in Table 1. The sediment at station 1 was mostly sand with a moderate amount of organic material. The sediments at stations 2-4 were mostly organic material with some sands and silts. The lack of significant benthic faunal communities in the salt pond and creek areas suggest that the Stewart's Creek ecosystem is being negatively impacted by a stressor. All species found are typical pioneering species that can tolerate poor quality habitats. " Table 1. Benthos collected in Stewart's Creek on September 12, 2002. Density values are per 0.016 m2. Sta. l Sta.2 Sta.3, Sta.4 Species ANNELIDA Capitella spp. - Hobsonia florida 5 - Unidentified Capitellidae ARTHROPODA Unidentified Chironomidae 6 f. w i 2 , !I�., s � �� : r. • . �� i �chi�"k-E -47 - � � i o ." 1 e 1 Ir I1• r � � %'s fir. 4 ' � �ga�+ AN M aS�'�`` �`' 89_P..,� 15: €'E-V, -+r'' NAMI Mn AR Ap vi I. -1 y� 63 F e � F "-+ -•vtE' x '€ ��7L�`�i;**��"� .� �'S3 C3'�T f�''" �� d"r R.'�"{ r.�y, �'5... •i 1 I f "" 1 �. � � � t:_f mow'm id1 "`. V Lei-V ` .. APPENDIX D-HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS EA-48 - STEWARTS CREEK COASTAL WETLAND ECOSYSTEM'RESTORATION BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS L INTRODUCTION , The Stewarts Creek marsh is located in a coastal wetland, approximately 1.3 square miles in drainage area, in the town of Barnstable,Massachusetts in the village of Hyannis. The Stewarts Creek ecosystem includes a20-acre'salt pond and tidal creek and approximately 35 acres of wetland. Historically, the marsh experienced continuous tidal exchange from a meandering tidal-creek located between the present day Keyes Memorial Beach and Hyannisport Beach on Nantucket Sound. Construction of Ocean Avenue and a 36-inch culvert beneath the roadway created a tidal restriction, hence degrading the marsh. The salt pondcurrently experiences extensive algal blooms and subsequent water quality con concerns. This hydrologic and hydraulic analysis was conducted to provide an assessment of tidal conditions within the Stewarts Creek salt marsh to determine the culvert and channel size needed to improve tidal exchange to the marsh(see Plate 1). This work effort includes development of a one-dimensional model of tidal flow. The existing culvert and sediment build up in the jetty restricts the natural tidal flow and flushing of the marsh. This study was conducted by the New England District,Corps of Engineers for the town of Barnstable, Massachusetts under the Corps Section 206, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program The intent of the modeling was to 1) determine the optimum culvert and channel size required to increase the tide range within the pond during a spring tide cycle 2), compute the.flow velocity under various tidal events to ensure stabilization.of the proposed channel and 3) compute the water surface elevation(WSE) of the pond under proposed conditions for the spring, 1-yr,and 10-yr tidal and rainfall events to ensure the increased tide range does not'increase'flood:ele�ations to adjacent residential properties. The 50-yr and 100-yr tide elevations overtop the Ocean Avenue roadway;therefore these events were not included in the flood analysis • t II. DATA COLLECTION Bathymetric,topographic,tidal monitoring; salinity,dissolved oxygen and sediment-samples were collected to describe the existing salt marsh tidal regime and to obtain information to deyelop:a one=dimensional model for Stewarts Creek.As part of the September 2001 topographic survey effort, 8 cross-sections and random spot elevations were obtained throughout the salt marsh and adjacent uplands. First,flood elevations of four residential properties adjacent to the pond were collected. ` For tidal monitoring purposes, three staffgages were installed and tied to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum(NGVD)to monitor tidal movement within the marsh. Gage 1 was installed downstream of the 36-inch culvert at Ocean Avenue. For interior i marsh measurements, a second gage was installed upstream of the'36-inch culvert and a third gage was installed in the?main channel approximately 600-feet upstream of the 36- inch culvert.NAE personnel collected tide data for 6 hours at the three staff gages on 20 , June 2002 (see plate 2). This data'was then used to develop a mathematical model to predict interior tidal conditions under proposed conditions. Results of the tide survey are presented on Plate 2. The COE collected salinity concentrations at five stations within.the study area on the 13 March 2002. Salinity, dissolved oxygen(DO), pH and temperature were recorded at four stations within the study area on 12 September 2002. Salinity concentrations were reported at 33 ppt at the confluence of the jetty.with the Hyannis Harbor while the salinity concentrations recorded in the pond were near zero. The low salinity concentrations within the pond are due to the culvert restricting tidal flow into lhe, . pond. -Sediment samples were collected on�l l November 2002 at-3 locations along the. jetty and four locations in the pond within 50-feet of the 36-inch culvert and evaluated for' grain size.The sediment collected in the jetty contained approximately25% gravel, 506% medium sand,20% fine sand and trace amounts of coarse sand and fines. The sediment, collected in the pond contained approximately 1 8% gravel; 12-70%:medium sand,30 50% fine sand and 2-50% fines. III. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS 1. Tidal Regime. In.the study area;tides are semi-diurnal, with two high and low waters occurring during each lunar day(approximately 24 hours and50 minutes). The resulting astronomic tide range varies constantly in response to relative positions of the earth, moon,and sun,.with the moon having the.primary tide producing.effect. Maximum tide ranges occur when orbital cycles of these bodies are in phase. A'complete sequence t' of astronomic tide ranges is approximately repeated over an interval of 419 years, known as a tidal,epoch. Coastal storms and hurricanes can cause tides to.be much`higher than=' astronomically predicted. Although long term tidal measurements are not available at•the site,an , approximation can be developed from short term tidal measurements'with correlation to historical tide data at Woods Hole, Massachusetts,National Ocean Survey(NOS) gage, located approximately XX miles east of the site. Also,tidal profiles developed.by:the Corps for the open ocean along the New England coastline were.used to estimate tidal° flood frequencies at Stewarts Creek. A summary of estimated tidal datums at the subject site is shown in Table 1: Based on tidal regime at Stewarts Creek, it has been estimated that eight flooding. times per month are required to restore the salt marsh. This-frequency corresponds to an estimated high'tide of 2:3 feet NGVD, slightly higher than the mean spring high water. 2 , TABLE 1 ESTIMATED TIDE LEVELS AT STEWARTS CREEK Estimated from Corps of Engineers Tidal Flood Profiles, New England Coastline, September 1988 Tide Level and report datum (ft,NGVD29) 100-year Frequency Flood Event. 10.47 50-year Frequency Flood Event - 8.67 10-year Frequency Flood Event 5.53 1-yr Frequency Flood Event 4.00 Mean High Water Spring(MHWS) 2.25 Mean High Water(MHW) 2.00 Mean Tide Level(MTL) 0.50 National Geodetic Vertical Datum(NGVD) 0.00 Mean Low Water(MLW) Mean Lower Low Water(MLLW) -1.55 2. Freshwater Drainage Area. Based on 1:25,000 U.S. Geological Survey(USGS) quadrangle sheets the total drainage area was approximated as 1.3 square miles. Of this area,the Stewarts Creek marsh occupies .09 square miles(55 acres). The outlet of the marsh is a single 36-inch diameter, 60-foot long, concrete culvert that runs beneath Ocean Avenue. 3. Hydrologic Analysis. The HEC-HMS (hydrologic engineering center hydrologic modeling system)computer program was selected to analyze the freshwater runoff at Stewarts Creek. Rainfall event information.for various return periods was- developed using USWB TP-40. This rainfall,was applied to the 1.2 square mile drainage basin and routed to the 0.1 square mile marsh. The runoff information from this precipitation was developed using the Soil Conservation Service Curve Number method. A curve number of 60 was adopted, and considered representative of the drainage areas. Unit.hydrograph data was developed using the SCS Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph method. This analysis determined the peak stormwater flows discharging to the marsh during a 2-yr, 10-yr,'50-yr and 100-yr rain events are 43 cfs, 86 cfs, 140 cfs and 171 cfs, respectively. IV. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 1. General. The.hydraulic analysis of Stewarts Creek was performed using a one- dimensional,unsteady hydrodynamic model, HEC-RAS. The HEC-RAS model calculates the water surface elevations(WSE) along a river channel using the backwater analysis and can simulate one-dimensional, unsteady flow through a full network of open 3 channels. The model was calibrated using tide data collected at Stewarts Creek on the 20 June 2002 (see plate 2). Input needed to develop and run the HEC-RAS model includes topographic information and tide data. The intent of the modeling was to 1)determine the optimum culvert and channel size required to increase the tide range within the pond during a spring tide cycle 2) compute the flow velocity under various tidal events to ensure stabilization of the . proposed channel and 3) compute the WSE of the pond under proposed conditions for the spring, 1-yr, and 10-yr tidal and rainfall events to ensure the increased tide range does not increase flood elevations to adjacent'residential properties.The 50-yr.and 100-yr tide elevations overtop the Ocean Avenue roadway and.will inundate the marsh, therefore these events were not included in the flood analysis, The HEC-RAS analysis of Stewarts Creek started at the confluence of the jetty with Hyannis Harbor. The existing salt marsh was divided into three separate reaches. Reach 1 comprises the primary channel from its confluence with the Hyannis Harbor, through the 36-inch culvert and through the pond to Stetson Street. Reach 2 comprises the northwestern tributary from Stetson Street to Fiddlers Circle and Reach 3 comprises the northeastern tributary to approximately 200 feet upstream of Stetson Street. Approximately fifteen cross sections were utilized to develop the existing condition model(see plate 1). Topographic survey conducted by NAE in September 2001 provided , the cross-section information. The tidal survey was used as a guide in calibrating the model. 2. Model Calibration. First, WSE measured on 20 June 2002 were used to calibrate the HEC-RAS model. Measured and estimated cross-sectionalinformation was used to,run the model. Manning's frictional"n"values ranged between 0.035 in the channel, 0.07 on the overbanks and 0.03 in the existing culvert. Values were adjusted so results more closely matched the observed:tide level measurements. Tidal simulations for the preceding two days-leading up to the recorded tide . elevations were included in the model to.remove any instability in the calculations. Observed tidal conditions at the Boston Harbor gage were converted to expected tidal ` conditions at Hyannisport.and were used to estimate tide levels in.the Hyannis Harbor during the previous two days. Results of the calibrated run for 20 June 2002 are shown on Plate 2. As can be seen,the computed results coincide closely with the recorded results. 3 HEC-RAS Analysis and Culvert Evaluation. The Corps one-dimensional, unsteady flow hydrodynamic model HEC-RAS was used to determine the optimum culvert and channel size to increase the tide range in the salt pond,while maintaining low velocities for channel stabilization. The existing high tide in the marsh is near,that of the Hyannis Harbor. However;due to poor drainage conditions, the high tide in the marsh is unable to dain through the existing culvert;prohibiting the.marsh from experiencing low tide conditions. The intent of this analysis was'to increase the tidal exchange by lowering the existing low tide. 4 This analysis determined that a 5-foot x 5-foot box culvert with 8-foot wide channel would adequately increase the tidal exchange to improve habitat and reduce . velocities for channel stabilization. The invert of the proposed,culvert would remain the same as that of the existing culvert, -0.86-feet NGVD upstream end and=0.90-feet NGVD downstream end. Three alternatives were evaluated in this study to restore habitat to the pond. Alternative 1 is a no action alternative. Alternative 2 includes replacing the existing culvert and dredging a 225-foot long channel between the culvert and cross- section 7. Alternative 3 includes replacing the existing culvert and dredging the entire. pond area between the culvert and cross-section7.6, located approximately 450-feet upstream of the culvert. Currently beach sand has deposited along the existing jetty restricting tidal exchange to the existing 36-inch culvert and pond(Plate 3). Alternative 2 includes dredging an 8-foot wide channel along the jetty and through the pond to station 7 and replacing the existing 36-inch culvert with a 5-footx 5-foot box culvert. These improvements will significantly increase tidal exchange to the pond while maintaining moderately low velocities for channel stabilizationTidal exchange to the pond will increase from 2-inches to 1.6=feet. 4 The existing channel parameters were usedto define basic channel design features for the proposed channel; see Table 2. Although the velocities through the proposed channel are considerably lower than the;existing velocities, sedimentation along the jetty is expected to occur over time,and periodic removal of this sediment build-up will be necessary to maintain adequate flushing to the salt pond for successful habitat restoration.- Table 3 presents the existing,and proposed.WSE and flow volume in marsh during the spring tide. As can be seen, both alternative 2 and alternative 3 lower the low tide from L284eet NGVD to 0.11-feetNGVD with a slight increase in high tide..The flow volume in the marsh also increases significantly. Erosion of the existing and proposed channel was evaluated using the American Society of Civil Engineers publication, Sedimentation Engineering,published in 197T The grain siwAnd associated average critical water.velocities are presented in tabular form below. The critical water velocity represents the.point at which the grain is suspended. Results of sediment samples for*this study area are discussed in Section II. As shown on Table 4 the average spring tide velocities of the existing channel ranged between 3.1 fps at.station 3 and 0.0 fps at station 9 during a spring tide. The velocity computed at,station 4with the existing channel is low due to the sediment build-up at station and station 3 which restrict.tidal flow to station 4.. The maximum spring tide velocities in the proposed channel during spring tide ranged between 1.5 fps at station 4 and 0.0 at station 9. During normal conditions the spring tide velocity increases at stations 4 and:5 since there is a greater tidal interchange. In addition, velocities are higher in this location than at stations 1 and 2 because the conveyance area is smaller. Although a velocity of 1.5 fps is sufficient to erode coarse sand,these conditions will only,occur periodically during spring tide conditions and eventually the amount of material moving during these.conditions`should decrease as the channel stabilizes. However, should storm conditions or large waves cause material to`move close to the-culvert where velocities are higher fizrther sediment transport will occur.thus requiring a periodic removal of material from the proposed sediment basin. Very Course Sand(1-2 mm) 4.2 fps Coarse Sand(0.5-Imm) 0.9 fps, Medium Sand(0.25-0.5mm) 0.7 fps Find Sand (0.125-0.25mm). 0.5_fps - Very Find Sand(0.062-0.125mm) 0.3 fps' TABLE.2 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CHANNEL PARAMETERS Stewarts Creek,Barnstable, Massachusetts Existing Conditions Proposed Channel Parameters Channel Bottom Channel Bottom Cross- Invert:-- Width Cross- Invert Width Section t(Ft.NGVD) (feet) Section. (Ft.NGVD) (feet) 1 -0.2 0 - 1 -1.5 8 2 0.1 .0 2 -1.3 8 3 1.0 0 3 =1:2 8 4 -0.9 7 s 4 -0.9 8 5 ` -0.9 6 5., -LO 8 6 0.0 9 6 -1.0 8 7 0.1 0 ` 7 -1'.0 8 TABLE 3 MODELED EXISTING AND PROPOSED WSE AND FLOW VOLUME IN . MARSH DURING SPRING TIDE Stewarts Creek,Barnstable,Massachusetts Alternative l . ' : . Alternative 2 "Alternative 3 Existing Conditions 8-Foot Wide Channel Dredge Pond Sta Low tide High Tide` Low Tide High Tide Low Tide Hi Tide WSE Vol* WSE Vol* WSE Vol*.` WSE Vol* WSE Vol* WSE Vol* 5 1.28 0.00 .1.77 0.09 0.0 0.01 1.77 0.17 0.0 0.00 1.77 0.12 6 1.28 0.02 1 77 0.10, 0.0 `0.07 1.77 0.34 0.0 0.01` 1.77 0.17 7 1.28 0.12 1.77 0.24 0.0 0.07 1.77 0.53 0.0 0.03 1.77 0.45 8 1.28 1.15 1.77 1.91 0.0 . 0.10 1.77 2.34 0.0 0.34 1.77 4.71 9' 1.28 1.84 1.77 , .3.05 "0.0 0.10 1.77 1 3.52 0.0 '0.49 1 77 1 . 6.80 10 1.28 2.37 1.77 4.06 0.0 0.10 1.77 4.54 0.0 0.5.1. 1.77 8.51 11 1.28 2.70 1.77 4.66. 0.0 0.10 1.77 5.14 ' 0.0 0.52 L77 9.08 12 1.28 3.48` 177 5.89 0.0 ` ;0.11` 1.77 6.38, 0.0 0.53 , 1.77 .10.27 *Note: Volume is in units of acre-feet. ` ' TABLE 4 MODELED AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITIES (fps) Stewarts Creek,.Barnstable, Massachusetts Existing Channel Proposed 8-Et Wide Channel Station Spring Tide. . 1-Yr Storm Spring Tide 1-yr Storm 1 2.7 2.6 0.5 1.0 2 3.1 2.8 0.6 1`.1 3 2.1 2.4 0.9 1.6 4 0.2* - 0.6* 1.5, 2.0 5 0.3 0.7 1.2 2.3 6 0.2 _0.4 0.0 1.2 7 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.9 8 0:1' 0.0 0.4 0.7 9 0.0 0.0 1.4• '0.7 *Note: Velocities at station 4 are low under existing conditions due to sediment build-up at station 3 restricting flow to station 4. F 4. Flood Analysis.A tidal frequency analysis was conducted to determine the design tidal elevations for flood risk analysis and for.marsh restoration.As stated previously,tidal flood profiles,developed by the Corps for the open,ocean"along the New England coastline were used to estimate tidal flood frequencies at Hyannis'Harbor. This - study utilized the flood profiles:to determine the maximum stage for the spring, 1-yr and 10-yr tidal events. Stage hydrographs were then calculated from tidal elevations, recorded ' by he National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA), on the 21 June 2002, 29 January 2002, and the 30 October=1991 events to model the spring, 1-yr and i0-yr storm events respectively.The 50-yr and 100-yr tide elevations'overtop the"Ocean Avenue roadway,therefore these events were not included in the flood analysis. The topographic survey conducted in September 2001 measured finished floor elevations of 7.66 feet NGVD and 8.15 feet NGVD for two residential structures located adjacent to the study area on Studley Road. Table 5 presents the results of the flood $- analysis. Flood risk to nearby properties will be.dependent on tidal conditions, rainfall; and stormwater runoff to the marsh and drainage from the marsh through the proposed`5- ` ft x 5-ft box culvert. , During a spring tide with no rainfall;,alternative 2,alternative 3 and alternative 4 slightly increase high tide flood levels. During a 1=yr tide e vent'with no rainfall,` alternative 1 and alternative 2 increase flooding to the marsh by 2.51 feet. Assuming there are no rainfall contributions, this analysis determined that increasing the volume of tidal exchange to the pond would not cause flooding to structures located near the study area during the spring tide or.I-yr tide events. This project will not increase flooding to structures located adjaceni to the study area. TABLE 5 MODELED EXISTING AND PROPOSED FLOOD ELEVATIONS IN MARSH Stewarts Creek, Barnstable, Massachusetts Maximum Flood Elevations(Feet NGVD) Stop Tide Rainfall Logs Alternative 1 Event Event In (Existing Alternative 2 Alternative 3/4 � g Place Conditions) Spring NA NO 1.77 1.77 1.77 1-Yr NA NO 1.77 . : 4.00 4.00 10-Yr 2-Yr NO 5.20 7.75 7.75 10-YR 2-Yr YES 5.20 5.20 5.20 5. Salinity and Dissolved ONygen(DO) Evaluation. As discussed in Section II; the salinity and DO measured_concentrations in the.pond are near zero due to the restricted tidal flow. Although-DO.was not measured during the cooler months, it is anticipated that the low dissolved oxygen levels generally occur, only during the warmer months of the year. The intent of this study is to improve the tide exchange to the marsh to increase salinity and DO concentrations for habitat restoration. Table 3 presents the volume (acre-feet)of flow entering and leaving the marsh. As can be seen, both alternative 2 and alternative 3 significantly increase the volume of flow and tidal exchange to the marsh area. This analysis concludes-that both alternative 2 and alternative 3 will provide adequate salinity for habitat restoration within_ the proposed salt marsh 6. Sedimentation Basin, Trash Racks, Weir and Stop Logs.A sedimentation basin will be dredged immediately upstream of the proposed culvert to collect sand that deposit at the culvert entrance during the exiting tide. The basin is designed to capture course sand that will be suspended from wave and tidal action through the culvert and deposited immediately upstream of the culvert. A 6-foot wide by10-foot long by 3-foot deep basin with 1:4 side slopes has been determined practical for this application and will provide a storage volume of 180 cubic.feet. The average'channel velocities computed by the HEC- RAS model for mean tide range and spring tide range are below the range that will suspend course sand,however; some sedimentation is expected due to periodic storm and wave action and during high spring tide events. It is recommended the basin be monitored for maintenance on a monthly basis during normal tide conditions. In the event of increased tide levels(i.e. 1-yr tide event or greater)the basin should be checked for sedimentation build-up and necessary maintenance conducted at that time. A trash rack is proposed on both the upstream and downstream.ends of the proposed culvert to collect debris and prohibit trespassing within the culvert as a safety precaution. h 8 A flow control weir is proposed at the upstream end of the proposed culvert to regulate the WSE within the marsh. An elevation of 0.0-feet NGVD is proposed to maintain open water in the marsh during low tide. A stop log structure is proposed for the downstream end of the proposed culvert for use during a major tidal event (i.e. 10-yr or greater)to prevent damaging tide levels within the proposed marsh. The stop logs should be engaged during low tide when a major tidal event such as a hurricane or noreaster is predicted from the national weather service. Failure to engage the stop logs during low tide conditions will result in difficulty during high water conditions. Therefore, an operational flood-warning plan will need to be instituted. Tidal flooding from Hyannis Harbor will overflow Ocean Avenue into the . proposed marsh during 50-yr and greater tidal events since the elevation of Ocean Avenue is 8.6-feet NGVD and the 50-yr flood elevation is 8.67-feet NGVD. See section III.5. for the Flood Analysis discussion. There will be no.flooding increase to adjacent properties as aresult of this project. IV. CONCLUSION". This hydrologic and hydraulic analysis was conducted to provide an assessment of tidal conditions within the Stewarts Creek salt pond to determine the culvert and channel size needed to improve tidal,exchange in the marsh. A5-foot x 5-foot box culvert with an 8-foot wide channel was determined adequate to improve the tidal exchange, salinity, DO and habitat of the marsh while maintaining moderately low flow velocities and minimal increase to flood levels within the proposed marsh. The invert of the proposed culvert would remain the same as that of the existing culvert, -0.86-feet NGVD at upstream end and=0.90-feet NGVD at downstream end. . Three alternatives were evaluated in this study to restore habitat to the pond. Alternative Lis a no action atemative: Alternative 2 includes replacing the existing culvert and.dredging a 225-foot long channel between the culvert and cross-section 7. Alternative 3 includes replacing the existing culvert and dredging the entire pond area between the culvert and cross-section 7.6, located approximately 450-feet upstream of the culvert. Alternative 4 includes replacing the existing culvert, dredging.a larger pond with. off-site disposal. This analysis determned that alternative 2, alternative 3 and alternative 4 will substantially increase tidal exchange to the pond while maintaining moderately low velocities for channel stabilization. Although the velocities through the proposed channel are considerably lower than the existing.velocities,sedimentation along the jetty is expected to occur over time and removal of this sediment build-up will be necessary to maintain adequate flushing to the salt pond and successful habitat restoration. P. 9 Tidal exchange to the pond will increase from 2-inches to 1.6-feet during a spring tide event by lowering the low tide. The high tide elevation will increase minimally. There will be no increase to flooding to adjacent properties as a result of this project. 10 4 F _ Ineremental Analysis for Stewart s Creek Marsh Restoration Barnstable, Massachusetts MARCH 2O03 Prepared by New England District " U.S. Army Corps of Engineers z 696 Virginia Road` Concord', Massachusetts. INCREMENTAL ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................... .......... ........ ......... ........ ........ .........33 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES(MISSION, GOALS,AND OBJECTIVES)............................... ..................... ..... ................ ....... ................. ........33 Goals and Objectives Project Goals............ :.................. .................. .....::.. ::...............:. .................. ...................I...6 Project Objectives.... ............... .........6 UNITS OF MEASUREMENT AND MODELS ............. ........7 ModelConsiderations..........................................:.........................................................:.........7 Model Selection... .... .. 8 INVENTORY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES...............89 WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITION ANALYSIS.............:........ .........99. ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN INCREMENTS.................................................................I....1010 Alternative 1,No Action::.........:. :........ .......... ...... .................. ......... ... .. .:...... . .... 1010 Alternative 2;Replace Culvert and Dredge Channel... Alternative 3,Replace Culvert; Dredge Channel and Pond, and Create Marsh..,,............................ Alternative 4, Replace Culvert,-Dredge Channel and Pond with Offsite Disposal, ...10 w WITH PROJECT;ANALYSIS........................................................................ ......... ..........10 Red-winged Blackbird Model Results.. .......... .................. ....:............. ......... ............... 16 6 Clapper Rail Model Results...................................................................... ......... ......:. ......17 7' Wintering Black Duck Model Results...: ..._.................................. ......:. ,. ...... ..... 174-7 Summary of Results 19474 DISPLAY OF BENEFITS AND COSTS............................................. ............ ...................2020:;. Incremental Cost Curve............................................ ........................... ......... . ............20—N RECOMMENDATIONS.... ..........:......... � . REFERENCES. ..... . ...... ..... ...... ........................................... 25' INTRODUCTION This report documents the incremental analysis performed by the New England District of the Corps of Engineers for the Stewart's Creek Marsh Restoration Project(Figure 1). The incremental analysis evaluates alternatives for modifying a degraded salt marsh and salt pond to restore estuarine habitat for fish and wildlife. The Stewart's Creek marsh and salt pond are currently in a degraded state because of a lack of tidal mixing with seawater from Hyannis Harbor. The existing culvert that links the two systems does not allow proper tidal flow. Prior to the installation of the culvert,tidal flow to the site was unrestricted. The purpose of this incremental analysis is to display and evaluate the fish and wildlife habitat benefits and incremental costs of various restoration alternatives. The incremental cost associated with an alternative is the added cost for each additional unit of benefit. The information generated in this assessment will help to identify the best restoration alternative. Fish and wildlife resources may have both economic.and ecological value. The Corps of Engineers guidance for performing incremental analysis describes fish and wildlife resources with substantial commercial and/or recreational value as National Economic Development(NED) resources. Fish and wildlife resources with substantial non-monetary, ecological value are defined as.Environmental Quality(EQ) resources. This incremental analysis displays the EQ outputs of alternative plans and compares the marginal cost of the various options. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES(MISSION,GOALS,AND OBJECTIVES) Stewart's Creek historically contained an open water salt pond with salt marsh surrounding the pond. These habitats have been converted to an oligohaline (very low salinity) pond and a common reed marsh(Phragmites australis, hereafter referred to as phragmites). The restoration project is intended to restore estuarine habitats by reestablishing tidal flow to the system and redistributing materiatin the area to restore elevations,hydrologic, and physical conditions that will support estuarine habitats: The historic habitats at Stewart's Creek were estimated based on interpretation of 1960 aerial photography(Figure 2). Based on that photography, the approximate area of former estuarine habitat, extending from the southern portion of the marsh adjacent to Ocean Road to approximately 900 feet,upstream, was: ■ 5.3 acres of salt pond and intertidal flats ■ 4.0 acres of salt marsh. Therefore, the historic.ratio of open water to marsh.was about 1.3:1. Upland areas surrounding the pond had less residential development, consisting of mixed residential, open agricultural;and open space: 3 Ca .44 QW Fir-gyp jam Ls III AMP-' m sS 3n � �t'�'��" sli iN �+ w Z Y�, on NuMfenr a zw- c ke EYE ski os. -4- tom' �. A� ✓�"e� r r� r '"aa« -'ar�;s - ,C�-'�� t t � �: 6'`�' .K1 3:. k � '`i c ,� ti � t.� �"..-�J a. "-qat�• '7:lis � W y'"3`a'` t'.F a � "�;r gak�'i ft,,, ' ` i.�' -`+k:� ➢: f #y a 'a'„g ,5" �� ,.x .��' � A -�� 3�� k�e� i r�+ � gt�` u' - �.•��.y. c 1� y,t �R�g��^ '�* � .srt.i. �— �,-a�: .G...� er"e�.��z��- m d��irw�`� ,��. ��. "�`.3i'.K .i�`�- to �. a. � •;� __�4,:. Figure 2. 1960 Aerial Photograph of Stewart's Creek Project Area Rr s� �S1 trL J' t •i, 1 n u .. -:t'•ta'�.+ y*� -, td c-�8'. a '[C-,€�31�, *"''a� � _ t' 1 .. r � �` t .-�•` �, �.�� " c ram' eon MU IN KN ki WA V. 14 AV '.fie]R�f .c 9 .a t=• 'e'fih� � i.K' ,t t t T L tv :.7, Sr, r�: �~a•;`T��s � , q� r F 'ltd�uT,„^��,} i _:. AI � 7 -x, 1 LC �f i m Y f e t .JE �Syf /Y P . 1 n`* ,i r y�,�,j .t'� b e- n>,F,i�' eh y- ,,., ..+^:�b has +fit'. x t1 .., s�•. ., ..v:�. t:.;' ?' v, 4MZKli dd "'^"d. e .S�w �gF��` ,•" (1 }J try, +f F S S _ h 5 Goals and Objectives Prior to beginning a restoration project it is important to establish and agree to the goals and objectives. These statements form the basis of project design and evaluation and are the basis for developing performance,criteria for project monitoring and success evaluation. Goals refer to the target characteristics to be restored, such as water quality,hydrology,.or wetland flora and fauna. Objectives are more precise, such as the specific characteristics of water quality to be achieved or the species composition of the various'communities of biota to be restored. Performance indicators,which are developed as the project progresses and are the basis of the monitoring plan, are specific,measurable quantities such as pH or concentration of chlorophyll in a water sample. The goals and objectives for the Stewart's Creek Marsh'Restoration Project are outlined below. Due to the differences among:alternatives considered and the.stage of this project,the goals and objectives are relatively-general. Project Goals ■ Restore a combination of tidal creek, salt pond and salt marsh that'ma itemizes fish and wildlife habitat value within'project constraints. ■ Increase the habitat value for estuarine dependent fish and wildlife,while maintaining some cover for the existing wildlife community.;; • Cause no increase in flooding potential to surrounding uplands. Project Objectives - Restore tidal flow to the system to sufficiently raise salinity levels to support estuarine flora. and fauna. ■ Restore substrates at intertidal elevations (spring-high.water to mean sea level)that all ow salt marsh plants and associated animal communities to colonize the site. ■ Restore substrates at lower intertidal elevations(about mean sea.level to mean lower low water)that allow;invertebrates adapted to intertidal areas and the animals that feed on them to recolonize the site. ■ Restore permanent open water to allow populations of shallow subtidal invertebrates and possibly submerged aquatic vegetation and the animals that feed on them to recolonize the site. ■ Restore habitats in appropriate`ratios to.maximize use by fish and wildlife. ■ Ensure existing.flood heights on surrounding uplands remain unchanged. 6 UNITS OF MEASUREMENT AND MODELS Model Considerations Once the project goals and objectives are established and alternative means of achieving them are formulated,the units of measurement must be determined. More than one unit of measurement may be usedin an incremental analysis as ong as the same units are used to describe increments that address a single objective. In many cases,,acres can be used as.a simple and practical unit of measure. For instance,if the project alternatives would restore different size increments of similar quality salt marsh, acres would be a good unit of measure.-In the case of the Stewart's Creek marsh,the alternatives would restore.varying combinations of salt pond,tidal, creek, and salt marsh habitats.,The historic combination of habitats and the type of alteration. (excavation and redistributing sediments)require the evaluation of different types of habitats of about the same size;but with different qualities. Therefore, habitat models are the best way to discriminate among alternatives. Habitat Evaluation Procedures(HEP)models were used to evaluate existmg and alternative habitats for the Stewart's Creek,Restoration Project..HEP was developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as a system to measure and document the value of fish and wildlife resources for impact assessment. Using HEP,the,quality of habitat for selected evaluation species is documented with a Habitat Suitability Index(HSI)._ The models generate an HSI by evaluating how well key habitat components supply requirements for a species.7 The HSI ranges from 0.0 to 1.0 with an HSI of 1 representing optimum habitat and an HSI of O:O signifying unsuitable habitat for the species. The HSI is developed by comparing measurable components of a habitat to models for the individual habitat components, frequently in the form of Suitability-Graphs. Suitability Graphs have potential values of habitat�components on the x-axis and Suitability Index (SI) on the y-axis. For instance, if a species requires.at least 50 percent herbaceous vegetation to utilize a habitat, areas with less than fifty percent herbaceous vegetation would have an SI value of zero;the habitat would not be suitable for the species. If optimum habitat for the species consisted of 90 percent herbaceous vegetation;areas meeting this percentage criterion would be given an SI of 1. Areas with intermediate percentages of herbaceous vegetation would be assigned SI values between 0 and 1. Normally, several Slvalues,are combined in a model to estimate the overall HSI for the species and the habitat. : The HSI is used to estimate Habitat Units (H ), which area measure of habitat quality and quantity. Each HU is equal to one unit(e.g.'acre,hectare) of optimal habitat. To determine the number of habitat units,the HSI value is multiplied by-the area of available habitat. For instance, 10 acres of habitat with a HSI of 0.6 would produce 6 HUs. Generally, several species 'representing different components of the habitat are used in a HEP evaluation. ` Model Selection To select an appropriate group of models for the Stewart's Creek Project,.District staff reviewed the list of available HEP models to identify appropriate species for the existing habitats and the types of habitats that may be restored. In light of the restoration goals and objectives and the habitats to be restored,the models for red-winged blackbird(Agelaius phoeniceus), great blue heron(Ardea herodias), clapper rail(Rallus longirostris),wintering black duck(Anal rubripes), wintering lesser scaup (Aythya affinis), alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus)and blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), and hard clam(Mercenaria campechiensis, Mercenaria mercenaria) were considered(See References). The models reviewed and reasons for selecting or not selecting them are summarized in Table 1. Based on the review of these seven models,the red-winged blackbird, clapper rail, wintering black duck, and wintering lesser scaup models were selected to evaluate the restoration alternatives. The four models.provide an assessment that considers all of the major-habitat types involved and species likely to.use them. Although all of the species are birds,the habitats represented by the models include subtidal open water with clam habitat, submerged aquatic vegetation, salt marsh vegetation with invertebrates,and broad-leaved monocot vegetation(e.g. phragmites or cattails(Typha spp.)) INVENTORY AND SIGNIFIC ANCE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES The area of existing cover types at the project site was determined by mapping cover types on 1996 aerial photography(Figure 1). The project area was defined as the maximum area affected.by tidal flow under With Project conditions. The existing conditions in the Stewart's Creek project area include approximately: ■ 3.0 acres of Phragmites dominated marsh 1.0 acre of Typha dominated marsh 2.0 acres of freshwater marsh 0.7 acres of shrub/forest communities ■ 0:2 acres of Spartina spp.salt marsh ■ 7.1 acres of open water 8 Table 1.Habitat Evaluation Procedures Models Considered and Reasons for Selecting or Not Selecting Them Model Status Reasons for Selecting or Not Selecting Clapper rail Selected Applies'to tidal water and estuarine emergent wetlands and.contains variables that will be affected by.the alternatives. Red-winged blackbird Selected Provides few criteria for distinguishing between alternatives,but is useful for evaluating Without Project Conditions: Great blue heron Not Applies primarily to heron rookeries and;provides little Selected detailed design/evaluation information for the habitat components that can be manipulated by the project. Wintering black duck Selected Applies to estuarine open water and emergent wetlands s and contains variables that will be affected by the alternatives. Applies to deeper estuarine areas. 4 rin lesser Not pe Wintering Pp scaup Selected. s will be since tie r ' Alewife and blueback Not, Not appropriate for the p oa ect sin Salim herring Selected higher than the HSI threshold for alewife and blueback herring habitat. Hard clam Not Not appropriate since most of the variables are water Selected . quality parameters that would be difficult to predict accurately prior,-to implementation: WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITION ANALYSIS The guidance for performing'incremental analysis requires a prediction`of the` Without Project Conditions. The.Without'Project Conditions(also known as No Action Alterriative) are the most likely,changes to occur at the site without the project and are the basis for the`evaluation of the action alternatives. Under the Without Project-Conditions,the marsh vegetation will continue to shift towards a Phragmites dominated marsh. Continued sedimentation in the pond will further decrease tidal exchange, which will lead to a continued decrease in water quality: If no action is taken,the salt pond and marsh will continue to degrade. 9 ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN INCREMENTS ' Four alternatives, including the No Action alternative, are considered in this section. The first two restoration alternatives use on-site disposal and attempt to achieve as much restored habitat as possible. The third restoration alternative uses off-site disposal: Alternative 1,No Action If no action is taken to restore the salt pond,marsh and estuarine habitats,the marsh in the lower Stewart's Creek pond will persist as a degraded estuarine pond with low benthic productivity and a fringing Phragmites marsh. Conditions in the Stewart s Creek ecosystem will continue to degrade as tidal mixing continues to decrease asa result of sedimentation. Increased sedimentation will also raise elevations and promote the growth of brackish marsh. The improvements in fish and wildlife resource value that would be generated with the project would not be achieved if the no action alternative is chosen. Alternative 2,Replace Culvert and Dredge Channel This alternative would.restore flushing to the salt pond/marsh system. The inlet channel would be dredged to the minimum depth,width, and length required to restore the maximum tidal , range and appropriate_dissolved oxygen and salinity conditions. Elevations in much of the area would be sufficient to establish salt marsh without grading. Habitats within the project area uni comm would consist of 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh, 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community, 2.0 acres of brackish marsh, 1.0 acre of high marsh,5.0 acres of low salt marsh, 1.0 acre of unvegetated intertidal habitat,and 3.0 acres of subtidal salt pond(Figure 3). The new channel would have.a 4 ft bottom width. The channel will have an invert of —1.5 feet,NGVD.at its confluence with the Hyannis Harbor, a culvert invert'of-1.0 feet NGVD and maintain a channel-invert of—1.0 through the salt pond:The side slopes will be cut 1:4 and allowed to develop a.natural side slope. Approximately 300 cubic yards of material would be . generated and spread in a thin layer on site near the channel. This alternative would change the tidal range in the pond from 1 40'to'l.55 ft NGVD�to a range of 0.11 ft to 1.74 ft NGVD, an overall.increase of 1. 48 ft. Alternative 3. Replace Culvert and Dredge Pond to Depths Suitable for Fish and Wildlife, Create Marsh with Excavated Material This alternative would estore flushing to the salt pond/marsh system, dredge silt from the .pond to`restore appropriate depths for fish and wildlife and`expose suitable substrates for optimum,benthic communities, and create salt marsh to the north of the culvert (upstream)using material dredged from the pond(Figure 4). The pond would be dredged to .a,maximum depth of 0.5'to 10 feet to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl. Approximately 3,200 cubic yards(cy)would be removed to restore the salt pond and spread in the areas labeled SALT MARSH maintaining.elevations that will support salt marsh vegetation(<2.0 feet NGVD). Large 10. � _ deposits of sandy material may be placed along the beach to the south. Habitats within the project area would consist of 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh,0.5 acres of shrub/forest-community, 2.0 acres of brackish marsh,2.0 acres of high marsh, 2.2 acres of low salt'marsh, 1.5 acres of unvegetated intertidal habitat,and 4.3 acres of subtidal salt pond. The area of marsh created with dredged material would be approximately 2 acres. This alternative would change the tidal range in'the)pond from 1:40-1:55 ft NGVD to a range of 0.11 ft to 1.72 ft NGVD. 1 Alternative 4. Replace Culvert and Dredge Pond to Depths Suitable for Fish and Wildlife, Off-site Disposal of Material This alternative would re`s_tore flushing to the salt pond/marsh system, dredge silt from the pond to restore appropriate depths for fish and wildlife and expose suitable substrates for optimum benthic communities. A larger pond(Figure 5) would be created,under.this alternative than under Alternative 3. The pond would be dredged to a maximum depth of 0.5 to 1.0 feet to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl."Habitats within the project area would consist of 1.5 acres of freshwater:marsh,2.0 acres of brackish marsh, 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community, 1.0.acre of high marsh,2.0 acres.of low salt marsh, 1.0,acre of unvegetated intertidal habitat, and 6.0 acres of subtidal salt pond. Approximately 6,800 cy of material would be removed to create the salt pond. Approximately 3,200 cy would be spread in the areas labeled SALT MARSH:maintaining elevations that will support marsh vegetation and approximately 3,600cy would be removed from the site and disposed of at the Bourne]Landfill, or another suitable upland location. The surface of the_material placed on site would be conditioned with sand to improve,its capacity to support salt marsh. Large deposits of sandy material may be placed along the beach to the south. WITH PROJECT ANALYSIS The purpose of the HEP analysisAescribed n this section is:to evaluate alternatives-to display their potential benefits from providing habitat for the species formerly.inhabiting.the site, rather than impact assessment. The results do not predict existing or future population levels,but rather the'capacity of the habitat to support wildlife. The environmental effects of the alternatives are described.in detail in the Environmental Assessment. The methods and results of applying the three selected HEP models are described below. Although the models are.created to.describe the habitat of a single species, to some extent they represent the quality of the habitat for similar species. For instance,the black duck model also at least partially describes the value of habitats for other dabbling.ducks(e.g. mallards). The models applied and the-types of wildlife represented by the,models are shown in Table 2 z Figure 3. Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative Z. r AL :,Fr:VN=L y I P �'� \.^'\ ail 1 /- .� 'k Y* •�•.0 - y \\ R r(jy 74- �Al I MARSH •�c`�Y /�/ '.II• PT iP —RT% sfC•-N \ x i,:IN R t\:-- -. �� C _rrANNEL / \ . 10'LC'J•; SED16'EN-dT CN D�.S:V 46. ; T\ -_ U EX ST NC -- L� R l�. \.':r`y�? � �\ �. � _`'',d�y,� \� r�-- I[I�h l 1 1�1 ,^7°'-'t�l��.t�-(.} � �`�'��e��'✓. ��'�- � / it�, jRry�� .. t, r v -yJ!�• �,�1\\\ `v" -_. '" 6 ..,,�/ '� ` 100 4_ 100 200 F / "r hF ,.l -Ise +i! .... _ -� � 1 - _ `MIMF N _ � T y tv=vS''4f1 lroli--fFIi ii wS.aze z --I.-PR (: Tk S Ch -K I,,O Ahenotive 2 1 �-'` .cwaw.vn�srE-,ntus' PROPOSED CHANNEL - 5 Figure 4. Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 3. \, � �y`�� -�a!II -� I/�j•>;J F� �. �\�-�-�� P /. Y� _��•- .� \\ .cam UL AILI;. N:i \ / - [ ak 1 A \x \ �>/` /IF >n E� ��''��-x � �� ;� k�,�•.I� `J�. ,A .,`�,�1A SALT M,�S-1 TRANSITIONAL -� ,la- "_i � .. E J i - MARSH/MUD FLATS / �. �y.,' �3Et• 5t _I � �{2EMOVE MUD , J9-ABOUT -1 o M1 LW REMOVE SAND r�� ,�._ /.�.✓ TO ABOUT -1 MLLW - 1 '�s' ° �;'e.m�, t r.__, •i,' 'XIO -10 6 VC ALL`EFT a �`=cL•-;'fS?: r`-� �`\�. _� I, / / ��Nl (.0�� 1 +fx L': P..' I _--- - -_ - - � 1� GRAPHIC SCALE \ -_ 100 0 100�0 iw- -,F'43TMFW -:"F iF ARV( 'a:u scr.�u ouq y_u r'ac_ci 1 Y#J'JK.Ht.SA:IIJSCT i 3 ST '•,Sa>,'J _ - :;_:¢rs c» _r+c Alternative 3 ttvitivm.,+Fs-vsi.ircTTa PROPOSED SALT POND 5 . 13 Figure 5. Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 4: 7 r'j ``."\_ �- \ �Xr-^^'�' •\\ Y I .:r lt` t NAB i - - i- \ y' i '• f \. � ;`F` / N ULrA)LEI .No Cz H.2. �C 4{ JA M,: t P SALT Si \ rP[�' __� ' � .'AA �:� _ � - / ,=�K �t .3`�\�,� I. /_�..-_ / � y/ r�' !� '• e rim _i �.�v REMOVE MUQlift /— 4 's TO ABOUT 1 0 MLLW— ` Yi IER E C flC �,. ® r �' �// � -.L.\ ��•_, �� REMOVE SANG - iaY: n t� ��\V h,\ TO ABOUT -t MLLW j jqR _xIST VC n LL ERT'' IU fTFlt > LL r,t ------- - GRAPHIC SCALE 10 A\\,;�mt �`2"'.- \.��/ fit ` �� 1 100 �L I MLN Ch iL Ak•.1 . - t }t`•y.• - FYANQS.M S P'K NFI 4 C t 1G A 7.D STFIC . I M,:F�I S =+• •� r`+� D F pr N Nrr Alternative 4 5 PROPOSED SALT POND ,, 14 Table 2.HEP Models A lied for,the Project and the Species They Represent Model Represents Red-Winged Blackbird Perching;birds that use reeds and similar vegetation for roosting and feedin . Clapper Rail Birds and other'animals that use tall salt marsh cordgrass for cover or nesting and wading birds that feed in mudflats bordering salt marsh. Wintering Black Duck Dabbling ducks and4other animals that feed in the salt marsh,tidal flats and shallow water. Fish and invertebrates that live in tidal flats and shallow water. To apply the HEP models to each of the alternatives,the Corps of Engineers biologist predicted changes in the physical andvegetative variables of the cover types to estimate future HSI values. The predictions reflect conditions of the site at the permanent stable condition,which will be achieved rapidly(mostly within-2-3 years). These predictions were made based on the plans developed for each initial alternative. The area of various.habitat types predicted based on these plans is shown in Table 3. Table 3. Area of Cover Typos.at Stewart's Creek Under Various Alternatives Alternative 1 2 , 3 4 Total Area of Affected Habitat(acres) 14 14 _14 14 Total Intertidal Habitat(acres) ` 0:0 1.0 - 1.5 1.0 Total Estuarine Marsh Habitat(acres 0.2 6 4. 3' - PBra.ckish ea of High Marsh(acres 0.2 1.0 2.0 1.0 ea of Low Marsh acres 0.0 5.0 2:2 2:0 Marsh(acres) 4,0 2.0 2:0 <. 2.0 water Marsh(acres) 2.0 1.5 L5 1.5 Shrub/Forest Communi (acres) 0.7 0.5 0.5. 0.5 Open water(acres) 7.1 3.0 4.3 6.0 Each model was applied to`each of the alternatives using the information in Table 3 and predictions about the habitats with the project. The results of applying the models:are shown in Tables 4 through 8. Since the habitat suitability indices are based'on predictions,actual values for various suitability indices cannot be measured and are based.on judgements about future conditions. These judgements are summarized, along with.general information about application of the models, in the-paragraphs that follow. Variables that did not require significant. adjustments in Suitability Index ratings are not described in the text. 15` Red-winged Blackbird Model Results 5 he Nestin .Red-winged Blackbird Model are shown in Table 4. Although Variables fort g 1985) the HEP model for red- red-winged blackbirds may feed in salt marshes (Amos and Amos, assumptions winged blackbirds applies most directly to freshwater-habitats;ther efore, several were made in applying the model to this protect. .. are shown in Table 4.,Variable 1 refers'to the type of emergent vegetation get ai alternatives The results available in the wetland. Although the predominanWe a ratevetad with the lower of the two Suitability will be broad-leaved monocots,these alternatives Index options because red-winged blackbirds do not appear to nest frequently in salt marsh cordgrass. Variable 2 and Variable 3 were not adjusted. Variable 4.considers�he abundance ost f of larvae of emergent aquatic insects. This variable nrea ed condit onsquires ethat cannot,be measured, the desired model outputs have to do with future p the ratings of this variable were estimated at 1 for all alternativeTh This analysis also assumed that the g the rating process in terms of h the restoration alternativesalwould produce.suitable insect larvae higher salinity open water w for red-winged blackbird feeding. Table 4.Nestin Red Win ed Blackbird Model Results Overallof Overall Z' of Emergent Density of Red- Type Aquatic Emergent Winged Emergent Permanence Presence Insects ` Vegetation Blackbird Alternative Vegetation. of Water of Carp s 2 3 4 51.0 0.l '0.10 1 1.0 1.0 1`Q 1.0 : 0:3 0.03 2 0.1 1.0 1:Q 0.08 1.0 3 ' 0 l 1A. 1:0 0.10 4 0.1 _:1.6 Clapper Rail Model Results Variables for the Clapper Rail Model are shown in Table 5. Variables 1 and 3 in the clapper rail model were not adjusted for the evaluation other than predictions made to represent the plans. For Variable 2,Alternative l (the-existing Phragmites marsh),was given a value of zero as clapper rails prefer Spartina marsh as habitat (Lewis and Garrison, 1983). , Table 5. Cla er Rail Model Results "/o Persistent. Emergent . Shoreline %Covered %Area of Overall Bordered.by by Emergents Clapper Tidal Flats or SI Persistent; SL w/in 15 n of SI Rail Alternative ChannelsVVEme ents a Tidal Water' s HSh 1 100 0 0.00 >25% 1 0 0.00 2 100 43 0.43 >25%: 1.0` 0.75 3 100 - 29 0.29 > 25% 1:0 0:66 4 100 1.0 21 0.21` > 25% 1.0 0.59 Wintering Black Duck Model Results Variables for the Wintering Black Duck Model are shown' n Tables 6 and 7. Several of the variables in the black duck model had to be estimated or adjusted-for the evaluation. . Variables 1 &2 were not adjusted. Variable 3 required an estimate of the.area occupied by rooted vascular plants (e.g. eelgrass). , The suitability index for this variable leveled off at 1 when the percent cover reached 20 percent. The analysis assumes that eelgrass can be established in at least 20 percent of the subtidal area for all of the alternatives with permanent open water; therefore,alternatives 3 and 4 were assigned SI's of 1. Variable 4 has to do with'intertidal and subtidal habitats with clams at greater than 300 clams per square meter. The suitability,index for z this variable leveled off at F when the percentage of the area with clams at greater than 300 per m reached 25. The analysis assumed that,with seeding, clams could be established'at.this density in at least 25 percent of the intertidal/subtidal area for all of the alternatives except the.no action (alternative 1);therefore, alternatives 2, 3, and 4 were assigned.SI's of l>for this variable. ' r The black duck model was applied separately for open water and emergent wetland habitats as recommended in the model documentation. However, we-assumed the adjacent open water habitat had an influence on the value of the wetland habitat for" Variable S and included it in the overall relationship for this variable. Variable.5.represents the percentage of salt marsh occupied by.creeks,ponds, and impoundments. Since the blackduck model was chosen to represent animals that utilize shallow open water and marsh,Variable 5 was adjusted',so that alternates that had open water to marsh ratios of approximately 11 (hemimarsh)were set at HIS of 1.0: This as was based on Payne(1992) who reported that the greatest vanety,of wildlife (i.e, diversity) in marshes is found when ratios of open water to marsh are approximately 17 �. 1:1. Variable 6 required an estimate of the area of ponds on the marsh portion of the site occupied by the rooted vascular plants,Ruppia sp. (widgeon grass) and Potamogeton sp. (pondweed). We assumed that Zostera sp. (eelgrass) in the larger open water portion of the site could represent this variable and would be established at 20 percent cover as discussed previously. Based on the relationship in the Suitability Graph,the SI for these variables was estimated at 0.2 for alternatives 3, and 4. `Variable 7 concerns the percentage of the emergent marsh that supports snails at greater than 750 per square meter. The.suitability index for this variable leveled off at 1 when the percentage of the area with snails at this density reached 25. The analysis also assumed that snails will establish at this density in at least 25 percent of the marsh for all of the alternatives that restore salt marsh. Table 6.Win ering Black Duck Mod10, Water. % Subtidal Open Water Estimated Mudflats <_I m Deep SI SI % Subtidal SI w/>300 SI Alternative at MLW 1 Mudflat z w/Plants 3 clams/mZ a 1 100 0.6. 0 0.0 0` 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 2 100 0.6 10 0.5 0 0.0 25 1.0 3 100 0.6 10 0.5 20 1.0 25 1.0 4 100 0.6 10 0.5 20 1.0 25 1.0 Table 7. intering Black Duck Model-Eme ent Wetland in '4..' U 0-0, W Q C U W o W 6 1 00 > A 1 50 1.0 0 0.0 0 0 0.00 0.50 0.25 2 21 0.5 0 00 >25 1.0 0.54 0.50 0.51 3 29 0.6 20 0.2 >25 1.0 0.67 0.60 0.62 4 43 10 20 0.2 >25 1.0 0.67 0.80 0.74 18 i _ i Summary of Results Based on the applicationof the HEP models,the overall HSI,value for each alternative is shown in Table 8. The HUs,which are the HSI,values multiplied by the acreages of the various habitat types, for each of these alternatives are shown in Table 9. ' Table 8.Habitat Suitability Index Scores by Species and Overall for All Alternatives Red Winged Wintering Alternative Black Bird Cla er Rail Black Duck Overall . 1 0.10 0.00 0.25 0.35 2 .. 0.03 0.75 0.51 1.29. 3 0.08 0.66 0.62. 1.36 4 0.10 0.59 . 0.74 .., 1.43 Table 9. Habitat Units for Stewart's Creek°Restoration Project Alternative, Acres Overall Habitat Units' HSI. acres 1 • '14 '0.35 4.9 2: 14. 1.29 1:8.06 3 14 1.36: 19.04 4 .14. 1.43 20.02 z 19 M1 M DISPIAY.OF BENEFITS AND COSTS- Incremental Cost Curve. In this section,the costs of the alternative restoration plans`are compared with the environmental benefits,within the framework of an incremental cost analysis, to display the most cost effective alternatives. An incremental cost analysis examines how the costs of additional units of environmental output increase as the level of environmental output increases. For this analysis,the environmental outputs are measured in habitat units. The analysis is in accordance with IWR Report 95-R-1, Evaluation of Environmental Investments Procedures Manual-Interim: Cost Effectiveness and Incremental Cost Analyses,May 1995;. and ER 1105-2-100, Planning Guidance Notebook, Section 3-5 Ecosystem Restoration, April 2000. The program IWR-PLAN, developed for the Institute for Water Resources(IWR),was used to conduct the analysis. An incremental cost curve can be identified by displaying cost effective solutions. Cost effective solutions are those increments that result in the same output, or number of habitat units, for the least cost. An increment is cost effective if there are no others that cost less"and provide the same, or more,habitat units. Alternatively, for a given increment cost,there will be no other increments that provide more habitat units: Management plans to improve;environmental conditions at-Stewart's Creek include culvert installation and.different dredging/wetland substrate modification scenarios. Project description,project cost, and the number of habitat units created by each plan are shown in Table 11. Costs are annualized at an interest rate of.5 7/8 %.This interest rate, as specified in the Federal Register;is to be used by Federal agencies in the formulation and evaluation of water and land resource.plans for the period October 1; 2002 to September 30,2003. The project economic life is considered to be 50 years. . Alternative 1 is the no action alternative. Alternative 2 provides for culvert replacement and channel,dredging; o restore salt marsh. +Alternative 3.provides for culvert replacement,pond dredging and marsh restoration with excavated material. Alternative 4 provides culvert replacement,poiid5dredging and marsh creation with off-site disposal of dredged material. These alternatives,the cost of each alternative; and the habitat units restored;are shown in Table_11. 20 Table I Plan Increments Stewart's Creek Hyannis,Massachusetts Project Cost HU ltemative Description $000 1 Without Project $0.0 4.9 2 Replace Culvert and Dredge Channel $682.2 I8.06. 3 e lace Culvert,Dredge Pond,and Restore Marsh t $834`6 19.04 4 e lace Culvert,Dredge Pond and Restore Marsh with Disposal $977.0 Project cost derivation is shown in-Table 12. Other`costs are added to construction cost to derive total first cost. Construction cost includes engineering and design(E&D) and supervision and administration(S&A) of the contract. Alternative 4`has a landfill tipping cost of$112,800. Interest during construction(IDC) is then calculated assuming a construction period of 4 months for Alternative 2.and 6 months for Alternatives 3 and 4. IDC is an economic cost,not a financial cost. It needs to be estimated for the purpose of project justification,but it is not a financial cost that needs to be cost- shared., Essentially, IDC represents the opportunity cost of funds tied up, in investments,before these investments begin.to yield benefit. Once project benefit begins, IDC costs stop. Combining total first cost and IDC results in investment cost. Annual operation and maintenance (0 &M) is then added to investment cost to arrive at total project cost. Annual 0 & M is $2,500 discounted over 50 years using the discount factor of one.per period at an interest. rate of 5 7/8%. This yields a net present value of$40,100 for 0 &M: Table 12 Project Cost Stewart's Creek Hyannis,MA ($000) Alternative Construction Other f otal First idc hivestmenI D&M Project 1 0.0> ' 0.4 `' 0.0 0.0 0.0 -j - 0.0 0.0 2 637.4 00 637.4 4.7 642.1 40.1 682.2 3 784.8 0.0 784.8 9.7 794.5 40.1 834.6 4 •812.7 . 1-12.8 '925.5 11.4 936.9 40.1 977.0 2.1 s —'�"" is .+'. ✓ x �.t,, Fective and. Flansy ?,.'a'sR� '`J�;'" ,7 '� .- a S zw v` 1'` a 4t `�, N' 'his 13'§,• js tf 5,'1n .r. .i Y 4 � 5 c r� a R e 7Uwft d- �Ie ej�`�18IId3e1 PoFI 3,t ,r 2 1•� x�a, �, F,t-F O r i.. if a s 5 v ,:t,'.: s e p� � l e t�; `�r �'"�1 °,x„a '�i ,. .,t:y .i�'li NLa+'"�'3{, { ' '��(.s.E�"& 9✓'` 5x3�F irG j7 'Ez',7 y`h+.�4i'yry �Y vs� `7' �,..pt + pyy J'ieg-Yy°�� x-""'� Yk7 �' . Nng w r p f sr : {{ 7� �4 �k��Ad y�'Yr✓',�{'` �S�M1� S7"� `(`1�t 7`d5 :ice ;} � ':� 1�U��3� �)'�f;��`L��N✓(�.:. �I rJ o. t �E x.*�� tJ '.�t 3X � Y1�)� i - v Figure 6' Figure 6 shows all cost effective plans and best buy plans. AR four alternatives are cost effective. A plan must be cost effective to be'selected by the Corps of Engineers for implementation. In Figure 6, alternatives are arrayed along the horizontal axis by increasing. number of habitat units with corresponding project cost shown on the•vertical.axis. . I 22 5 S yet Ai 4 �'. J,Oy3fRS ?Yh bF:'"") AsC 4+.7( �i SR�'�-t cM4rF' •i4 -:�f 1 "12)4''Y+...'S. l� Figure 7 - 7 shows best buy plans that comprise the incremental cost curve. As in Figure 6, Figure P gur Y P the horizontal axis represents habitat units created by each project. However, the vertical axis represents the incremental cost per incremental output as output increases with project size.. Best buy plans area subset of cost effective plans. For each best buy plan there are no other,plans that will give the same level of output at a lower incremental cost. Best buy plans have the greatest value per dollar invested because their incremental cost is lower than the incremental cost of other cost effective plans. There are three best buy plans. Increments that comprise the best-buy plan curve are described in Table 13. This is the incremental cost curve that is the'final result of this incremental analysis. The change in cost and output is compared in the incremental cost curve. Incremental cost is the increase in cost of each successive plan. Incremental output is the increase in output of each successive plan. Incremental cost per output is the change in cost per incremental output when proceeding to plans with higher output. It is the incremental cost divided by.the change in output. Table 13 shows incremental cost, incremental output and incremental cost per incremental output. 23 Table 13 Incremental Cost Curve Best Buy Plans Stewart's Creek Hyannis,,Ma Inc.Cost Plan Description HU Cost Avg. Inc. Inc. Per Cost Cost Output Output ($000) ($000/HU) ($000) ($000) L Without Project 4.90 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 Replace Culvert&Dredge Channel 18.06 682.2 37.8 682.2` 13.2 51.8 'R 4 Restore Marsh with Disposal 20.02 V7.0 48.8 294.8 2.0 150.4 In the incremental cost curve shown above in Table 13 (shaded column),and in Figure 7, incremental cost per unit increases with output,or habitat units. Development of the incremental cost curve facilitates the selection of the best alternative. The question that is asked at each increment is:is the additional gain in environmental benefit worth the additional cost? The first increment beyond the without project condition is Alternative 2 that has 18.06 HU and an incremental cost of$51,800 per HU. This increment would consist of replacing the existing culvert and dredging a channel to restore salt marsh. The second and final increment is Alternative 4 that has 20.02 HU and an incremental cost of$150,400 per HU. This increment would consist of replacing the existing culvert,,dredging the pond to restore.fish and wildlife habitat;restoring the marsh with excavated material,and off-site disposal of unused dredged material Alternative-3 which provides for culvert replacement,_pond dredging and . marsh restoration with excavated material results in 19.04 and has an incremental cost'per output of $155, 500. This plan is cost effective but is not considered a best buy plan because Alternative 4 has a greater output and a lower incremental cost. RECOMMENDATIONS M Based on the results.of the incremental analysis and consideration of the benefits and costs of each alternative,the Corps of Engineers recommends Alternative 3 for implementation. Although the recommended plan is not considered a best buy plan, it does not require any off-site disposal of dredged material, which will facilitate implementation..;Alternative 3 produces a mixture of habitat types, most similar to the historic condition, which will support a diversity of fish and wildlife. The difference in incremental cost between Alternative 4 (a best buy plan) and Alternative 3-is relatively small(approximately$5,000). The Town'.of Barnstable, non-Federal sponsor, supports Alternative 3. 24 REFERENCES Lewis, C. and RL. Garrison. 1983.. Habitat suitability index models: clapper rail. US Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.51. 15 pp. Lewis, C. and R.L. Garrison. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American black duck (wintering). US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82 (10.91). 15 pp. Mulholland, R. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Hard clam. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82 (10.77). 21.pp. Mulholland, R.' 1985. Habitat suitability index'models: Lesser scaup(wintering) US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82 (10.91). 15 pp. Pardue, G. B. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Alewife and blueback herring: US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological'Report 82 (10.58). 22 pp. Payne,N. 1992. Techniques for Wildlife Habitat Management of Wetlands. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 549 pp x Short, H. L. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-winged blackbird.. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82 (10.95). '20 pp. Short, H. L. and R. J. Cooper. 1985 Habitat suitability index models:Great blue her-on. US Fish and Wildlife.Service Biological Report 82 (10.99). 23 pp. USFWS.' 1980. Habitat Evaluation Procedures(HEP)ESM 102. Division of Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 25' STEWART'S ;CREEK ESTUARY,RESTORATION-, ' ,' OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS,-MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION ` ., _ ,m A. .•. it .. ' a ATTACHMENT K . SITU PLANS , N „, 46 F .. I STEWART'S CREED ESTUARY RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION t Submitted to: MA DEP SOUTHEAST REGION DIVISION OF WATERWAYS 20 LAKESIDE DRIVE LAKEVILLE,MA 02347 Prepared for: TOWN OF BARNSTABLE, CONSERVATION DIVISION 200 MAIN STREET, HYANNIS,MASSACHUSETTS 02601 Prepared by: MARTHA CRAIG RHEINHARDT,M.S.,P.W.S. 415 COUNTY ROAD POCASSET,MA 02559 and VINE ASSOCIATES/GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC. 190 OLD DERBY STREET,SUITE 311 HINGHAM,MASSACHUSETTS 02043 SEPTEMBER 2010 CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION. STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS TABLE OF CONTENTS DEP TRANSMITTAL FORM CHAPTER 91 WATERWAYS LICENSE APPLICATION ATTACHMENT A Abutters List ATTACHMENT B Locus Map ATTACHMENT C Project Narrative ATTACHMENT D Figures ATTACHMENT E Tables ATTACHMENT F Photographs ATTACHMENT G Storm,.Operations Manual.(Dr ATTACHMENT H EOEA Secretary's Certificate ATTACHMENT I Order of Conditions ATTACHMENT J. Environmental Assessment ATTACHMENT K Site Plans` Enter your transmittal,number. X224237 Transmittal Number Your unique Transmittal Number can.be accessed online: httQa/mass.aov/dep/service/online/trasmfrm.shtml or call MassDEP's InfoLine at 617-338-2255 or 800-462-0444(from 508,781,and 978 area codes). Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Transmittal Form for Permit Application and Payment 1. Please type or A. Permit Information` print.A.separate Transmittal Form BRP WW01 Chapter 91 Licensee must be completed 1.Permit Code:7 or 8 character code from permit instructions 2.Name of Permit Category for each permit Estuary and salt marsh restorationlculvert,replacement application. 3.Type of Project or Activity 2. Make your check payable to g, Applicant Information-firm or Individual the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Town of Barnstable, Conservation Division and mail it with a 1.Name of Firm-Or,if party needing this approval is an individual enter name below: copy of this form to: DEP, P.O.Box 4062,Boston,MA 2.Last.Name of Individual 3.First Name of Individual 4.MI 02211. 200 Main Street 5.Street Address 3. Three copies of Hyannis MA 02601 508-862-4093 this form will be 6.City/Town 7.State 8.Zip Code 9.Telephone# 10:Ext.# needed. Rob Gatewood Rob.Gatewood@town.barnstable.ma.us Copy 1 -the 11:Contact Person 12.,e-mail address(optional) original must accompany your permit application.'C. Facility, Site or Individual Requiring Approval Copy 2 must accompany your fee payment. 1.:Name of Facility,Site Or Individual Copy 3 should be retained for your 2.Street Address records 4. Both fee-paying 3.City/Town 4.State 5.Zip Code 6.Telephone# 7._Ext.# -and exempt applicants must 8.DEP Facility Number(if Known) 9.'Federal I.D. Number(if Known) 10.BWSC Tracking#(if Known) mail a copy of this transmittal form to: ,D. Application Prepared by (if different from Section B)* MassDEP P.O.Box 4062 Martha Craig Rheinhardt Boston,MA 1.Name of Firm Or Individual . 02211 415 County Road' 2.Address Pocasset MA . . 508-439-9980 02559 "Note: 3.City/Town 4.State 5.Zip Code 6.Telephone# 7.Ext.# For BWSC Permits, enter the LSP. 8.Contact Person. 9.LSP Number(BWSC Permits only), E. Permit - Project Coordination 1. is this project subject to MEPA review? Z.yes ❑ no 1f yes,enter the project's EOEA file number-assigned when an Environmental Notification Form is submitted to the MEPA unit:. 13815 EOEA File Number F. Amount Due DEP Use Only Special Provisions: 1. ®Fee Exempt(city,town or municipal housing a utho rity)(state agency if fee is$100 or less). Permit No.' *There are no fee exemptions for BWSC permits,regardless of applicant status. 2. ❑Hardship Request-payment extensions according to 310 CMR 4.04(3)(c). Rec'd Date: 3. 0 Alternative Schedule Project(according to 310 CMR 4;05 and 4.10)., 4. ❑Homeowner(according to 310 CMR 4.02). Reviewer. r Check Number Dollar Amount Date Massachusetts'Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection.. Waterways Regulation_Program X224237 Transmittal No. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application -310 CMR 9.00 Water-Dependent, Nonwater-Dependent,Amendment Important: Application lication Information Check one When filling out PP ). forms to the NOTE: For Chapter 91 Simplified License application form and information see the Self Licensin computer,use p Simplified� Pp 9 only the tab key Package for.BRP WW06. to move your cursor-do not Name(Complete Application Sections) Check One Fee Application# use the return key. WATER-DEPENDENT General (A-H) ❑ Residential with'<4 units $175.00 BRP WW01a ® Other $270.00. BRP WW01 b Extended Term $2730.00 BRP WW01c For assistance ......................----.- _--- ..-.._.._ ----- -----= ------- ------------------ in completing this Amendment(A-H) ❑ Residential with.<4 units - $85.00: BRP WW03a application,please see the "Instructions". 0 Other,- $105.00 BRP WW03b NONWATER-DEPENDENT Full(A-H) ❑ Residential with<4 units' $545.00 BRP WW1.5a ❑.Other $1635.00 BRP WW15b ❑ Extended Term $2730.00 BRP WW15c Partial (A-H) ❑ Residential with <4 units $545.00 BRP WW14a Other $1635.00 BRP WW14b Extended Term $2730.K BRP WW14c Municipal Harbor Plan (A-H) ❑ Residential with <4'units $545.00-'. BRP WW16a ❑ Other., $1635.00 BRP WW16b ❑ Extended Terms $2730.00 BRP WW16c Joint`MEPA/EIR(A-H) ❑.Residential with<4 units $545.00. BRP WW17a ❑Other $1635.00 BRP WW17b ❑Extended Term $2730.00 BRP WW17c Amendment(A-H) ❑ Residential with`<<4 units $435.00- BRP WW03c [] Other $815.00 BRP WW03d El Extended Term r . . $1090.00 BRP.WW03e CH91App.doc•Rev.6/06 Page 1 of 13 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection-Waterways Regulation Program X224237 Transmittal No. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application -310 cMR 9.00 Water-Dependent, Nonwater-Dependent,Amendment B. Applicant Information Proposed Project/Use Information 1. Applicant: T�own�Qfi�Bar�ts�able;�nservationxDlvtsion Ro��;6atewood@townA�amstabte rxya�us Name E-mail Address 200Ma%St�eet Mailing Address Note:Please refer .a to the"Instructions" !artnis MA 026fl11 City/Town State Zip Code 5�8YA8f2u4Q9"3, 508��7,�$�4�1Y2 Telephone Number Fax Number 2. Authorized Agent(if any): Ntacttta��,ratg�RhelR�iaGdi cna�Fha',fhe�nhardt@v�nzQn n�f Name E-mail Address ��r ri 1 xsrdr 415�County;'Road Mailing Address rPocasse� VIA 02559 City/Town State Zip Code 508-439-9980 - _6 27-, Telephone Number Fax Number C. Proposed Project/Use Information 1. Property Information (all information must be provided): �own�of Bamst'abfEa>andHarbor Vtllage� and©rnfnlum�Assoclatrori - , Owner Name(if different from applicant) Ma�,30 �P{arce5tsr0�'t��;��242�and 'L91� 41'38 06 N 70d 17 36'V1l :Ntap28&t'arcelt180 Map 305 Parcel 001 Latitude F?`,2 k Y4cea�nyAue{;j�Nyann�s MA "02604, Street Address and City/Town State, Zip Code 2. Registered Land ❑ Yes ® No 3. Name of the water body where the project site is.located`. Stewart's Creek 4 Description of the water body in which the project site is located (check all that apply): Type. Nature . Designation ❑ Nontidal river/stream ® Natural ❑ Area of Critical Environmental Concern Flowed tidelands ® Enlarged/dammed ❑ Designated Port Area ❑Filled tidelands ❑ Uncertain ❑Ocean Sanctuary ❑ Great Pond ❑ uncertain. . F ❑Uncertain CH91App.doc•Rev.6/06 Page 2 of,13 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Waterways Regulation Program X224237 Transmittal No. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application -310CMR9.00 Water-Dependent, Nonwater-Dependent,Amendment C. Proposed Project/Use Information'.(cont.) Select use(s)from Project Type Table 5. Proposed Use/Activity description on .2 of the "Instructions ctions" Restore estuarine ecosystem through the installation of larger culvert to restore natural tidal.flow; restore historic extent and functions of degraded salt marsh with dredge material. 6. What is the estimated total cost of proposed work(including,materials & labor)? $.1,200,000 7. List the name &complete mailing address of each abutter(attach additional sheets, if necessary). An abutter is defined as the owner of land that shares a common boundary with the project site, as well as the owner of land that lies within 50' across a waterbody from the project. see attached list Name Address Name Address I . Name Address D. Project Plans 1. 1 have attached plans for my project in accordance with the instructions contained in (check one)- ® Appendix A(License plan) ❑. Appendix B (Permit plan) 2. Other State and Local Approvals/Certifications ❑401 Water.Quality Certificate pending Date of Issuance ®Wetlands SE3-4666 . File Number ❑Jurisdictional Determination JD- File Number ® MEPA 13815 . File Number ® EOEA Secretary Certificate 8/16/2006 Date 21.E Waste Site Cleanup N/A RTN Number CH91App.doc•Rev.6/06 Page 3 of 13 Massachusetts Department.of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection = Waterways Regulation,Program X224237 Transmittal No. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application -310 CMR 9.00 Water-Dependent, Nonwater-Dependent,Amendment E. Certification ' All applicants, property owners and authorized agents must sign this page. All future application correspondence may be signed by the authorized agent alone. "I hereby make application for a permit orlicense to authorize the activities I have described herein. Upon my signature, I agree to allow the duly authorized representatives'of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program to enter upon the premises of the project site at reasonable times for the purpose of inspection." "I hereby certify that the information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Applicant's signature' Date " Property Owner's signature(if different than applicant) Date r Agent's signature(if applicable) Date' CH91App.doc•Rev.6/06 Page 4 of 13 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Waterways Regulation Program X224237 Transmittal No. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application -310 CMR s:oo Water-Dependent,Nonwater-Dependent,Amendment E. Certification All applicants, property owners an d d authorized agents mu sign must s n this-page.'A!I future application ratio PP , P Petty 9 9 PP n correspondence may be signed by the authorized agent alone.. "I hereby make application for a permit or license to authorize the activities I have described herein. Upon my signature, I agree to allow the duly authorized representatives of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program to enter upon the premises of the project site at reasonable times for.the purpose of,inspection." I hereby certify that the information submitted in this application is true and accurate to.the best of my knowledge.": Applicant's signature _ Date -- i ropert Owner's signature V � er nt than applicant) Date' Agent's signature(if applicable) Date- CH91App.doc•Rev.6/06 ;. Page 4 of 13 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Waterways Regulation Program X224237 Transmittal No. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application--310 cMR 9.00' Water-Dependent, Nonwater-Dependent,Amendment F. Waterways Dredging Addendum `' 1. Provide a description of the.dredging project ❑ Maintenance Dredging(include last dredge date &.permit no.) Improvement Dredging Restore historic depths of creek channel and other subtidal areas: Purpose of Dredging 2. What is the volume(cubic yards)of material to be dredged? 3,200 3. What method will be used to dredge? ❑ Hydraulic E Mechanical ❑ Other 4. Describe disposal method and provide disposal location (include separate disposal site location map) The dredge material will be used to restore the.historic extent of-Ahe salt marsh. y 5. Provide copy of grain size analysis. If grain size is compatible for beach nourishment purposes, the Department`recommends that the dredged material be used as beach nourishment for public beaches. Note: In the event beach.nourishment is proposed for private property, pursuant to 310 CMR 9.40(4)(a)1, public access easements'below the existing high water mark shall be secured by . applicant and submitted to the Department. CH91App.doc•Rev.6/06 'Page 5 of 13 r STEWART'S. CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNISIVIASSACHU.SETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION ATTACHMENT A . ABUTTERS LIST Stewarts Creek Ch. 91 Abutters 305-001 Town of Barnstable (Bch.) . 367 Main Street Hyannis, MA 02601 e 306-001 George F. & Marion Collins 81 Crestwood Road Warwick, R. I. 02886 306-002 Daphne f. Abodeely 78-2 South Quinsigamond Ave. Shrewsbury, MA 01545 306-003 Jeffrey M. Coombs &Gail T. Clear 39 Mitzi Road Stamford, CT 06905 306-006 Daphne f,Abodeely 78-2 South Quinsigamond Ave. Shrewsbury, MA 01545 306-007 Daphne f. Abodeely 78-2 South Quinsigamond Ave. Shrewsbury, MA 01545 306-011 Town of Barnstable (Cons.) 367 Main Street Hyannis,.MA, 02601 306-027 George E. &Marion Collins. 81 Crestwood Rd. Warwick, R.I. 02886 306-282 Philip F. Hudock& Rita L. Ailinger 10502 Hunting Crest Lane Vienna, VA 22180 y 306-066 Steve &Angela S. Richards 756 Ocean Palm Way St. Augustine,FL 32080' 306-191 Town of Barnstable (Bch.) 367 Main Street Hyannis; MA 02601 - 306-202 George E. & Marion Collins f .81 Crestwood.Rd., Warwick, R.I. 02886 288-180-OOA. Richard S. Baright&Carleen S. . P.O. Box 483 Tivoli; NY 1`2583 9/9/2010 Stewarts Creek Ch. 91 Abufters 288-180-006 Anne Sweeney 145 Commercial St., #413, Boston, MA 02109 288-180-OOC Thomas J. & Paula J. O'Conrior 4 Winslow Road Westwood, MA 02090 288-180-OOD Albert C. & Linda A. Kurinskas, Trs. 18 Mill Pond Road W. Bridgewater, MA 02379 288-180-OOE James Garvey 73 Janet Street Merewether, NSW.2291..l Australia 288-180-OOF Jane Davis&Jean Hancock 380 Blue Hill Road Chester,.VT 05143 288-180-OOG James H. Rowe,Tr. 5008 Glentirook Rd., NW Washington, DC 20016" 288-180-OOH Beachview Ventures LLC C/O Todd Delano 2555 Marshall Road,_Ste.'E Biloxi, MS 39531 288-180-001 Lewis K. & Elizabeth L. Glanville, Trs. - 507 North Huntington Avenue Monterey Park, CA 91754 288-180-OOJ Earl W. Adams, Jr., et al, Trs. 187 Grandview Avenue Meadville, PA 16335 288-180-OOK Harbor Village Condo Associates 18 Mill Pond Road W. Bridgewater, MA 02379 288-180-OOL John K. & Louisa-B. Milne 5 Huntington Street . . Concord, NH 03301 288-180-OOM Sharon A. Kravis P.O. Box'46 Hagaman, NY 12086 288-180.0ON Vincent Cardillo 160 Soule Road 9/9/2010 t Stewarts Creek Ch. 91 Abutters Wilbraham; MA 01095 - 288-180-000 Garrick T & Kathryne E. Bauer'< 160 Marston Ave., Unit 15, Hyannisport, MA 02647 288-180-OOP .Vincent Cardillo 160 Soule Road Wilbraham, MA 01095 288'-180-OOQ Sandra L. Ross P.O. Box 36 Hyannisport, MA 02647 288-180-OOR Eugene D. &JanetL.'Smith 222 Hersey Street Hingham, MA 02043 288-180-OOS Richard W:& Diane`G..Horn 101 Kevin Lane Windsor, CT 06095 4. 288-180-OOT Anne Sweeney 145 Commercial Street;Apt.<413 Boston, MA 02109 288-180-OOU Stephen A. & Bernadette M. Matheson 160 Marston Avenue,#21 Hyannis, MA 02601 288-179 John S. Burgess 55 S. Wynstone Drive Barrington,,IL 60010 . 288-178 Catherine J.'Gulliver P.O Box 739 'Hyannisport, MA 02647• 288-177 Paul E. &'Jane F. McHugh 153 Westminster Avenue Arlington, MA 02174 288-176 James R. Hayes ;. .1 Twomey Court S.`Boston; MA 02127 ... 288-171•. Leann Kennedy Dentremont, Tr. 50 Northgate Road Tewksbury,:-MA 01876 .288-168-001 Oswald L. Jordan 31 Hollis Street 9/9/2010 Stewarts Creek Ch. 91 Abutters Brockton MA 02 402 288-168-002 Sylvia B. Goldstein 33 Fiddlers Circle Hyannis, MA 02601 r . 9/9/2010 STEWART'S CREEK'ESTUARY'RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, AMSSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION ATTACHMENT -B LOCUS MAP • � T°• � .�'—.L CAA. � a =i � �.. �°�, I y.�_'�a t= . �+N (�' a. .n �xQ I t 3 ��r� fi,j I��. It � •� #1 � X71, lr.�t '1 f'' y, �,Ci. . ty� �'.p ,t}}: �� _�"�� e� '•� �, Z' L:G' � Yr Ir b y� � rf t� , o -:f JL Gm,t- PT"„ 4. r• '' a t) j -f e r e �,. I -..� / '� Menl°nit I_! � xf e:1 ! � ~An <ti 1J � J.l wMo s' I aPl I � t9 y t, - ;Z�_ P�rNt y I �•1 �y t-...�rp�'',.�' ` t. ♦` � ,. f �'� $�� C4 �� s . /-.�ref',`L�.+iPl Br a a YY ti J� ♦ t �•� �k s ti � + 1 Nxb ! N°� ..,I��r. 1 � I 1 'a"� �1�v r i"`-^•,s 5 r M�`aTJ } Y °'�• rfi h � I" 1 7 v3- _•I �a t s w �„ 4d Y( krPt 4�r7F �� .a fi. . r,e,' r1.� ` (-� �` :HYANNIS � B-0 xr d 1j .err r i' }r y al reo l u � I: i_1 y � (: 1.'l_" S.i r ! �,l v'i'zT�V #r °I^'\`l X�\S t�ayi I.sl�nfd`�r�-iT' I ` �� s, A � i. r��,4"';�t� � ° ! z�, �#�,� ��i/�-�.°�ry 3.�•c-. IN� .s"r-cam M1 1 - ,b r y t {s 4 1 L � i �� wr Y, I, t i, d,� l3 t-.� � � ° 1i�.. 6 1� 3 xttit"`� 7�� ri /'t !� Y �l a ',a t.f 1 �'�di •- - { E 4-0f ,rititu\ qi� 'r �°Odiit 4{m r h} �'S , i y r Il'4 r it '1 },I Y1 h r _. � it ,.- ya ;. z tC ,"'a r• \s ° ° � '. a^o.'r1. '� t s 7b n s`" moo.' a r � I a a a:y S /Az ,y t i al x e c?'tiaaptl6x �`" " ,yB llix }y [rRldd°e a - ��(,, - v''}�'�",ti�t �Yrtjh6S.�...fl�. Locus Map Stewart's.,Creek Restoration Hyannis, MA USGS Topographic Map Provided by Map'Tech STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY, RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION A ATTACHMENT C PROJECT NARRATIVE Project Narrative " Stewart's Creek Estuary Restoration Project -Hyannis, Massachusetts INTRODUCTION The Town of Barnstable (Town), in conjunction the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers(Corps), is proposing the restoration of the highly-degraded Stewart's.Creek estuarine ecosystem. This restoration project will replace the existing tidally-restrictive culvert under Ocean Avenue with a larger culvert and,thereby, increase tidal influence and the rate of flushing to the degraded estuarine/marsh ecosystem and increasing the extent of flowed tidelands.,.The project will also restore the natural resource areas and functions of the ecosystem, including the restoration of a heavily-degraded Salt Marsh and tidal creek. The proposed restoration will not only restore , these areas to their approximaie historic size and depth,which will be better suited_ for fish and wildlife,but will also restore their natural functions as well. The project will also improve the condition of, and access to,`publiC'tidelands. Restoredhabitats within the project area will include approximately 4.2 acres of Salt Marsh(2.0 acres of high Salt Marsh and 2.2 acres of low Salt Marsh), 1.5 acres of unvegetatedintertidal habitat(Coastal Beach), 4.3.acres of subtidal embayment(including a tidal creek). The project will also.restore 4.0 acres of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BVW)that includes'2.0 acres of brackish marshy 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh, and 0.5 acres of shrub/forest:community. As part of this effort,the Corps finalized an Environmental.Assessment(EA),Finding of No Significant Impact, and Clean Water-Act Section 404(b)(1)Evaluation for this project in 2006. The EA is comprehensive and includes hydrologic and hydraulic studies, biological surveys, alternatives analysis, sediment testing; and economic analysis. The EA was included, in its entirety, in the expanded_Environmental Notification Form(ENF)'filed with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act(MEPA) office in May 2006 and distributed to the Barnstable Conservation Commission,the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and others. A copy of the EA has been included within this submittal(Attachment J). 'Much of the information contained in this document comes directly from the EA. This project has been reviewed under the Massachusetts (MA)Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) and a Secretary's Certificate was issued for the project on August 16;2006 (EOEA#13815, Attachment H). An Environmental Impact Report is not required for this project. The project was also reviewed under the MA Wetlands Protection Act. The proposed project meets all the performance standards*of the MA Wetlands Protection Act and its implementing regulations (310 CMR 10.00), and the Barnstable Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions for the project on October 3, 2007 (DEP File 4SE3-4666; Attachment 1). An application'for a Chapter 91 for this,project is being submitted, and this document supports that submittal. This project,as proposed,meets all the requirements of M.G.L. c. 91 and its implementing regulations.(310 CMR 9.00), as outlined further in this document. 1 RESTORATION OF HISTORIC CONDITIONSAND FUNCTIONS` The goal of the Stewart's Creek Estuary Restoration Project is to return the lower Stewart's Creek estuarine ecosystem to its historic condition and functioning to the greatest extent possible. This includes the restoration of both areal and functional loss of Salt Marsh, as well as the restoration and enhancement of functions performed by other existing resource areas and- public tidelands, including a subtidal embayment, Coastal Beach(Tidal Flat)and BVW. All . functions naturally performed by this estuarine ecosystem are highly degraded, but have the potential for restoration. Historically, a meandering tidal creek and adjacent Salt Marsh dominated the lower Stewart's Creek Estuary. (See historic topographic maps and aerial photography.—Attachment D,Figures 1 —4.) A small tidal embayment also developed.within the system. However, with the removal of the former open-span bridge over the creek and installation of the current fill causeway and culvert,the tidal creek was routed through an undersized culvert. The undersized culvert restricted the natural tidal range by about three-quarters and created an,impoundment on the upstream side. A tidal survey conducted in June 2002 documented the tidal restriction(see Plate 2 below). During this survey,the difference between the tidal ranges upstream and in Hyannis Harbor was 2.9 feet. Plate 2 Recorded(20 June 2002)and Computed Tide Data 2:2 Ste its Creek Barnstable as a husetts xxxX 1.7 t. 1.2 ••JXA •... x. x z 0:7 _ - ♦R—ded Gaga 3 . �. ' .x ■Re ddGage2 - d . Raw Gage7 ,. X Recorded Hyannis Haibw.. O'2 ♦C—PuWd Gaga 31SM S w -0 38 0 900 1000 1100, 1200'° 1300 X 1400 1500 1600 17 0 x A x -0.8 X x, X. . - -1`.3 x x - x x x Time(hrs) Gauge 1 was just downstream of the eulvert. .Gauge 2 was just upstream of the culvert and Gauge 3 was located neamhe island in,the ponded.area. , 2 The restriction of natural tidal flushing and the impoundment upstream of the culvert at Ocean Ave. inundated areas of Salt Marsh,which have since degraded and,currently no longer exist. Sediment has re-distributed throughout the area, creating unnaturally shallow conditions within the impoundment, and facilitating the subsidence,'erosion and ultimate loss of much:of the Salt Marsh. The tidal restriction, lack of natural tidal flushing, and sediment redistribution have caused water quality, as well as benthic and fisheries habitat,to severely degrade. Benthic and fishery surveys conducted by the Corps show degraded communities with early successional and/or sparse populations throughout Stewart's Creek. . The subtidal open water area(embayment) at Stewart's Creek was described as a Salt Pond in s the MEPA filing, and it was determined that.this project met the performance standards of Land Under a Salt Pond and was consistent with DEP's Salt Pond policies. The same area was defined as Land Underthe Ocean(LUO.).in the NOI filing. This project also,meets all performance standards for LUO under the Wetlands Protection-Act. For purposes of Chapter_91,this area is the subtidal open water area of the project and will be referred to as the"subtidal-area"and/or "subtidal embayment and is considered flowed tidelands. The extent of the subtidal area at Stewart's Creek was artificially created by the-tidal restriction and is actually, in large part, degraded Salt Marsh. Due to the presence of the filled causeway, restrictive culvert and resulting lack of adequate flushing,the subtidal area now acts as a sediment trap and the depths of the open water area are extremely.shallow. Because of these conditions,when the tidal restriction is removed and natural hydrology is restored, much of the subtidal embayment will be. effectively drained and-the existing sediments exposed to a more.. natural tidal range (-2 feet during spring tides). The natural channel of Stewart's Creek will be restored by dredging of the accumulated sediments. .Salt Marsh at Stewart's Creek is now almost non-existent, except in its currently degraded state'` as an extremely shallow, anoxic open water area with low fisheries value. Figure 5 (see Attachment D) shows the areal;loss of salt marsh in lower Stewart's Creek between 1960 and the present. This,figure clearly illustrates that the Salt Marsh areas were much larger than the } current conditions and that the open water area,was'historically much,smaller.-' Conversion of Salt Marsh to open water habitat is a common cause of coastal wetland loss nationwide and is what, in part,this project will address. The historic extent of Salt Marsh in lower Stewart's Creek has been greatly reduced not only through the conversion to open water, but through the encroachment of Phragmites austrahs as g: well. The tidal restriction created,by the construction of the causeway.and installation of the undersized culvert has facilitated encroachment of Phragmites into former Salt Marsh habitat. The areal loss of Salt Marsh has also resulted in the loss of important Salt Marsh functions. Salt Marshes are,one of the most productive ecosystems in the world. Valuable Salt Marsh functions' include-acting"as spawning and nursery grounds for fish,production(and export)of organic matter,pollutantremoval, storm water bufferingand erosion control fi PROJECT METHODS The Town, working with the Corps, has the opportunity to restore this once-productive estuarine ecosystem back to its historic condition. The restoration of the Stewart's Creek Estuary will occur through several different methods including culvert replacement, dredging to restore historic channel and embayment depths, and restoration of substrate suitable for the establishment of historically lost salt marsh. The existing culvert will be replaced with a larger 6-foot by 4-foot culvert,which will increase the upper and lower limits of the tide range, increase the extent of flowed tidelands, and reduce the velocity of water entering Stewart's Creek. The installation of the larger culvert will change the tidal range from the existing range of 1.40 to 1.55 ft NGVD to a range of 0.0 ft to 2.1 ft NGVD during spring tides. The lower limit of the tide range is maintained by a weir with a top elevation of 0.0 ft NGVD29. Further details regarding the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses are . contained within the EA. Lower velocity flows through the culvert will reduce sediment transport into the embayment,helping to minimize future restrictions of tidal flow. A sedimentation basin(depression)will be constructed at the upstream side of the culvert to capture sand transported into the.marsh from the beach. The culvert will be equipped with a sluice gate with one-way flap valves on its downstream side. The sluice gate will be closed. during storms to reduce the potential for tide water to flood surrounding uplands. The sluicegate" will be closed when a major tidal storm such as.a hurricane or nor'easter is predicted. The details of operation of the sluice gate are provided in the Storm Operations Plan(see Attachment G)- To restore its historic extent and.depths,-the open water area and channel will be dredged to depths which will also be more conducive to the restoration of marine fisheries and wildlife habitat. The increase in tidal flow, accompanied by the removal of accumulated sediment, will help restore the natural functions performed by the open water portion of the estuary, including providing habitat for marine fisheries and wildlife. These functions are currently in a highly" degraded state and will be greatly enhanced by this project. Without the associated dredging, much of the open water area would disappear once the tidal regime has been restored,and the area would convert back naturally to intertidal habitat: The embayment portion will be dredged to a maximum depth of-1.0 foot NGVD29 to restore its size as well as its functions. Approximately 3,200 cubic yards (cy)of:rriaterial will be dredged from this area to restore the depths of the embayment and prevent conversion of this portion of the subtidal area to intertidal habitat,All dredged material will be reused on site to restore salt marsh;no dredged.material will be taken off-site. Sand excavated to establish the inlet channel downstream of the culvert will be placed on the beach adjacent to the existing inlet. Dredged material will then be used to stabilize the intertidal substrate at elevations appropriate for salt marsh plants. Sediment samples taken within the marsh areas were analyzed for grain size,water content; and bulk,chemical analysis,the results of which are summarized in the,EA. A coir fiber" roll will be placed around the perimeter of the Salt Marsh to hold the dredged material in place. The perimeter will then be planted with Spartina alterniflora. Elevations within the salt marsh and surrounding areas will be within the range that will support both low and high Salt Marsh and mudflats when the tidal range and tidal flushing are restored. , 4 - , The areal loss of Salt Marsh will'be restored through the return of the-expanded tidal range in conjunction with the use of the material obtained from the restoration dredging of the pond and channel to stabilize the substrate at suitable elevations for Salt Marsh development. Once the area of Salt Marsh has been re-established,the'Salt Marsh functions will also begin to re- establish themselves. Two of the highest-valued Salt Marsh-functions at this site will be the production of organic matter and establishment of spawning and nursery habitat for estuarine fish species. This will help further enhance the marine fisheries function within the estuary, in general, and the subtidal embayment in particular. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE The construction sequence will be as follows: l) Install,cofferdam and erosion control and pump interior runoff over Ocean Avenue; 2) Install_culvert, sluice gate', and grates;3)Remove cofferdam; 4) Restore Salt Marsh and subtidal embayment by excavating and redistributing sediments to appropriate elevations; 5)Plant Salt Marsh cordgrass (Sbartina alterniflora)plugs along the interior perimeter of the coir logs. Goose exclusion fencing is not proposed because of the softness of the sediments. Extra large plugs will be planted to minimize the effects of grazing. Any Salt Marsh plants excavated during construction will be stored on'-site.and replanted following site grading. Site plans are located in Attachment K. The Town of Barnstable, Department of Public Works (DPW) is committed to the long-term operation and maintenance of the project. The DPW will adopt and adhere to the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan to be developed by the Corps of Engineers for this project, particularly as it pertains to the sluice gate. This O&M Plan is.currently in draft stage, and operations may need to be modified to more efficiently maintain the restoration project and safety of the site. Adaptive management will be included in the monitoring plan,.which will allow for adjustments to be made.to the project,in order to help meet project objectives and allow for success of the project: MONITORING PLAN A monitoring'plan has been developed for the planned restoration of Stewart's"Creek Estuary and is presented below. The purposes of this monitoring plan are: 1)to guide implementation and generate information to formulate minor adjustments in the:plan or mid-course corrections; and 2)to measure the success of the project. The plan is intended to measure and ensure achievement of the goals and objectives established during planning. It is'also intended-to be flexible to allow readjustment as new information,and conditions develop. The goals, objectives and performance criteria for this project are specified in the following 'Sections. Reference Conditions A nearby relatively-unaltered maish will be identified to be used as a basis of comparison for the restoration project. Several potential reference sites have already been identified along the southern shore of Cape Cod, adjacent to Nantucket Sound. These sites have similar landscape positions as Stewart's Creek and may represent target conditions. This relatively-unaltered site will serve as the reference site from which project goals and success.can be measured. Similar attributes will be measured at the reference site as those measured at the project site. Past, w 5 present and future aerial photographs will also help determine historic conditions, current baseline conditions and project success Project Goals The goals of this restoration project are: to resiore'a combination,of Land Under the Ocean (including a subtidal embayment), salt marsh, and,intertidal mudflats; increase the habitat quality for estuarine-dependent fish and wildlife, while maintaining some habitat for existing wildlife communities; and cause no increase in tlooding>poteritial.to surrounding uplands. Objectives, Success Criteria and Methods Objective 1:Restore intertidal elevations and substrates (spring high water to mean sea level) that allow salt marsh plants and associated animalcommunities to recolonize the site. Increase the abundance of salt marsh vegetation(e.g., Spartina alterniflora, Spartina patens,Distichlis spicata,Juncus gerardii, etc.) and eliminate most of the Phragmites.Success Criteria A: The area of the marsh flooded between once daily and two to eight times monthly is increased to within 75% of the plan requirements.Method: Establish ten permanent sample stations at appropriate locations within portions of the marsh between elevation 0.14 and 0.95 meters NGVD. (Apportion stations in high marsh and low marsh based on area and locate stations using GPS.) Install crest stage gauges at each station and determine the elevation of the station relative to a tidal datum. Determine the height of flooding of the marsh surface during neap and spring tides once each year.for five years. Estimate the area flooded using surface water depth information and as-built plans.Success Criteria B:,The soil water salinity is between 20 to 33 ppt in portions of the marsh below the elevation of mean spring high water.Method: At each of the ten marsh sample stations, measure the,salinity of soil water during low tides during the spring and neap tide phases in pits once per year for five years.. Success Criteria C. The percent cover of salt marsh vegetation is increased-in areas flooded once daily to two to eight times monthly and.is within 75% of reference condition. :Method.Establish ten permanent sample stations at random locations within portions of the marsh between elevation 0.14 and 0.95 meters NGVD.` Measurements may.include the percent cover of vegetation(in cover classes) and height,number of stems and number.of flowering stems.of common reed'in 0.5 m2 rectangular quadrats: ,Perform this sampling once each year in late August to.September at two,three, and five years after construction and compare to reference location. Objective 2:Restore elevations and substrates to intertidal elevations (about mean sea,level to mean lower low water)to allow invertebrates.,adapted to intertidal areas and their predators to recolonize the site.Success criteria..The intertidal zone of the restored habitat supports a benthic community comparable to similar habitats at the reference location.Methods: Collect benthic cores at a minimum of five stations randomly located in the intertidal zone each year for five years following the completion of construction. Screen samples through a 0.5-nun sieve and identify and count all organisms to the lowest practical classification. Objective 3: Provide permanent open water habitat for shallow subtidal invertebrates and provide conditions suitable for the establishment of submerged aquatic vegetation as nursery areas for marine and estuarine-dependent species and their predators.Success criteria: The subtidal zone of the restored habitat supports a benthic community comparable to similar habitats at reference locations. Methods: Collect benthic cores at five stations randomly located in the subtidal zone 6 each year for five years following the.completion of construction. Screen samples through a 0.5- mm sieve and identify and count all organisms to the lowest practical classification. Objective 4:Restore habitats in appropriate ratios to maximize use by fish and wildlife. Success criteria:The ratio of open water to salt marsh meets 75%0 of plan requirements. Methods: ' Collect true color aerial photography at five years after implementation. Map cover types and compare to most recent pre-project aerial photography. Objective S: Ensure that existing flood heights on surrounding uplands remain unchanged. Success criteria:Flood heights do not exceed those predicted by project modeling.Methods: Measure flood height during astronomic tidal conditions and compare to predictions. Monitoring Results and Reporting The data collected during the monitoring efforts will be analyzed and submitted to.the Corps for review following each monitoring effort.'The Corps and Town of Barnstable will use these results to determine if any corrections need to be initiated to assure that project objectives are met. This adaptive management approach will allow for potential project adjustments before the end of the monitoring period and project completion. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS During the initial planning stages of this restoration project, four feasible alternatives were analyzed are discussed below. All four alternatives cover 14.0 acres within the lower Stewart's Creek Estuary and all alternatives,with the exception of the"Do Nothing" alternative,.involve ` the elimination of the tidal restriction through the installation of the larger culvert. Table 1 summarizes changes in conditions and resource areas`associated with the different project alternatives as they were presented in the EA in 2005. Alternative-1: No`Action If no action is taken to restore this ecosystem, all estuarine habitats within the lower Stewart's Creek system will-persist in a degraded state with poor water quality and low bentlic and fisheries productivity and diversity. Conditions in the Stewart's Creek ecosystem will continue to degrade as the<basin fills with more sediment. ° Alternative 2: Replace culvert and dredge channel This alternative considers the replacement of the existing culvert-with a larger culvert and the dredging of approximately 300 cubic yards of material from the tidal creek channel to improve tidal flow and planting the perimeter of the marsh with salt marsh cordgrass. Elevations throughout most of the lower embaymentare within the range that will allow most-of the area to support low Salt Marsh when the tidal range is restored. This alternative would restore flushing to the embayment/Marsh estuarine system. The inlet channel would be dredged to the minimum depth,width, and length required to restore the maximum tidal range and appropriate dissolved oxygen and'saliriity conditions to the system. `. Post-constructiodresource areas within the project area based on`this alternative would consist of approximately 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh(BVV), 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community 7 (BVW), 2.0 acres of brackish marsh(BVW), 1.0 acre of high Salt Marsh,.5.0 acres of low Salt Marsh, 1.0 acre of unvegetated intertidal habitat(Coastal Beach), and 3.0 acres of subtidal embayment, including tidal creek(see Attachment D, Figure 6).'Most of the changes are due primarily to the restoration of tidal flow and are considered indirect impacts. Table 1 summarizes the changes in resource areas under this alternative. Alternative 3: Replace culvert, dredge embayment, restore marsh with dredge material This alternative would restore flushing to the subtidal embayment/Marsh system by replacing the existing culvert under Ocean Avenue; restore the historic,extent and depths of the embayment and tidal creek to appropriate depths for fish and wildlife; expose suitable substrates for optimum benthic communities; and restore the historic extent of Salt,Marsh in the northern portion of lower Stewart's Creek using material dredged to restore the subtidal embayment(see Attachment D, Figure 7). The subtidal embayment would be dredged to a maximum depth of 0.5 to 1.0 feet at mean low water(MLW)'to create appropriate conditions for marine fisheries and waterfowl. The embayment size would be limited to the maximum size that would not require off-site disposal. 4 Approximately 3,200 cubic yards(cy) of material would be excavated to restore the embayment. The material excavated would be placed in an area designated for salt marsh restoration. The area of marsh restored by the placement of dredged material would be approximately 1.87 acres. Post-construction resource areas within the project area would consist of approximately 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh(BVW), 0.5 acre's of shrub/forest community(BVW), 2.0'acres of brackish marsh(BVW), 2.0 acres of high Salt Marsh, 2.2 acres of low Salt Marsh, 1.5 acres of unvegetated intertidal habitat(Coastal Beach), and 4.3 acres of subtidal embayment, including tidal creek..Most of these impactssare due primarily to the restoration of tidal flow and are considered indirect impacts. Table 1 summarizes the.change in resource areas under this alternative.: . This.alternative reduces the loss of subtidal embayment from tidal restoration by dredging an area that is on par with the.known;historic extent and depths of the open water.area. This alternative is also supported.by the neighbors of Stewart's Creek, who desire a yariety of resources areas, including open water embayment'and Salt Marsh. This is the preferred . alternative. Alternative 4: Replace.culvert,dredge.,embayment, off-site disposal of dredge material This alternative would also restore flushing to the subtidal embayment/Marsh system, dredge silt from the embayment to restore appropriate depths for fish and wildlife;expose suitable substrates'for optimum benthic communities; and restore the Salt Marsh(see Attachmmnt D, Figure 8). The embayment would be dredged to a maximum depth of 1.0 to 1.5 feet MLW to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl. The embayment size would be approximately 6.0 acres. Of approximately 6,800 cubic yards(cy) of material that would be excavated to restore the embayment, approximately3200 cy would be placed'in an area designated for Salt Marsh;raising its elevation to approximately 2.0 feet NGVD. The remaining. 3,600 cy of silt excavated to restore the embayment would be removed from the site and disposed of at the Bourne Landfill(approximately 30 miles from the site). 8 Under this alternative,post-construction resource areas within the project area would consist of 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh(BVW), 2.0 acres of brackish marsh(BVW), 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community (BVW), 1.0 acre of high Salt Marsh, 2.0 acres of low Salt Marsh, 1.0 acre of unvegetated intertidal habitat(Coastal Beach), and 6.0 acres of subtidal embayment, .including tidal creek. This alternative has many of the same components as the preferred alternative, except for much more dredging to create a larger embayment and less Salt Marsh. This alternative is also cost- prohibitive due to the large expense associated with trucking the dredge material to the landfill. RESOURCE AREAS AND PROPOSED CHANGES The lower Stewart's Creek ecosystem currently consists of degraded Salt Marsh,an artificially impounded subtidal embayment, and Bordering Vegetated Wetlands dominated by Phragmites. Other resource areas within the project site include Coastal Beach and Coastal°Bank. The greatest changes to the existing resource areas under the current preferred alternative will come from the removal of the tidal restriction and restoration of full tidal range,increasing the area and extent-of flowed tidelands. A small amount of direct impacts will be caused by the dredging to restore the embayment. Minimal impacts will occur to existing resource areas from the culvert installation. A table outlining the anticipated impacts to resource areas is presented in Table 2. These impacts are described-as direct,indirect and temporary. Salt Marsh Historically, an expansive Salt Marsh existed throughout lower Stewart's Creek. However,the current area of Salt Marsh in the project area is only 0.2 acres. Approximately 4.0 acres of Salt Marsh that was lost through the conversion to open water many years ago will be restored to its historic extent and functioning. After restoration,the total area of Salt Marsh will be 4.2 acres, including approximately 2.0 acres of high marsh and 2.2 acres of low marsh. The extent of the 4.2 acres of salt marsh will be achieved as a result of the restored tidal range as well as the re- establishment of marsh through the re-use of dredge material: Subtidal Areas The subtidal area upstream of the culvert is 7.1 acres. The removal of the tidal restriction and restoration of tidal fluctuation will indirectly impact this subtidal area by causing much of it to drain and have its sediments exposed at low tides. Therefore,the conversion of subtidal area to intertidal areas (Coastall Beach and/or Salt Marsh)will occur primarily through the replacement of the tidally-restrictive culvert and not through the placement of dredged material. This area will be restored to depths and substrate more suitable for productive benthic and fisheries communities and waterfowl habitat. The dredging of the embayment, in conjunction with the removal of the tidal restriction, will increase flushing and improve water quality, particularly in the subtidal embayment. Approximately 4.3 acres of the embayment will be restored. 9 Approximately 24 SF of subtidal area on the south side of the project area will be impacted from the installation of the wingwall associatedwith the new culvert. Approximately 75 SF of subtidal area will be temporarily impacted from the installation of the cofferdam. Bordering Vegetated Wetlands(BVW) The area of BVW present at the project site is 6.7.acres, including 4.0 acres of Phragmites and Typha-dominated brackish marsh, 2.0 acres of freshwater marsh and 0.7 acres of scrub/shrub- forested wetlands. The impacts to this resource area come from the change in hydrology due to the removal of the tidal restriction,which will result inthe conversion of Phragmites marsh to Salt Marsh. A small area of Phragmites marsh will also be converted to intertidal area(Coastal Beach). After the restoration,there will be 2.0 acres of brackish marsh, l.5 acres of freshwater marsh and 0.5 acres of scrub/shrub-forested wetland. Coastal Beach The area of Coastal Beach(Tidal Flat)upstream of the culvert will increase from.0.0 acres to 1.5 acres due to the removal of the tidal restriction and restoration of the natural hydrology. Approximately 24 square feet(SF)of Coastal Beach on the south side of the project area will be impacted by the installation of the wingwall associated.with the new culvert. Approximately 150 SF of Coastal Beach will be temporarily impacted from the installation of the cofferdam. Coastal Bank Coastal Bank at this site is the road embankment along Ocean Avenue. Approximately 10 linear feet of Coastal Bank within the existing road embankment will be impacted due to the installation of the culvert. Endangered Species Stewart's Creek and surrounding areas do not support any Federal or State threatened or endangered species, except-for, transient species such as bald eagles(Haliaeetus . leucocephalus). No submerged aquatic vegetation(SAV) (Zosterd marina or Ruppia maritima) is present in the estuary. A-complete inventory of.vegetation, invertebrates, and.other wildlife was conducted by the USACE and is included in detail in the EA., Essential Fish Habitat An assessment of Essential Fish Habitat was also conducted and is summarized in the EA. Because of the low.salinity and fine organic nature of the sediment within the estuary,this is unlikely habitat for winter floundei spawning.'In addition, a cofferdam will be installed in the area of the culvert installation, in,order to isolate the area from ambient water. Because of these mitigating factors,the National Marine Fisheries Service has agreed.to not impose any Time of Year restrictions on the project(Lawrence Oliver, USACE, personal communication). The MA Division of Marine Fisheries will also not recommend a TOY if a cofferdam is used(and no material is placed on the beach). WETLAND PROTECTION ACT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (310 CMR 10.00) The proposedproj ect complies with all performance standards set forth'in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(310 CMR 10.00), and an Order of Conditions was issued by the Barnstable Conservation Commission on October 3, 2007 (DEP File#SE3-4666). 10 CHAPTER 91 AND COMMONWEALTH TIDELAND&(310 CMR 9.00), The purposes served by the Public Waterfront Act(M.G.L. Chapter 91) and its implementing_ regulations (310 CMR 9.00)are: to protect and promote the,public's interest in tidelands. in accordance with the public doctrine; to preserve and protect the rights in tidelands of the inhabitants of the Commonwealth by ensuring that the tidelands are utilized only for water- dependent uses or otherwise serve aproper public purpose;.to protect-the public health, safety; and general welfare as it may be affected by any project in tidelands; to support public and private efforts to revitalize unproductive property along urban waterfronts, in a manner that promotes public use and enjoyment of the water; and to foster the right of the people to clean air and water, freedom from excessive and unnecessary noise, and the natural, scenic,historic, and esthetic qualities of their environment under Article XCVII of the Massachusetts Constitution (310 CMR 9.01(2)(a-e)). The restoration of the Stewart's Creek Estuary meets the purpose of these regulations in their entirety. The public's interest in tidelandsmill be both protected,and promoted by this: restoration project. The community surrounding Stewart's Creek strongly supports this project, particularly the restoration of the salt marsh and improvement of habitat and water quality. This is a water-dependent project which will serve a public purpose through the restoration of productive salt marsh and the restoration of natural hydrology and tidal range,'extending the area of flowed tidelands. Public health and safety will be protected through the improvement of water quality expected with the project. The'ecosystem will be made more productive through restored hydrology, dredging of the accumulated sediments and the restoration ofproductive salt marsh, and the public's right to clean water along with the natural,scenic and esthetic qualities of the ecosystem will all be improved. When the tidal restriction is-removed,the subtidal-conditions created by the tidal restriction will be replaced throughout most of the area.within lower Stewart's Creek by intertidal conditions. The extent of flowed tidelands will'be increased from their current degraded extent. When the dredge material is placed within a part of this area to stabilize Salt Marsh substrate and optimize the elevations for-Salt.Marsh development,most of.the area will still remain.intertidal. This will be done to restore historic elevations and extent of Salt Marsh, which by defiriition is a water dependent activity. This project will also result in the restoration of natural ecosystem functions, and by doing so,will enhance the public interest in these aieas, including all interests of MA Wetlands Protection Act.and the Public Waterfront Act(Chapter 91). While there are no specific provisions in the'Chapter`91 regulations that.address or promote habitat or ecosystem restoration,the project is nonetheless permittable because it is in keeping-i with the-purposes.of 31 Q CMR 9.00,as outlined'above. In addition,measures have also been taken to minimize the amount of fill used(310 CMR,9:32(a)(2)-to obtain the stated project purpose of estuary and salt marsh restoration,which is clearly a water-dependent use. All public rights within Stewart's Creek;as outlined in 3,10 CMR 9.35,will either be preserved, or more importantly, enhanced,by this restoration project: Because of the extremely shallow existing conditions,navigation of any type of vessel within this waterway is currently nearly . 11 impossible. The dredging of the tidal creek channel and subtidal embavment will restore navigable conditions to those found in similar nearby tidal creeks. Free passage over and through the water will also be restored or enhanced. Because of the extremely poor substrate and water quality,benthic and fishery resources are degraded or non-existent within Stewart's Creek.There is currently no known fishing or fowling within the project area. The implementation of this project will restore these resources and it is anticipated that fishing and/or fowling may also, restored. On-foot.passage will be enhanced in the area through the construction of a new sidewalk along Ocean Avenue. While it is possible that the material dredged during the restoration ofthe embayment may be suitable for beach nourishment, a greater beneficial.use for this material is to help stabilize the restored marsh surface and,create optimal elevations for Salt Marsh development. This will help enhance the overall public benefit of this'resforation project. Also,the adjacent public beaches do not require additional sand at this time. SUMMARY. In summary,the project, as proposed, meets the purpose and intent of the Public Waterfront Act in its entirety. The public's interest in these tidelands will be undeniably enhanced by the implementation of the proposed project. The overall extent of tidelands will be increased,water and habitat quality will.be improved and the natural functions of the estuarine ecosystem will be restored. t 12 STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION a OCEAN-AVENUE HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION ATTACHMENT ,D FIGURES • r .�L z s � DE-G 1-� �193R� P J ,( y3 �� .� � y,■/�� J�}cam) �u r� f 4 S H t� r� a f , y t � �t� ��;3 .r� '�' 'Y �l{ate �•' g"''. f�M 3.3, ��'�. a4 ^sn�,.} n si '��.u4-n�.;,•�j'�--.a,_s � i _ fr+�'ar`"`��',,,.+...', WN VIO � `. "r�� 2 ' st. 442 Figure 2 1960 Aerial Photograph VIM WE may" iNM oil t,r ' ,, � ors}--•r r��}�"� r - k� is T�� ;�. k� i;�: s. I� � • �i " , a r.� n r I r 0 • al � 3r r n, i e: �} � r Figure 3 r 1893 Topographic Map _sx .67 FeEdt .views- �cs �, s 4, L`} { - !�SliareA DeaaruYks �f :!lwww rw,.c:usg3 ae l.. Ftn lldecs ui,mlulnW x 4.:'E 4�yYtj. `"-< s.. R.'+US/a r`t a `\µ `ri �': „L ea0e Nods; -0 ITT it IZI A ON 11 n_itaeSimdy Pondr t �® ,} i A. _ r r �• I \ nt Ut i,j ki �/ '1�• rrr/ .1/ � � - tr t i 1� `: �1r111b fl if 1 1 iv.. - _.`_ !.;one RewaR'sa �v : cartofcis c v Al„ docwsl� scewere:c, c ooa.�xt nw.: a sizenik Lf! ,.....,:.{ —� Figure 4 1942 Topographic Map -' U_htCP!!data uM eduiMryhyarW2u�9 _. _ _ . fle to New Famit - v..2r. 4l t tmks „ u 1 \\ �T,• 0 �/� is 0- ii ° �� `;�\ -v'�'1•��,f.N�R A� " o- O� '�� p ;�`# y M::,� _ \1�3t . '_. S-1 jt`•v'�.:. :' c � �� ,� �•fin' .. o t 0 p .r �N 11' �t; rift!/' dd4 i��•�tti/ .. `_ c"C✓yy a �ry fGT'.1,. � li_ c� `/q� EJ [�`ri-: i. .�`, - oa• r. 1�\l\/��:_- f`�n^ �� J�/'� 4 ii a � �• B M `�� h .n ¢ 8 it a '• ,' °� .. so CEMj •�-s•' —,fir _ ;"�1�0�\� \\'•`- �� ` r(fj/ �SWy ry I 1 i ,�i��a�• - ' � 5 1-P0.07ECT$ C Ml I,�httP-/�doCs.teih.ed - �51<art'.S J rMox T nosaft 0utl �''�Rewarf'Geek Ch'9 I ,(i:4'•°'J��`.S 11 PM. .,r_�� „ }a[z._ rr✓k�iiF�'�:5� `''Y ,.y, 4 �i}^t •�'k�' a�-a 4 .,, ' rW y fit' y 3. — W -t a� �yrt >v�rt€�'✓��.� ,r3 -C � �� ..F�x^ �u �°[ 3- � �4{;! O A "6 # xnfiss 5'r �S t �F Figure 6 Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 2 i 1 N Varies v-1 r 1 L o7A — 4. U/S Invert �c^�, 'TAGING AHO 4•I' /~�"`� DE HATER ING ' j \ AREA i TYPICAL CHANN t Not EL SECTION io X� x AITIN CULVERT 111YERT ` SALT MARSH � . —4 NGVD NATER E1.Er.. x X7.0 . 6' f-.- i ldd ^tE \` .SED I►iEN7ATlON BASIN>� 10'LONG SEDIMENTATION BASIN PROPOSED 4' WIDE CHANNEL 1 Not to Scale) /1. ET�SHEPLACEDT - RE 5'zs'- j BOX CULVERT. f.. LIr,: f�1 XU.9 8 x ` t twrnc sraP• nOTE: Sand dui table •For- beoah we ►,{tE►! —.,._too O SOO 200 - rill be pwrped to beach - . yIENT DEPARTMENT - ANO H 7HE H3t7 �m.esowos am&04 lrr ram, S 0CLNm.06T10CT M'A"�-"' • .. ...CdM6 or pnaEpS SCENARr; GgE�1( . .. r' m�cwalws.aus�n PROPOSED DEL 5 . Figure 7 - Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 3: _ N STAGING ANO OEMATERING a MIEA --�—�— SA\LT.IAARSII - HEOT 1.1 NDVE lC1 N ABONc") . S T PO1A1. EXISTING CULVERT = TO RE u�PCAC�O n Ate •�afLvERT ■ GRAPHC SCAI F- r-otr Y ARE MI AMLCHT OF - AGf11EH THE ARMY rev®r i•uo.a.rmty ' HFR ri Ekcwa ormn . rrawu+a.sm � Cost-W O .MIIS ., SIEITAETTS CTiEEI( .. - FROPQSm SAEt POND- 5 Figure 8 Stewart's Creek conceptual plan for Alternative 4. Iu�• STAGING AND DEVATEHING SALT eµRSp' XTe REUM To ABDUT 1:1 aLrULI . ..To EL•L!L 1-0.5'NCYDI " .i SAL7 POND a EXISTING Cmve" ' 4ya DO)I WLYERi � •. . 4J p r. - DEPAOmw Oas"M MWY. W..m MUwMSS A e. m��n :NiDP05m5AlT POMD - 5 ' STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION -OCEAN AVENUE H A I A H T Y NN S M ASS C USE T5 CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION e . ATTACHMENT E TABLES Table 1. Stewart's Creek Restoration Project Alternatives Analysis Anticipated Post-Construction Conditions Hyannis, MA Resource Area Existing Alternative. 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3* Alternative 4- Conditions 'Do Nothing" Replace culvert;dredge Replace culvert; dredge Replace culvert; dredge y; 300 CY from channel and' pond to restore fisheries; 6,800 CY,to restore. spread over marsh lace 3200 CY for marsh fisheries;truck to landfill (acres) `Proposed Net Change Proposed Net Change Proposed Net Change Proposed Net Change acres) acres} acres acres) (acres) `(acres acres)' (acres) Salt Marsh 0.2 0.2 0 6.0 +5.8 4.2 +4.0 3 A +2.8 Coastal Beach 0.0 0.0 0 1,0 +1.0 1.5 +1.5 1.0 +1.0 (Intertidal Flat)' Subtidal Area** 7..1 7:1 0` 3.0 -4.1 4.3 • -2.8 6.0 -1.1 BVW 6.7 6.7 - 0 4.0 -2.7 4.0 -2.7 4.0 ;-2.7 All alternatives encore ass'14.0 acres within the lower Stewart's Creek ecos stern: . P , y �-.Preferred alternative -**Subtidal Area also includes the tidal creek: - Table 2. Preferred Alternative Resource Area Impacts Stewart's Creek Restoration Project Hyannis, MA Resource Area Existing Proposed Net Change Direct Impacts Indirect Impacts Temporary Impacts acres acres acres Salt Marsh 02 4.2 +4.0' 0 0 0 Coastal Beach 0.0 1.5 +1.5 24 sf from installation of N/A 150 sf from installation of (Intertidal Flat) wingwall Does not currently exist north cofferdam. Does not currently exist of Ocean Avenue Restore in-place after north of Ocean Avenue removal Coastal Bank 10 linear feet along south „ . side of road embankment 4.3 -2.8 1.15 acres to be dredged 2.8 acres converted to Coastal 75 sf from installation of Subtidal Area 7:1 g (including tidal (restored) (plus 1.15 to restore depths and Beach (intertidal flat),and Salt cofferdam. creek) acres of improve water quality Marsh due to change in Restore in-place after dredging) 24 sf from installation of hydrology removal wingwall BVW 6.7. 4.0 -2.7 0 2.7 acres of Phragmites marsh converted to salt.marsh and ; tidal flat by change in hydrology Total Affected 1 .0 4 14.0 0.0 3:15_acres of Subtidal 4.63 acres converted from, 150 sf Coastal Beach . � Area Area Phragmites marsh and 75 s€Subtidal Area Sub}tidal Area to Salt`Marsh All temporary impacts and Coastal Beach(Intertidal. from installation of Flat) cofferdam STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY.RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION ATTACHMENT F PHOTOGRAPHS , 11 R�- wk Y iRh �1s lop �.fr` t 4 �I msd �Rolf • �=fir ��'€"�.. y.<�� r.� '�`�S"� .r�r� r"�`<��, 1• • J . • / I I V eo I 11 19" 1• • /" "1 lh .+zi F}p'`tr9-:"fie .7� ��Fes-, ��` �,..�r ,� �txa r �F.j„@;jd� �Sr -��j� '�� r�,��'•*r y'ra,�++�`3 f$=` '�i- �» �-...� �.. ram.•— � �. � ��-.� .� �- e ate ..`. WX z 3 �� Aa"�+ �St��T,��fi 2r�-.�y,,��ev- py'c �ir ��y`ti�'S+ _`G.�.d•G AMZX 1 ' 4 st �" wM x � � g $sus tee'^sFa }{ r �N e Vie • tr , � ; xs �'�, r -�i ��t-��i'1 7<�;r��ll`al t �r-. ��Y�",#�� a� �"'��,��=i.,,•.r�F��.�Z' '� "�� '�., a� . .�.-„ak.x .�f; •,r ��r:(��iy ��:.x�'.'`��_r�� fi.,. ;�* s�...�i-��`��; r�a��ia'� ,�? n � 1/ 1 J • /• 1 •�• 1' "1 s mayZpa.t F ate_. R � aa + + € 1> � m��? �'.�- +•r u s * NO R PUT gm WC > gg Vw iw { ; ' "�k z_ ,.0 �� sM�Ci�''r��.�..��•f:r �t�' � ti': r��-r'aa � v'i 3Je1 ' 3� :ly.{ r �l LF .�1d „4 ... 'ems" ��f�. �� } � y"r t� ��s ,�"°•� t->r fit. 'SP� - .i�` 3°`• zF ram,>r°� 'l �`.t}` ,,.'.�w' '`-Lfer .� rM �4�'F��f•."`",�{3"- ��W ��,�-�3�;3��•�� '�:�-fit" �'' t,�+ -s. '�Zr �',�'��'.. r _�' � �'-�'�4 � �,- �; � �"^� `F4's' r,� �� `xc4' � ✓ t' -`s q3 � 'w�X�`�r. P 'y39� t e t��. f k 2 'Y "i 3$` -' .hJ,�• 3m��. !K., - ,,,a�..or��yx• -u � av�..�`,°'..�.r_�• _..'*':r- .x_� �'�"'�`*�',y?�:- "�" p5.r�t��t+',.''3 °C cue .� ��'� STEWART'S CREEK .ESTUARY RESTORATION OCEAN:AVENUE -HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION . r ATTACHMENT G _ STORM OPERATIONS MANUAL (DRAFT), f - STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION PROJECT BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUETTS DRAFT Storm-operat'i S. Manual US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS September 2010 New England District OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION PROJECT BARNSTABLE,MASSACHUSETTS CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT PARAGRAPH TITLE , PAGE NUMBER SECTION I -INTRODUCTION 1. AUTHORIZATION 1, 2. LOCATION 1 F 3. DESCRIPTION OYTHE PROJECT i SECTION II- OPERATIONS 4. PURPOSE OFTHIS MANUAL 2 5. GENERAL GUIDANCE. 2 6. OPERATION 4 7. SEDIMENTATION BASIN MAINTENANCE 7 8. WEIR/GATE ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS 7 APPENDICES A. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS A71 r SECTION I-INTRODUCTION 1. AUTHORIZATION The project for restoration of the Stewart's'Creek estuary in the town of Barnstable, Massachusetts was authorized for construction pursuant to the authority contained in Estuary a Restoration Act of 2000,as amended. The memorandum that authorized the restoration project is included as Appendix A. 2. LOCATION Stewart's Creek is.located on Cape Cod in the town of Barnstable,Massachusetts in the village of Hyannis. 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE-PROJECT ' The wetland/aquatic habitat area of Stewart's Creek is approximately 55 acres. The Stewart's Creek ecosystem includes a 20-acre salt pond and tidal creek system, and approximately 35 acres of wetland. The project'area'(the area affected-by project-related changes in tidal hydrology) encompasses approximately-14 acres of the Stewart's Creek system. The system is connected to Hyannis Harbor.(Nantucket Sound)through_a 60 foot-long,3 foot- diameter concrete culvert that passes under Ocean Avenue. The project restores tidal flushing to the salt pond/marsh system by replacing the existing culvert under Ocean Avenue. The existing.culvert will be replaced with a larger 6-foot wide by 4-foot high culvert,which would increase the upper and lower limits of the tide range and reduce the velocity of water entering Stewart's Creek. The culvert will be equipped with a combination sluice/flap gate on its downstream side, which would be closed during storms to reduce the potential for tidewater to flood surrounding uplands. A flap gate on,the combination gate will allow water to leave the upstream freshwater area as the tide recedes.,A sedimentation basin, consisting of a 10-foot long by 3-foot deep depression will be constructed at the upstream';side of the culvert to capture sand transported into,-the marsh from the beach. An access area, consisting of a ramp or loading area,will be constructed to allow maintenance equipmentto,access the sedimentation basin. A channel will be constructed from Hyannis Harbor.into the existing pond along the western side of the pond. Pond and intertidal flat habitat will be restored to conditions suitable for,estuarine benthic..invertebrate, fish,,and wildlife habitat-as a result of this project..A salt marsh in the northern'portion of lower Stewart's Creek will be restored using materials dredged to restore the pond. The pond will be dredged to a maximum depth of 0.5 to'l.0 feet at mean low water(MLW)to create appropriate conditions for dabbling waterfowl. Dredging.of the pond will be limited to the maximum size that would not require off-site disposal as dredged material will be placed within the site. Approximately 3,300 cubic yards (cy) of material.will be excavated to create the salt pond. The material excavated to restore the pond will be placed in the areas to the north raising their elevations fr6th approximately 1.7-to 2.0 feet NGVD. A coir fiber roll will be placed around the perimeter of the excavated sediments (approximately 1.8 acres)to hold the material placed within it and the perimeter will be planted with salt marsh cordgrass to encourage it to colonize the restoration area. Habitats within the improved project area will consist of approximately 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh, 0.5 acres of shrub/forest community,"2.0`acres,of brackish marsh, 2.0 acres of high marsh, 2.2 acres of low salt marsh, 1.5 acres of unvegetated intertidal habitat, and 4.3 acres of subtidal salt pond and tidal creek. The area of marsh created with dredged material will be approximately 2 acres. The proposed project will change the spring Jidafrange in the pond from its existing range of 1.4 to 1.6 ft NGVD to a range of-1.6 ft to 2.1.ftNGVD, SECTION H - OPERATIONS 4. PURPOSE OF THIS 1VIANUAL The purpose of this manual is to present information regarding the operation of the project to restore estuarine habitats to`Stewart's Creek while avoiding flooding of adjacent upland properties. The restoration depends on cyclic tidal flushing to bring about'a gradual transition of the area to a salt marsh/pond estuarine habitat. To achieve the tidal flushing, the new culverts and channels must be kept free from trash and debris that could restrict the range of tidal flow. 5. GENERAL GUIDANCE The project sponsor, the town of Barnstable, should appoint a person;or "Superintendent," who will be responsible for the efficient operation of all project features during coastal storm and flooding events-and adaptive management and for periodic inspection and maintenance of the project features, all without cost to the United States. The'name, address and office and cellular,phone numbers of the Superintendent, and any changes thereof, shall be promptly furnished to the District Engineer,New England District,Corps of Engineers. The form for reporting this inform- ation is"shown in Appendix C The town of Barnstable, in accordance with the Project Partnership Agreement,must grant the District Engineer,or his authorized representatives, access to the project for the purpose of inspecting and, if necessary;completing, operating, maintaining,repairing,replacing or rehabilitating the project. The town of Barnstable shall promptly implement maintenance measures or repairs that the District Engineer deems necessary. Other than road resurfacing, no improvement shall pass over,under, or through culverts and improved channels,nor shall any excavation or construction be permitted within the limits of the project right-of-way; nor shall any change be made to any feature of the works without prior determination by the District Engineer or his authorized,representative that the changes or alterations will not adversely affect the function of the project. Drawings or-prints showing such changes or,alterations as finally constructed shall be furnished to the District Engineer after ,. 2 completion of the work. Any contemplated-improvements or alterations:as outlined above must be submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,New England District, Concord,.Massachusetts;and the approval of the District Engineer obtained piior-to the town of Barnstable authorizing the work. All requests for approval shall be in writing with complete drawings along with a full description. of the work intended. The town of Barnstable will>be held responsible for obtaining prior approval from the Corps of Engineers for any improvements or alterations proposed by itself, private parties, or any public parties. The town of Barnstable shall furnish the District Engineer = as-built drawings of the completed work. 6. OPERATION The term"operation," as used in this manual,refers to the actual functions of the various features of the project during the varying stages of the tidal flows in and out of the marsh. The primary means of flow control through the culverts is a combination(sluicegate and flap valves)tide gate. Stop logs provide aback-up means of closure for the box culverts that can be deployed in the event that the.combination tide gate is inoperable.or is somehow prevented from closing. If stop logs are deployed before peak high tide,they should be removed as soon as practicable so that the interior marsh can empty during.the low tide cycle that follows. Repeating the procedure with the stop logs may be,necessary should the storm event extend beyond a full tide cycle. , To insure that the project features intended to prevent flooding of private properties adjacent to the salt marsh can be properly utilized during coastal storms,the Superintendent should assign at least one person responsible for the project's operation and knowledgeable of its features to be."on call"and.within a distance that will allow a rapid response to,predicted storms or tides that may threaten the project area. A crew and equipment sufficient to move,place or remove the stoplogs must also be available: Combination Sluice Gate Operation The gate will be installed on the south(downstream) side of the new 6 x 4 foot box culvert at Stewart's Creek. The gate will be a rectangular steel plate, raised and lowered vertically over the face of the box culvert opening. The combination gate is like a normal slide or sluice gate with the addition of a flap gate to allow outflow. In the slide-open position;water can flow in either direction.'This allows for one-way override and can be used to pass larger than normal flows as well as manual flushing of tidal marshes to preserve natural ecosystems, salinity and fish passage. When closed,the flapper feature of the gate permits outflow from the upstream marsh. The gate.is operated manually via a,handwheel„positioned directly above the gate on the top of the culvert headwall. Depending"on the operational goal, slide/flap gates may be used to partially or completely restrict'flow. For the purposes of this O&M Manual, it is assumed that the gate will be fully closed in anticipation of tidal events that have-potential to reach flood elevation. During typical tidal conditions,the gate.will be raised so that flow through the box 3. x,, culvert is unrestricted. The gate will be used for flood prevention. For specific information regarding opening and closure of the gate, consult the manufacturer's instructions for the actual gate installed by the construction contractor. Flood Analysis The Corps of Engineers conducted a tidal frequency analysis to determine the design tidal elevations for flood risk analysis and for marsh restoration. Vidal flood profiles,developed by the Corps for the open ocean along the New England coastline were used to estimate tidal flood frequencies at Hyannis Harbor. This study used the flood profiles to determine the maximum stage for the spring, 1-yr and 10-yr tidal events. Stage hydrographs.were then calculated from tidal elevations, recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA), on the 21 June 2002, 29 January 2002, and the 30 October 1991 events to model the spring, 1-yr and 10-yr storm events respectively. Less frequent storms such as the 50-yr and 100-yr tidal events overtop the Ocean Avenue roadway; therefore these events were not included in the flood analysis. The topographic survey conducted by the Corps in September 2001 measured finished floor elevations of 7.66 feet NGVD and 8.15 feet NGVD for two residential structures located adjacent to the study area on Studley Road. Table 1 presents the results of the flood analysis. Flood risk to nearby properties will be dependent on tidal conditions,rainfall and stormwater runoff to the marsh and drainage from the marsh through the 6-ft x 4-ft box culvert.. ; During a spring tide with no rainfall,the project would slightly increase high tide flood levels. During a 1-yr tide event with no rainfall, alternative 1 and.alternative 2 increase flooding to the marsh by 2.51 feet:Assuming there are,no rainfall contributions,this analysis determined that increasing the volume of tidal exchange to the pond would not cause flooding to structures located near the study area during the spring tide or 1-yr tide events. During a tidal event approaching a frequency of 10 years,residential structures that were not affected before could be flooded by tides. Precautions should be taken to prevent flooding of the area by closing of the sluice gate prior to high tide occurring. 4 Table 1. Modeled Existing and Proposed Flood Elevations in the Marsh Stewarts Creek,Barnstable,.Massachusetts Maximum Flood Elevations(Feet NGVD) Tide Rainfall Gate Existing Event Event Closed Conditions Proposed Plan NNA NO 1.8 1.77 NA NO 1.8 4.00 2-Yr NO 5.2 7.75 2-Yr YES 5.2 5.20 Gate Operation Criteria Based on the expected.peak water surface elevations at Stewart's Creek and the elevations of low lying properties in the vicinity of the marsh north of the roadway, the gate will be closed in advance of tidal events forecast to attain an.elevation of 6.5.. feet NGVD 1929 or greater: This elevation provides a 0.5 foot safety factor beneath the 7.0 foot NGVD29 prediction of the 10 year storm elevation. The updated Hydraulic Analysis for the.project and environmental assessment is attached as Appendix A. Analysis of the modeling results indicates that the new 6 x 4 foot box culvert is expected to largely remove the restriction of tidal flow in and out of the upstream marsh area. Therefore,tidal elevations on the downstream side of Stewart's Creek are assumed to be an appropriate predictor of water surface elevations in the upstream marsh. This manual'relies,on National Weather Service storm surge forecasts which are reported as depth above Mean Lower Low Water(MLLW). The analysis of conditions at - Stewart's Creek is based on the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 1929). A conversion factor of 1.5 feet is added to elevations in NGVD29 to obtain elevations in MLLW. A tidal elevation of 5.0 feet NGVD29 is equivalent to elevation 6.5 feet MLLW. Gate Closure—Forecasting and Operations The town of Barnstable shall perform the following daily procedures to determine whether it is necessary to close the slide/flap gate. Steps 1.and 2 should be performed daily. Step 3 shall be performed as necessary. The Stewart's Creek sluice/flap gate shall be closed when one or more of the following conditions are forecast; i A peak'tidal elevation of 6.5 feet MLLW or greater Woods Hole orNantucket' Island. (See Step 1.) Conditions that could produce coastal flooding in Cape Cod Bay.are forecast. (See Step 2.) F 5 Step 1. Review the National Weather Service Extra-tropical Storm Surge website. ■ Access the following link: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/mdl/etsUrge/index.php?page=map&region=ne&map=®-9C Times are based on Greenwich Mean Time. Subtract 7 hours to convert GMT to Eastern Standard Time. ■ If a peak tide of greater than 6.5 feet MLLW is predicted(column heading Fcst) for either station during the next 24 hours,:close the slide/flap gate as"described in Step`3. Step 2. Review the National Weather Service (NWS) Coastal Marine Forecast for Cape Cod Bay. ■ Access the following link: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/marine/zon'e/east/boxmz.htm ■ Select the "Nantucket.Sound" area from the.map of Eastern Massachusetts shown. A text weather and marine forecast for the next several days will be provided. ■ If the forecast calls for conditions that could produce coastal flooding in Nantucket Sound,the gate should be closed in advance of these conditions even_'if no extreme tide is forecast in the Step 1''review.: If the forecast calls for conditions that may prevent mobilization or operation of the gate (e.g. heavy snowfall, ice storm),the slide/flap gate should be closed in advance of these conditions even.if no extreme tide is forecast in the Step 1 review:'See Step 3 for procedures and timing considerations:; Step 1 Combination Gate Operation The gate should be fully closed in accordance with the operating procedures detailed by the gate manufacturer as soon"as possible after one of the specified closure criteria is met: It is best to close the gate at or near low tide,to permit safe access to the gate and culvert by closure personnel should any problems arise: To the extent possible and in.the interest of safety, gate closure should be performed during daylight hours. Should an extreme high tide.event be identified,with less.than 12 hours advance notice (i.e. after the last preceding low tide),or if it is not possible to mobilize at a-preceding low tide, the gate should still be closed in advance of the extreme high tide.. The gate shall be opened to the normal fully open'position when future tide elevations are forecast to�be below 6.5 feet MLLW:at Woods Hole and Nantucke_t,.and no other conditions cited previously are applicable. In the interest of safety,the gate should be opened during daylight hours and at low tide and the'gate closure should be performed by teams of at least two people. Additional personnel may need to be on.call should significant problems need to be addressed. All personnel who may be required to operate and/or maintain the gate should be provided appropriate training in management of the gate,and in safe operation, gate and culvert access and maintenance practices at the Stewart's-Creek site.The gate should remain open for regular operation,to permit tidal inundation to the upstream marsh area. 7. SEDIMENTATION BASIN MAINTENANCE The sedimentation basin at the upstream end of the culvert provides an,opportunity to remove sediments that would otherwise accumulate in a flood tidal shoal and eventually reduce the depth of the salt pond. The sedimentation basin should be inspected two times per year (spring and fall) and following major coastal storms to.assess the quantity of sand accumulation. Sand should be removed from the sedimentation basin when the elevation of the basin attains the elevation of the surrounding pond bottom. The accumulated sand will be placed on the beach above the elevation of mean high water on the south side of Ocean Avenue within 100 ft of the culvert. 8. WEWGATE ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS The weir at the upstream.end of the culvert provides an opportunity to manage water levels in the salt marsh/pond ecosystem. The project design is intended to provide a combination of salt pond standing water habitat, intertidal mudflat, and salt marsh. Removal of sediment from the sedimentation basin will help to control the accumulation of sediment at the entrance to. i the salt pond, which might otherwise build up and reduce the depth of the salt pond. Fine sediment from--upstream of the project area may also deposit in the pond decreasing its depth. If monitoring shows that the depth of the pond has deceased by more than one half foot(i.e. to elevation-2.1 ft-NGVD), the weir may be removed during high tide to`enhance flushing-of sediment. The weir may also be removed temporarily to enhance flushing if poor water quality (e.g. low dissolved oxygen concentrations) is observed in the pond. The sluice gate may be closed in the event of a hazardous spill in Hyannis Harbor to prevent hazardous material from entering Stewart's Creek. In this case,the gate should be closed prior to the hazardous materials entering the marsh and should remain closed until the risk of transporting hazardous materials into the marsh has past. REFERENCES GeoSyntec Consultants. 2006. Skaket Beach Road Slide/flap Gate Operations-Plan. Prepared for Massachusetts OM ice of Coastal Zone Management. Acton; MA } STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, IVIASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION A ATT CHMENT H EOEA SECRETARY'S CERTIFICATE e I '� �'A r,a, ru 4?,,90o Woa"P, d"'027,1 4-2524 MITT ROMNEY Aug ust 16' 2006 Tel. (617) 626-1000 GOVERNOR Fax. (617) 626-1181 KERRY HEALEY http://www.mass.gov/envir LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR STEPHEN R. PRITCHARD SECRETARY CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM PROJECT NAME : Stewart's Creek Salt Marsh Restoration PROJECT LOCATION ' : Ocean Ave. Barnstable (Hyannis) PROJECT WATERSHED Cape Cod EOEA NUMBER 13815 PROJECT PROPONENT . : Town of Barnstable,.Conservation Division DATE NOTICED IN MONITOR 'June 7,2006 Pursuant to.the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA),G.L. c.30, ss.61-62H, and the MEPA regulations(301 CMR 11.00), I have reviewed the Environmental Notification Form (ENF)'submitted on this project-and hereby.determine that it does not require an Environmental Impact Report: According to the Environmental Notification Form, the proposed project consists of the replacement of a 3-foot in diameter culvert with a 6x4-foot box culvert under Ocean Avenue at the Stewart's Creek crossing. Associated work will include the dredging of the Stewart's Creek channel of approximately 3,200,cubic,yardsq(cy) of material to restore the channel to depths better suited for fish and wildlife. The project would restore salt marsh in the northern portion of - Stewart's Creek. It would restore: 4.0 acres of salt marsh; 1.5 acres of unvegetated intertidal habitat; 4.3 acre's of subtidal area and tidal creek; 2 acres of brackish marsh; 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh; and 0.5 acres Iof shrub/forest community. It would create about 2 acres of marsh on dredged material. The purpose of the project is to restore a brackish wetland to a more normal tidal hydrology by increasing'the flow of salt,water into Stewart's Creek. The project would also improve wildlife habitat and fisheries`resources. The restriction of tidal flow has resulted in a loss of salt marsh area and the.encroachment ofwoody.vegetation and invasive species,such as Phragmites australis.The project site is approximately 55 acres. ,,The proponent requested a waiver from the mandatory'_EIR?threshold at Section 11.03(3)(a)(1)(a) for the alteration of one or more acres of salt marsh or Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BVW). Following consultation with the Department;of Environmental-Protection's (DEP) Wetlands Program;the project qualifies as a"limited"project under the Wetlands '.Cs Printed on Recycled Stock2Q%Post Consumer Waste.., - EOEA#13815 ENF Certificate August 16,2006 Protection Act and does not require a variance under the Section 401 Water Quality Program, or Chapter 91. Therefore, there has been no excedence of the mandatory EIR threshold,and a waiver is not required. The project will require a Chapter 91 Waterways License and a 401 Water Quality Certification from DEP. An Order of Conditions from the Barnstable Conservation Commission will also be required for the project. Federai Consistency review may also be necessary by the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management(MCZM) Office. MEPA jurisdiction is limited to the environmental impacts related to waterways, wetlands, and drainage. The'project has undergone an alternatives analysis with four alternatives. An Environmental Assessment for the project by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was found to have no significant impacts. The new culvert will be equipped with flood gates which have been designed so.that there will be no additional flooding. The proponent will employ siltation/turbidity barriers and other construction mitigation measures. According to the proponent,the project would directly affect the following wetland resource areas: approximately 10 linear feet of Coastal Bank; 1.5 acres of Coastal Beach (created); 24 square feet (sf) of Land Under the Ocean; 2.65 acres of Land Under Salt Ponds; and 2.7 acres of BVW.(mostly Phragmites dominated marsh will be converted to salt marsh and tidal flats). M The proponent has been closely coordinating`the project with the.local, state, and federal permitting agencies.DEP supports this restoration project and will work with the proponent to review the Preferred Alternative during the permit"process. DEP's remaining concerns regarding the conversion of open water salt pond habitat to salt marsh by filling with dredged material will be addressed as part of permitting. Based on a review of the information provided by the proponent and after consultation with relevant public-agencies,I find that the potential"impacts of this project do' not warrant preparation of an EIR and can be properly addressed in the DEP and local permitting processes. August 16, 2006 Date Robert W. Golledg ', Jr. cc: Lealdon Langley, DEP Wetlands Sharon Stone,DEP JSERO Comments received: Cape Cod Commission, 6/9/06 2 EOEA 413815 •. .ENF Certificate - { <' August 16,2006 1. DEP/SERO, 6/14/06 MCZM, 6/14/06 EOEA, 6/21/06 , DEP, 6/21/06 m R Vine Associates, 6/29/06 DEP, 7/5/06 Vine Associates, 7/6/06 Laurence P.Morin,7/6/06 DEP/SERO, 7/7/06 Town of Bamstabl'e,'7/7/06 9 ; MCZM;7/26/06 . Vine Associates, 7/28/06 DEP, 8/8/06 DEP; 8/9/06 £ 13815enf- RWG/wg t " > a k r C STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION c OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS,MASSACHUSETTS- CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION ATTACHMENT I ORDER OF CONDITIONS Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DEP File Number: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 5 - Order of Condition` ' sE3- 4666 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act`M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code A. General Information Important: Barnstable When filling From. 1.Conservation Commission out forms on the computer, 2. This issuance is for(check one): a. Z Order of Conditions b. ❑ Amended Order of Conditions . use only the tab key to 3. To: Applicant: move your cursor-do not Town of Barnstable/Conservation Division use the return a.First Name b.Last Name C.Company key. 200 Main Street d.Mailing Address , t Hyannis MA. 02601 e.Cityr li own f.State g.Zip Code 4. Property Owner(if different from applicant): Town of Barnstable a.First Name b.Last Name c.Company 367 Main Street - d.Mailing Address Q Hyannis MA 02601 _ e.Cityrrown f.State g.Zip Code 21AA4 - i67¢ _ Fo�.y• Project Location: • . Ocean Avenue Hyannis a.Street Address b.Village Map 306 Parcels 011, 001, 002, 202 Map 288 Parcel 180 c.Assessors Map Number d.Parcel Number Latitude and Longitude, if known (note: 41 d 38' 06" N 70d 17' 36"W electronic filers will click for GIS locator): e. Latitude f.Longitude 6. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for(attach additional information if more than one parcel): Barnstable a.County b.Certificate(if registered land) c.Book - d.Page .00T 3 2��7 August 10, 2007 August 28,207 7. Dates: a.Date Notice of Intent Filed b. Date Public Hearing Closed c. Date of Issuance 8. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents(attach additional plan or document references as needed): Preliminary•Site Plans (5 sheets) a.Plan Title U.S.Army Corps of Engineers" ---- b.Prepared By , c.Signed and Stampedby d.FinaLRevision Date e.Scale._ f.Additional Plan or Document Title g.Date wpaform5.doc• rev.311/05 B"amstable revised 7/512007 Page 1 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: �a WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions sE3- 4666 w . Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code B. Findings 1. Findings pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearing, this Commission finds,that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Wetlands Protection Act. Check all that apply: a. ❑ Public Water Supply b. Land Containing Shellfish c: ` ® Prevention of Pollution d. ❑ Private Water Supply e. ® Fisheries t Protection of Wildlife Habitat g ❑ rrnl�inritvater.1;UnrnI% h; Rtnrm rlarraga Prolientinn i 1571 Flood r ontmi 2. This Commission hereby finds the project, as proposed; is: (check one of the following boxes) Approved subject to a. ® the following conditions which are necessary in accordance with.the performance standards set forth in the wetlands regulations.This,Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the Notice of,Intent referenced above,the following General Conditions, and any -other special conditions attached to this Order. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, these conditions shall control. Denied because: b. ❑ the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a new Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to protect these interests, and a final Order of.Conditions is issued.A description of the performance standards which the proposed work cannot meet is attached to this°Order. c. ❑ the.information submitted by the applicant is not sufficient to describe the site,the work, or the effect of the work on the interests identified in the Wetlands Protection Act.Therefore,work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides sufficient information and includes measures which are adequate to protect the Act's interests,and a final Order of Conditions is,issued.A description of the specific information which is lacking and why it is necessary is attached to this Order as per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(c). Inland Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) . 3. ❑ Buffer Zone Impacts: Shortest distance between limit of project disturbance and wetland boundary (if available) a.linear feet Resource Area. Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 4. ❑ Bank ., a.linear feet b.linear feet c.linear feet d.linear feet s. ® Bordering Vegetated 0 direct impact Wetland a.square feet b.square feet . c.square feet d.square feet 6. ❑ Land.Under Waterbodies a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet and Waterways e.cu.yd dredged f.cu.yd dredged woaforrn5.doc- rev.311105 Barnstable revised 7/512007 Page 2 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection !..Wetlands DEP File Number: r WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions SE3- 4666 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of.Barnstable Code B. Findings (cont.) Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 7. '0 Bordering Land Subject to Flooding a.square.feet - b.square feet; c.square feet d.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage e.cubic feet f.cubic feet g.cubic feet . h.cubic feet 8. ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage c:cubic feet d.cubic feet e.cubic feet :` Lcubic feet " a• IRI •ram• f Stewart$ Ri.Va rf n_area Creek b.total sq.feet Sq ft within 100 ft c.square.feet d.square feet e.square feet f.square feet Sq ft between 100-200 ft -200 >600,000. g.square feet h:square feet i.square feet j.square feet Coastal Resource Area Impacts:..Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) 1o. ❑ Designated Port Areas Indicate size,-under Land Under the.Ocean, below. 75 temp. �. 11. ® Land Under the Ocean, a.square feet b.square feet , 3,200 c.cu.yd dredged d.cu.yd dredged 12. ❑ Barrier Beaches Indicate size"under Coastal Beaches and/or.Coastal Dunes below 24 ' 150 temp: 13: ,® Coastal Beaches a:square feet b.square feet c.c/y nourishmt., d.c/y nourishmt. 14. ❑ Coastal DUneS, a.square feet. b.square feet C.c/y nourishmt. d.c/y noudshmt 10 4 15.,-® Coastal`Banks a.linear feet b.linear feet " 16. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores" t a.square feet b.square feet 17...❑, Salt MarSheS, a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet, d.square feet 18. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds a square feet b.square feet C.cu.yd dredged d.cu.yd dredged_ ' 19. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish , a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 20. ❑ Fish Runs '•indicate"size:under Coastal.Banks, inland.Bank, Land.Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under-Waterbodies and Waterways; above a:cu.yd dredged b.cu.yd dredged 21. ❑ Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage "a.`square feet b.square feet .. wpaform5.doc• rev.3/1/05 Barnstable revised 7/5/2007 Page 3 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of.Conditions sE3- 4666 :; Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and § 237-1. to § 237-14 Town of Barnstabae Code - C. General Conditions,Under,Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (only applicable to a pproved,projects) 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein,and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or.modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any,exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights: 3. This Order does not relieve'the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state,or local statutes,,ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: - a. the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or ; b. the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years,,but less Y than five years,from the date-of issuance. If this Order,is intended to be valid for more than three years, the extension date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth as a special condition in this Order. 5. This Order maybe extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods.of up to three years each upon application to the issuing;authority at least 30 days priorto the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any f ll'used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, refuse,. rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster,.wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe,tires, ashes,_refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing:- 7. This Order is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed;or if such an appeal has been taken, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. %8. No work shall be undertaken until the Order has become final and then has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. in the case of recorded land;the Final Order shall also be noted in the. Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the-case of the registered land, the Final Order shall'also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. The recording information shall be submitted to this Conservation Commission`on the form at the end of this Order, which form must be stamped by the Registry of Deeds, prior to the commencement of work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site:not less then two'square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the:words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection" [or, "MA DEP"] "File Number SE3-4666 wpaform5.dce• rev.3/1/05 # Bamstable revised 7/5/2007 . Page 4 ot 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection :a Bureau of Resource Protection :`.Wetlands - `DEP_File Number: WPA Form 5 - ®rder of"Conditions z` .sE3- 4666 _ Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L._ c. 131, §40 "y and § 237-1 to§ 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts°"Wetlands Protection Act 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested,to issue:a Superseding Oder, the Conservation Commission shall be aipartyto all agency-proceedings and hearings before DEP. . 11. Upon completion of the work described herein,.the applicant shall submit a Request for Certificate of Compliance (WPA Form-8A);to the Conseryation;,Commission.` ' 12. The work shall conform to.the plans:a' nd special conditions"referenced"in this order. 13. Any change to the plans identified in'Conditlon #1 i above shall.require+the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the:change;Is signifcant'enough,to require the'filing of a new Notice of.lntent: 14. The Agent or members=of the Conservation Commission.and-tf e°Department of Environmental `Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order at reasonable'hours . to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated•in'this Order', and. relay require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the,Conservation Commission or Department fo'r.tliat evaluation. 15. This.Order of.Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the . property subject to this Orderand to any contractor or.other person performing work conditioned by w this Order. 16. Prior to the stait of work, and if,the'projecIt involves work.adjacent to a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, ::the boundary of the wetland in the:vicinity of the proposed work area shall be marked by wooden` stakes or flagging: Once.in place ry;the wetland°bounda markers shall be maintained until a Certificate of Compllance.has been.issued by the Conservation Commission n 17.: All sedimentation barriers sFiall be maintained in good repair until all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized With vegetation orotheemeans,.At no time shall sediments be deposited in a wetland or water`body.,Du"ring construction;the`appIIcant or his/her designee shall inspectthe.erosIon.controls' on a daily,basis-and shall remove accumulated sediments.as needed. The`applicant shall immediately control any erosion problems that occurat'the Site and shall also immediately-notify the Conservation s Commission,which"reserves:the right to,require additional=erosion.arid/ortdamage prevention controls it Irlay deem necessary. Sedimentation barriers shall serve as the Ilrnit'-of Work unles&another limit of; . . work line has been approved,by this Order: - - C 18. All work:associated'with this Order is required to comply.with the Massachusetts Stormwater Policy Standards: Special Conditions: If you.need more space for additional - conditions, select box to attach a text «s. a document ET a . , $. k wp2forrn5.doc rev.3/1l05 Barnstable revised 715/2007 ?age 5 of 9 1 ry Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: a. WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions SE3- 4666 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code D. Findings Under Municipal.Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance 1. Is a municipal wetlands bylaw or ordinance applicable? .N Yes ❑ No 2. The Barnstable hereby finds (check one that applies): Conservation Commission 3. ❑ that the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the standards set forth in a municipal ordinance or bylaw specifically: § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code a.Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw b.Citation Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to meet these standards, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. 4. ® that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with a municipal ordinance or bylaw: § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code a.Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw b.Citation The Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with=the following conditions' and with the Notice of Intent referenced above..To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals,submitted.with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. If you need more c.. The special conditions relating to municipal ordinance or bylaw areas follows: space for - . additional conditions, See pp.6.1 and 6.2 select box to. attach a text document J wpaform5.doc• rev.3/1/05 Bamstable revised 7/5/2007 Page 6 of 9 SE3-4666 Name: Town of Barnstable/Conservation Division . r . . Approved Plan= Preliminary Site Plans (5 sheets)by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Special Conditions of Approval I. Preface Caution: Failure to comply with all Conditions of this Order of Conditions can have serious consequences. The consequence may include issuance of,a stop work order,fines,requirement to remove unpermitted structures,requirement to re-landscape to original condition,inability to obtain a certificate of compliance, and more. The General Conditions of this Order•begin on page 2 ind continue on pages and 4. The Special Conditions are contained on pages 4.1,:4.2 and 4.3 if necessary.All conditions require your compliance. II. Prior to the start of work,the following conditions shall be satisfied: 1. Within one month of receipt of this Order of Conditions and prior to the commencement of any work approved herein, General Condition number 8(recording requirement)on page 3 shall be complied with. 2. It is the responsibility of the applicant and the project contractors to ensure that all conditions of this Order are complied with. The applicant shall provide copies of the Order of Conditions and approved plans(and any approved revisions thereof).to project contractors prior to the start of work Barnstable Conservation CommissionFornis A and B shall-be completed and returned to the Commission prior to the start of work. 3. The Natural Resources Dept.shall be notified at least 21 working days prior to the start of work at the site, to inspect the areas for shellfish. If deemed necessary by the Shellfish Constable,shellfish shall be removed from the work area to a suitable site and/or replanted afthe locus following construction. The foregoing measures for shellfish protection shall ensue at the expense of the applicant. 4..; Final site plans shall be provided to the Conservation Commission. M. The following.additional conditions shall govern the project once work begins: 5. General conditions.No. 12 and No, 13 (changes in plan)on page 3 shall be complied with. 6. General condition No. 17(maintaining sediment controls)on page 4 shall be complied with. 7. This permit is valid for three,(3)years from the date of issuance, unless extended by the Commission at the request of the applicant. Caution:a future Amended Order does not change the expiration date. Page 6.1 ., v _ '• 8. All areas disturbed during construction shall be revegetated immediately,following completion of work at. the site. No disturbed areas shall be-left unvegetated or unmulched for more than30 days:11 Mulching shall <r , not serve as a substitute for;the requirement to,revegetate disturbed areas at the conclusion of work: ' 9. All work shall follow the final project plans. 10. A post-dredging bathymetric survey shall be performed by:the project engineer.within one(1)year of the _ e , dredging event,and the results submitted to'the Conservation Commission for.compliance review purposes, 11; Work shall occur during the off-season only:,.October l5-through May L'`In-water work necessary to be ., performed between January 15 and May 31 shall require appropriate containment:measures(Le. coffer dam), be'deployed: 12. ...s urr .,.u......uu. u.�yr.,v.sio�.VI a+viuickLuig aiucwa,x dui uwcivauuli ucux aiid acctimpanying . road-curbing,and guardrails;so long as provided on supplemental plans submitted toilthe Commission.+.. 13. Constructed salt marsh shall be contauied by cou roles. Spartina altemaflora colonization shall be provided by combination of plug planting and natural,spread. e 14. Once constructed,the new culvert£shall be operated and maintained consistent with the O'&M plan w. provided by the Army Corps. + 15. Post-construction"ecological'monitonng, m as,:detailed the'plan,shall be completed. IV. After all work is completed,the following condition shall be promptly met:° 16, At the completion of work,}or by the expiration of this Order,,the'applicant shall'request in writing a Certificate of Compliance for the work herein permitted. Bamstable`Conservation Commission Form C t.^ 1 shall be completed and returned with the r'equestfora Certificate of Cornnhance Where a project has ,been completed in accordance with plans stamped,by a registered professional erigmeer;'architect,ir landscape architect or land'surveyor,a written statement by such'a professional.person ce rt�fymg r substantial compliance with.the plans and settmg-forth what`deviation,.if any,exists with the record plans ' approved in the Order shall'accompany the-request.for a Certificate of Compliance. .r, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number. WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions SE3- 4666 L231) Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 1,31, §40 and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable*Code E. Issuance This Order is valid for three years, unless otherwise specified as a special OCT 3 2007 condition pursuant to General Conditions#4,;from the date of issuance. 1.Date of Issuance Please indicate the number of members who will sign this form: This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. 2.Number of signers The Order must be mailed by certified mail (return receipt requested)or hand delivered to the applicant. A copy also must be mailed or hand delivered at the same time to the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection Regional Office, if not filing;electronically, and the property.owner,:if different from applicant: . Signatures: J � '(7 V d i Notary Acknowledgement Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of - a On this Dayd` of MorgYear Before me,the undersigned Notary Public, personal ly.appeared Name of Document Signer proved to me throughsatisfactory.evidence of identification;which was/were Description of evidence of entification to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that he/she signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose. As member of . Barnstable CitylTown Conservation Commission _ Signature of Notary Public GO Printed Name of Notary Public Place notary seal and/or any stamp above My Commission. pares(Date) This Order is issued to the applicant as follows: . by hand delivery on bycMfie ail, return rece ested; on 1013/o1 ate Name Signature -9a wpafoan5.doc rev.311105 Bamstable revised—7 5?1007 Page 7 of 9 �. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions sE3- 4666 71. Massachusetts Wetlands'Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40�-' and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable-,Code F. Appeals - The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land subject to this Order, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land isilocated, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriate DEP Regional Office to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and a completed Requestryof Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form, as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7)within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Order.A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. Any appellants seeking to appeal the Department's Superseding Order associated with this appeal will be required to demonstrate prior participation in the review of this project. Previous participation in the permit proceeding means the submission of written information to the Conservation Commission prior to the close of the public hearing, requesting a Superseding Order or Determination or nroviding written infnrmatinn to the Denartment nrior.to ices innrr.e nf'a Ci rnorcedin^ nrd�' or Determination. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Order which is being appealed and how the Order does not contribute to the protection of the interests identified in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, (M.G.L. c. 131, §40)and is inconsistent with the wetlands regulations (310'CMR 10.00). To the extent that the Order is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations, the Department has no'appellate jurisdiction.' t Section G, Recording Information is available on the following page.- , wpaform5.doc• rev.311105 Satiable mv°sed 702007 Page 8 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection Wetlands DEP File Number: ' WPA Form 5 - order of Conditions SE3- 4666 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and § 237-1 to § 237-14 Town of Barnstable Code G. Recording Information This Order of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located,within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in.the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order. In the case of registered land, this Order`shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the Order of Conditions. The recording information on Page 7 of this form shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission listed below. Barnstable Conservation Commission Detach on dotted line, have stamped by the.Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. D - --- Barnstable Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: Ocean Ave., Hyannis, MA SE3-4666 Project Location DEP File Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: Barnstable County Book _ page for: Property Owner and has-been noted in the.chain of title of the affected.property in: Book Page In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued on: Date If recorded land, the instrument number identifying this transaction is: Instrument Number, If registered land, the document number identifying this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant wpaform5.doc- rev.3!1.'W - Bamstable revised 7/5/200' _ Page 9 of 9 STEWART'S CREEK ESTUARY RESTORATION OCEAN AVENUE HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 91 LICENSE APPLICATION IT ATTACHMENT J ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,, AS PREPARED, CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS. NOTES: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET AND REFERENCE THE NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (NGVD29). m 2. COORDINATES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE LAMBERT GRID SYSTEM FOR THE p COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS (MAINLAND ZONE) AND THE.NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1927 (NAD27). 3. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CONDUCTED BY U.S.,ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DURING SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER. 2001. a HYANNI LOCUS IL _ 288 1-80 A—U t 306 �s • \, ,r'Ti "#Yet \ � ;S"�' 9ti NEW ' SALT PROPOSED 4' 306- -191 MARSH - 306 9 306-6 WIDE CHANNEL' 306-3' 1 y .'rs�ts4% 3U6 1 .NEW SALT POND . 306-2 CULVERT TO �T BE. E4'Lx 6 D l ' BOX CULVERT 306-191 IL h _ TAPPING VALVE 305-1 ;� `i. LIMIT OF P - ;, ��,��,�rK�� - � _ 1 CONTRACTORS , N. +�.'1� WORK AREA . ROAD CLOSURE . ch 1 %. , ENTRANCE CHANNEL TO BE EXCAVATED t` �; HYANNIS HARBOR TO EL. ;-1.0 (BY OTHERS: SITE PLAN SCALE: 17=150' SHEET 1 OF 6 W w PLAN ACCOMPANYING PETITION OF: THE U.S. ARMY � CORPS OF ENGINEERS TO PERFORM DREDGING/FILLING W AND INSTALL NEW CULVERT N HYANNIS HARBOR BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS, 75 150 SEPTEMBER 2010 ° AL, INC. HINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS VINE ASSOCIATES A DIVISION OF GZA GEOENVIRONMENT Z g CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, AS PREPARED, CONFORMS TO THE 'RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTER'S) . OF DEEDS. HEADWALL CONTROL LINE B STOP LOG TOP EL. 7.0 CENTERLINE STRUCTURE GRAVEL SHOULDER OF ROAD CONTROL LINE A --- RELOCATED 12' CENTERLINE OF r WATER MAIN ' CHANNEL/CULVERT z, (APPROX. 50 LF) p R29.7619 STA 3+70 END OF SEDIMENTATION i NEW: PAVEMENT MATCH A BASIN EXCAVATE xso EXISTING ROADWAY _ TO EL:'< -2.0 _ GRADE AND WIDTH CONSTRUCT NEW �` ' -RELOCATED GAS LINE GUARDRAIL FROM ' STA 2+65 , ' 4' WIDE COMPACTED ' TO STA 3+65 x 4.. - GRAVEL SWALE ` 4' X 6' CULVERT �o / 'J \CONSTRUCT NEW GUARDRAIL FROM STA .2+60 BEGINNING BIT/ `. STA' 2+80 TO STA 3+50 OF. NEW PAVEMENT CONIC. MATCH EXISTING GRADE CURB i TRASH RACK AND ROADWAY WIDTH` 6 4' WIDE COMPACTED 6 \ HEADWALL W/COMBINATION GRAVEL SWALE GATE TOP EL. 7.5 PAVED WALKWAY WITH , WOODEN RAILING CENTERLINE .OF CHANNEL- , STA 2+80 TO'STA 3+40 ;` `EL' -1.0 � ,, �'• HYANNIS HARBOR WOODEN RAILING MEET EXISTING GRADE RELOCATE EXISTING RIP RAP TOP EL. 6.0 a PROPOSED CULVERT SITE PLAN SCALE:- 1 _'30' NOTES: 1. ENTRANCE CHANNEL SHALL BE DREDGED TO EL. -1.0 FOR 50 FEET FROM THE y _ CULVERT'ENTRANCE. BEYOND THIS. POINT THE CHANNEL WILL BE DREDGE BY OTHERS TO EL. •-1.0 r U w PLAN ACCOMPANYING- PETITION OF: W . s THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 3 TO PERFORM DREDGING/FILLING N AND .1NSTALL NEW CULVERT ' N HYANNIS- HARBOR BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS o' . 15 30 SEPTEMBER 2010 --� SHEET 2 OF 6 a Z VINE- ASSOCIATES A 0/VISION OF- GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC. HINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS g - - x - i k I CERTIFY THAT TEAS- PLAN, AS PREPARED, CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS. CENTERLINE OF ROAD 24' WIDE BIT.CONC. PAVEMENT 10' .WIDE GRAVEL "SHOULDER BIT. CONC. CURBING GUARDRAIL GUARDRAIL BIT. CONC. CONCRETE HEADWALL- PAVED WALKWAY TO REMAIN HEADWALL' EL. 7.0 WOODEN RAILING STOPLOG -STRUCTURE un HEADWALL EL. 7.0 10 o SLIDE GATE GROUND SURFACE Z — ___ 5 1.85 MHW POND SIDE - _ - - OCEAN SIDE p -1.35 MLW = -- -- =_=__ _= _ �l=L9 — — Z - — • 11 J1 115 14, 5 EXCAVATE . 1.5 FOOTING (TYP.) CHANNEL N 1' GRAVEL BEDDING TO EL. —1.0 RELOCATED-4" GAS LINE w SEDIMENTATION BASIN 2' GRAVEL W/6" PIPE SLEEVE INVERT EL. —2.0 BEDDING APPROX. LOCATION OF APPROX. .LOCATION OF EXISTING EXISTING 4_" GAS LINE 12" CAST IRON WATER MAIN RELOCATED 12" WATER MAIN l �• I I I I I I I STA. 0+00 .-0+10 -0+20 -0+30 -0+40 -0+50 -0+60 -0+70 -0+80 PROPOSED PROFILE CULVERT/CHANNEL CENTERLINE STATION SCALE: 1"=20' ROADWAY w j NEW 4'X6' BOX CULVERT w 10 1 EXISTING TOP OF ROAD z5 -——1------r- —1------ 1.85 MHW " . 0 -1.35 MLW= 1.5 •5 _ EL. —4.0. —5 LIMIT OF EXCAVATION 14' GRAVEL BEDDING w • J - w - i PROPOSED TYPICAL CULVERT SECTION SCALE: 1"=20' co N O . tC y a . m x a W PLAN ACCOMPANYING ;PETITION -OF: 6 ` THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS TO PERFORM DREDGING/FILLING AND INSTALL NEW CULVERT N HYANNIS HARBOR BARNSTABLE, .MASSACHUSETTS', o. 10 20 & SEPTEMBER 2010 _ - SHEET 3 OF ' 6. Z USETTS VINE ASSOCIATES A DIVISION OF GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ` HINGHAM, MASSACH 5 - a t r I CERTIFY: THAT r THIS •PLAN, AS PREPARED, CONFORMS} TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS " OF- THE REGISTERS ' OF 'DEEDS. v n y Ito. d a ' REMOVE MATERIAL TO ti A 'DEPTH OF -{1.0 WITHIN NEW CHANNEL MARSH FEEDER CHANNEL RIDGELIKE � AT EL: '2.0 NEW MA RSIi . ., 6 x1 - Jz?Y LACE, FILL MATERIAL. WITHIN yAREA * ISLAND 3 ` OF `NEW MARSH°.TO ELEVATIONS INDICATED. �0 S E NOTE- COIR BUNDLES ALONG EDGE 4 r _ OF NEW MARSH �., 0 ��, REMOVE MATERIAL 0 • �k0 .. •A DEPTH -OF -1.0 �. WITHINNEW' POND AREA RIDGELINE p0 . �'`FAT EL. .2,0 6 �kOp SEE -NOTE 2 , :. pp , REMOVE,.MATERIAL �k • � _ - • - ` TO A DEPTH- OF o e MHW�r' ,• o -1.0 WITHIN NEW` 4'' NEW CHANNEL WIDE CHANNEL 1 NEW NEW"POND, AREA` CHANNEL r PROPOSED DREDGING SITE PLAN tN SCALE: 1' 150'. f NOTES l�MARSH EDGE SHALL` BE LOCATED- TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM, OF 30' OF OPEN WATER FROM EXISTING POND EDGE.' 2. MARSH EDGE SHALL BE- LOCATED TO MAINTAIN, APPROX. 20'- SEPARATION a FROM NEW CHANNEL AND APPROX. 50' SEPARATION FROM POND AREA 3. APPROXIMATE .VOLUME °TO BE REMOVED FROM N'EW SALT POND AREA & PLACED, IN NEW SALT MARSH AREA ,3200t CYDS. 4 , W PLAN ; ACCOMPANYING-^ PETITION OF: THE U.S. 'ARMY' CORPS OF. ENGINEERS .,. Q _ 3 TO PERFORM DREDGING/FILING, AND INSTALL NEW CULVERT ' HYANNIS- HARBOR BARNSTABLE,- •MASSACHUSETTS' 'o 7.5 Aso SEPTEMBER 201"0 SHEET 4 OF 6 VINE ASSOCIA TES, A DI.V/SION. OF GZA GEOEN VIRONMEN TAL, INC. HINGHAM, MA SSA CHUSETTS 1 I CERTIFY THAT 'THIS PLAN, -AS PREPARE®, CONFORiViSi TO' THE RULES AND REGULATIONS • OF JHE REGISTERS, OF DEEDS, ` COIR FIBER,BUNDLES EL. 1.8 w EXISTING BOTTOM MARSH HIGH EL. 2.0 w COIR FIBER BUNDLES 5 EXCAVATE POND TO -1.0 El_. 1.8 Z 1.85 MHW TA > 0 -----�- --- ---- -- ---- -- z �1 ON 3 -5 CHANNEL INVERT Al ON 3 'SIDESLOPES � EL. "-1.0 SIDESLOPES w w SECTION A VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=25' HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=.100' CUR FIBER -BUNDLES EL. 1.8 .� EXISTING BOTTOM MARSH -HIGH EL. 2.0 w COIR FIBER BUNDLES COIR FIBER w EL. 1.8 BUNDLES ` z 5 1.85 MHW EL. 1.8 035 -1 ON 3 SIDESLOPES z v-5 CHANNEL INVERT EL. -1.0 a o � , w SECTION B VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=25` HORIZONTAL SCALE: '1"=100' C N - a U , W PLAN ACCOMPANYING PETITION OF: W THE' U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ` F TO PERFORM DREDGING/FILLING N AND ISNTALL- NEV CULVERT N HYANNIS -HARBOR W BARNSTABLE, ,MASSACHUSETTS o' so goo o' _ 25 & SEPTEMBER 2010 SHEET 5 OF 6 a , Z VINE ASSOCIA TES; A DI VISION OF GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC. HINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS ' g I CERTIFY THAT THIS. PLAN, AS PREPARED, CONFORMS TO THE RULES 'AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS•J.OF DEEDS. EXISTING BOTTOM COIR .FIBER BUNDLES M^— EL. 1.8 w MARSH HIGH ' 5 EL. 2.0 Z 1.85 MHW ISLAND FEEDER CHANNEL 1 'ON 2 �1 ON 3 SIDESLOPES SIDESLOPES INVERT EL. 0.0 > _5 CHANNEL INVERT EL. =1.0 SECTION C VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=25' HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=100' - - - EXISTING BOTTOM COIR FIBER BUNDLES EL. 1.8 w MARSH HIGH EL. 2.0 COIR FIBER BUNDLES z 5 EL. 1.8' 1.85 MHW z 11 ON 3 SIDESLOPES —5 CHANNEL INVERT EL. —1.0 w W. SECTION D a VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=25' IN Lo HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=100' N i .. N C 52 W PLAN ACCOMPANYING . PETITION OF: Ix co THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 3 TO PERFORV DREDGING/FILLING AND ISNTALL. NEW CULVERT = ' N HYANNIS HARBOR BARNSTABL W - E,--MASSACHUSETTS ,, 0 50 _ 100 0 . 25 a SEPTEMBER 2010 • SHEET 6 OF 6 3 VINE ASSO CIA TES A DlI/ISION OF GZA GEOENV/RONMENTAL, INC. H/NGHAM,'- MA SSA CHUSE TTS