Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCape Cod Commission 12/10/24 3225 MAIN STREET • P.O. BOX 226 BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS 02630 CAPE COD (508) 362-3828 • Fax (508) 362-3136 • www.capecodcommission.org COMMISSION CERTIFIED MAIL-RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Tracking Number: 9589 0710 5270 1485 1428 62 December 10, 2024 Chase Brook Park Restoration & Pedestrian Bridge Project CCC File No: 24024 c/o Tighe& Bond 53 Southampton Road Westfield, MA 01085 ATTN: Briony Angus Dear Ms.Angus, This letter serves as notice that the above-referenced project has been deemed to be a DRI under Section 2(d)(i)of Chapter A, Code of Cape Cod Commission Regulations, Enabling Regulations Governing Review of Developments of Regional Impact. The Commission received the Secretary's certification of the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR")on November 29,2024(copy attached). Under Section 6(c)(vi)of Chapter A and Section 13(b)of the Cape Cod Commission Act,the Commission is required to open the public hearing on the project within forty-five(45)days of the Secretary's certification of the adequacy of the FEIR,which in this case means no later than January 13,2025. Once opened,the public hearing shall be closed within 90 days following its opening date, unless extended by mutual agreement with the Applicant.To allow for DRI review of the project, the Applicant shall make application with the Commission,which shall be prepared and filed in accordance with the Chapter A of the Code of Commission Regulations("Enabling Regulations"). Copies of the Commission Act, regulations, and DRI application cover sheet and guidance document,among other relevant regulatory documents,can be found on the Commission's website at www.capecodcommission.org. No municipal development permits may be issued for the project,and no development activity may be undertaken for the project, until the Commission completes its review and issues a DRI approval. Alex Peterson, Regulatory Planner at the Commission, is the project manager and your contact person. Please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Peterson should you have further questions. Since y.- C � �� ® a- DEC f1624J s Dillon _ Commission Clerk BUILDING DEPARTMENT SY Page 112 Enclosure CC via regular mail: Dennis Prebensen,Yarmouth CCC Representative CC via certified mail: Kathy Williams,Town Planner Mary Maslowski,Town Clerk Mark Grylls, Building Commissioner Julie Mockabee, Chair, Historical Commission Steven DeYoung, Chair,Zoning Board of Appeals Bruce Murphy, Health Director Grant Kelly, Conservation Administrator I' a g c 212 The Commonwealth of.Massachusetts _ t Executive Office of Energy and Environmentaf 1-11171 Affairs _ _fk- 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 'Boston, 511A 02114 Maura T.Healey GOVERNOR Kimberley Driscoll Tel:(617)626-1000 LIEUTENANT Fax:(617)626-1081 GOVERNOR http://www.mass.gov/eea Rebecca L.Tepper SECRETARY November 29, 2024 CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PROJECT NAME : Chase Brook Park Restoration and Pedestrian Bridge Project PROJECT MUNICIPALITY : West Yarmouth PROJECT WATERSHED : Cape Cod Bay EEA NUMBER : 16861 PROJECT PROPONENT : Town of Yarmouth DATE NOTICED IN MONITOR : October 23, 2024 Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act(MEPA;M.G.L. c. 30, ss. 61-62L) and Section 11.06 of the MEPA Regulations(301 CMR 11.00), I have reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report(FEIR) and hereby determine that it adequately and properly complies with MEPA and its implementing regulations. As noted in my Certificate on the Expanded Environmental Notification Form(EENF)and Proposed EIR(EENF/Proposed EIR)issued on September 23,2024, the Proponent was directed to file and circulate a response to comments received on the EENF/Proposed EIR and Proposed Section 61 • Findings in accordance with 301 CMR 11.06(14)(b). The response to comments and Proposed Section 61 Findings were published for review in the Environmental Monitor as a FEIR pursuant to Section 11.06(14)(b)of the MEPA regulations and was subject to a 30-day comment period during which time no additional comments were received. The response to comments was to address the recommendation by the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management(CZM)that the Proponent consider further alternatives to reduce impacts to wetland resources. Project Description As described in the FEIR, the project by the Town of Yarmouth(Town)consists of enhancing public access and ecological quality across three properties in West Yarmouth: Chase Brook Park, Mill Creek Park, and the former Yankee Village Motel(Yankee Motel) site. The project includes the construction of a prefabricated timber pedestrian bridge(bridge) supported by timber piles arranged in rows,with pile caps and elevated boardwalks leading to the bridge in both directions over Chase EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 Brook to connect Chase Brook Park and Mill Creek Park;' removal and improvement of existing walking paths to enhance use and connectivity; and creating a continuous pervious pedestrian pathway across all three properties. In addition to the bridge,the project will improve existing pedestrian walkways and create new pathways and seating areas on the former motel property, designed to increase public use and enjoyment of these spaces. Existing overlooks and parking lots on Chase Brook Park and Mill Creek Park will be retained to maintain their original function. To further enhance the area's ecological value,the project involves a comprehensive plan to remove invasive plant species including Mugwort, Spotted Knapweed, Oriental Bittersweet, Japanese Knotweed, and Phragmites and to reestablish native vegetation. This ecological restoration is intended to improve both the aesthetic and environmental health of the parklands, supporting local wildlife and increasing the site's resilience to environmental changes. The parcel will be planted with seed and plantings aimed at establishing species-specific stands or colonies, in alignment with a long-term Land Management Plan(LMP). The LMP will emphasize the sustainable management of the park and the ongoing control of invasive species to provide continued public access and the preservation of ecological integrity. Project Site The project site consists of three contiguous parcels located at 261, 275, and 281 Route 28 in West Yarmouth,with a combined area of approximately 4.5 acres. These parcels include Chase Brook Park and Mill Creek Park,two publicly accessible parks, and the site of the former Yankee Motel, which was demolished in 2019. The properties are bordered to the south by Mill Creek, a tidally influenced waterway, and to the north by state highway Route 28, a major regional thoroughfare. To the east of the site are commercial properties and residential areas lie to the west. Currently, the site features a mix of developed and undeveloped areas, including existing pedestrian walkways,two paved parking lots,a public observation deck, and a timber pier overlook. The walkways and parking lots vary in surface material, with portions of pervious and impervious pavement. State and local wetland resource areas located within the project site include Riverfront Area, Coastal Bank, Salt Marsh, and Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (LSCSF). According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM) (Panel No. 25001C0569J, effective July 16, 2014), the project site is located within Zone AE("Coastal A"Zone_ _ with a base flood elevation(BFE)of 13 feet NAVD88.2 The project site is regulated as LSCSF as it falls within the jurisdictional 100-year coastal flood zone. Mill Creek is situated south of and adjacent to the project site. Two perennial streams drain into Mill Creek from the north: Chase Brook, located between Chase Brook Park and the former Yankee Motel on the western side of the site, and an unnamed stream located east of and next to Mill Creek Park. As shown in the EEA Environmental Justice(EJ)Mapper, the project site is located within or within one mile of nine EJ populations. The site is located within five miles of 21 EJ populations designated Minority, Minority& Income, Minority& English Isolation, and Minority, Income& English Isolation. As described below,the FEIR identified the "Designated Geographic Area"(DGA) 'As further described below,the design of the bridge was revised to incorporate timber piles after the EENF/Proposed EIR Certificate to reflect recommendations of reviewing agencies. 2 According to comments from the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management(CZM),the site is a tidal creek within the park,which is also located in a Coastal A Zone,which is a high-hazard area where 1.5—3 foot waves are predicted to occur. 2 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 for the project as one mile around EJ populations, included a review of potential impacts and benefits to the EJ populations within this DGA, and described public involvement efforts undertaken to date. Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Potential environmental impacts associated with the project include permanent impacts to 11,913 square feet(sf) of LSCSF and 11,821 sf of Riverfront Area. It also includes temporary alteration of 255 linear feet(10 of Coastal Bank; 5,572 sf of Salt Marsh; 131,121 sf of LSCSF; and 129,260 sf of Riverfront Area.3 As noted below,these project impacts differ from those permitted by the Yarmouth Conservation Commission, and should be clarified. Measures to avoid,minimize, and mitigate environmental impacts include the removal of existing paved walkways and the use of stabilized semi-permeable aggregate for the new walkways, removal of invasive species; planting of native drought tolerant coastal grass species, erosion and sedimentation controls during project construction, and the restoration of temporarily disturbed areas following construction. Jurisdiction and Permitting The project is subject to MEPA review because it exceeds the ENF thresholds at 301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)(1)(a): Alteration of coastal dune,barrier beach, or coastal bank, 301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)(1)(e):New fill or structure or Expansion of existing fill or structure,except a pile- supported structure, in a velocity zone or regulatory floodway, and 301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)(1)(f): alteration of%or more acres of any other wetlands. The project is required to prepare an EIR under 301 CMR 11.06(7)(b) of the MEPA regulations because it is located within one mile of one or more of EJ populations. The project will require an Agency Action in the form of a Chapter 91 (c. 91)License from MassDEP. An Order of Conditions (OOC) from the Yarmouth Conservation Commission was issued on January 8,2024, and was not appealed. The project will also require the submittal of a Pre- Construction Notification(PCN)to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)seeking authorization under the General Permit#4 for Structures in Navigable Waters of the U.S. for Massachusetts in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Additionally,the project may require Federal Consistency Review by the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management(CZM). The project will include consultation under 950 CMR 70-71 with the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC). The project is subject to review by the Cape Cod Commission(CCC) as a Development of Regional Impact(DRI)due to its requirement for an EIR under MEPA,given its location within an EJ population. However, because the proposed work has limited impacts, the Proponent plans to seek a DRI Exemption from the CCC upon completing the MEPA review. Because the project is not seeking Financial Assistance from an Agency, MEPA jurisdiction extends to those aspects of the project that are within the subject matter of required or potentially required Permits or within the area subject to a Land Transfer, and that are likely, directly or indirectly, to cause Damage to the Environment. 3 These impacts were updated since the filing of the EENF/Proposed EIR to reflect the changes made to the project design as detailed in the Response to Comments published with the Rollover FEIR. 3 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 Review of the FEIR In accordance with the Certificate issued on the EENF/Proposed EIR, the FEIR included a separate chapter providing a response to comments, additional alternatives analysis,and updated proposed conditions plans and figures for a new preferred pedestrian bridge alternative. The FEIR also included a description of existing conditions, an alternatives analysis,revised existing and proposed conditions plans, estimates of project-related impacts, a stormwater report, and an LMP. The filing identified measures to avoid,minimize and mitigate environmental impacts. It also contained an assessment of the public health impacts of the project and information related to impacts on EJ populations in accordance with 301 CMR 11.06(13). Consistent with the MEPA Interim Protocol on Climate Change Adaptation and Resiliency,the ENF contained an output report from the Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool prepared by the Resilient Massachusetts Action Team(RMAT) (the "MA Resilience Design Tool"),4 together with information on climate resilience strategies to be undertaken by the project. The FEIR included a description of measures taken to enhance public involvement by EJ populations and baseline assessment of any existing unfair or inequitable Environmental Burden and related public health consequences impacting EJ populations in accordance with 301 CMR 11.07(6)(n)(1). It also contains an assessment of the impacts of the project on EJ populations in accordance with 301 CMR 11.07(6)(n)(2) and 301 CMR 11.06(13). On September 5, 2024, the Proponent provided additional information to the MEPA Office, dated September 4, 2024, addressing specific inquiries raised during the August 28, 2024 MEPA remote consultation session for the project. It clarified that there were no permanent Coastal Bank impacts from the pedestrian bridge installation, confirmed the requirement of a Chapter 91 License for tidelands jurisdiction, and explained the applicability of MHC consultation. The document also included technical details regarding the decision to use concrete abutments instead of helical piles to support the pedestrian bridge. Additionally, it addressed the use of coir rolls for stabilization, temporary impacts on Coastal Bank, and design considerations for a boardwalk alternatives and breakaway bridge components. As noted, reviewing agencies previously recommend alternatives to the concrete abutments for the pedestrian bridge to minimize impacts to wetland resource areas. While overall impacts are modest and agencies do not request further EIR review, the Proponent was directed to continue to consider less impactful options, and provide a response to Agency comments. As _ indicated above,the Proponent provided a response that incorporated Agency recommendations into the preferred design. Alternatives Analysis As described below,the FEIR included an Alternatives Analysis that considered a No-Build Alternative, a Land Management and Pedestrian Path Improvements without a Pedestrian Bridge Alternative, a Land Management with a Pedestrian Bridge Alternative(the Preferred Alternative), a Land Management and Pedestrian Bridge in an Alternate Location Alternative, and a Land Management Improvements with Reconstruction of a Timber Pier Alternative. The alternatives analysis considered factors such as the temporary and permanent impacts on environmental resource areas,the feasibility of avoiding or minimizing these impacts, the design life and cost relative to the °https://resilientma.org/rmat home/designstandards/ 4 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29,2024 level of protection, overall project cost, construction logistics, and duration, and other relevant considerations as described below. The No-Build Alternative would leave the site in its current condition and in turn would not combine the properties and the current pathways would stay in the existing conditions and configurations. Additionally, invasive vegetative species at the project site would not be removed. The FEIR further states that leaving the site in its existing condition could result in the existing invasive vegetative species spreading to other properties to the east and west. Without the addition of new accessible walking paths, there would be less continuity between the adjacent parks. Without stabilizing measures proposed, shoreline erosion on Mill Creek Park would continue to occur beneath the existing timber pier potentially leading to structural failure and debris in the resource area. Finally, scenic water views would be obstructed by existing overgrowth. For these reasons,this alternative was dismissed. The Land Management and Pedestrian Path Improvements without a Pedestrian Bridge Alternative consists of ecological site improvements to remove invasive vegetative species and overgrowth,planting of native species to improve the ecological and aesthetic value of the existing park and adding accessible walking paths and seating improvements. This alternative is considered by the Proponent as a possible Preferred Alternative if the financial budget at the time of construction does not allow for additional erosion control to support the restoration of the shoreline described above or the proposed bridge to connect Chase Brook Park with the former Yankee Motel parcel. While this alternative includes basic ecological improvements such as invasive species removal,native planting, and accessible walking paths, it does not incorporate the pedestrian bridge. Without the pedestrian the connection provided by it between the parcels is reduced,and walkers would need to rely on the Route 28 sidewalk to access the entire project site. The Land Management with a Pedestrian Bridge Alternative(Preferred Alternative)consists of the removal of invasive plant species and overgrowth,the planting of native species,additional accessible walking paths, a timber pedestrian bridge, additional seating, and erosion control to establish shoreline vegetation on Mill Creek as described herein. The Land Management and Pedestrian Bridge in an Alternate Location is similar to the Preferred Alternative but with the proposed pathways and bridge set further north away from the mouth of Chase Brook to a location where the crossing distance and distance to the existing path locations at Chase Brook would be shorter. The Proponent dismissed this option because moving the location of the bridge closer to the roadway brings it into a more vegetated area and reduces the area needed to create an Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA)compliant grade walking path to the bridge. The Land Management and Reconstruction of Timber Pier alternative is similar to the Preferred Alternative with the addition of the full reconstruction of the timber pier on the Mill Creek Park lot to extend the life of the pier while allowing construction of the pier to occur along with other construction on the site,reducing the temporary construction impacts to the resource areas and buffer zones. This alternative was deemed infeasible by the Proponent as the existing pier has not reached its useful life and the cost associated with this alternative was determined by the Proponent to not have a beneficial cost to benefit ratio and was dismissed. 5 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 According to the FEIR, the Preferred Alternative integrates the optimal site enhancements to establish a climate-resilient public space along Mill Creek. The FEIR outlines that the stormwater management system via natural on-site infiltration,walkway improvements, and invasive species management will enhance the project site's climate resilience and ecosystem health,while the proposed site design and new amenities will foster inclusive recreational opportunities and promote community well-being in the revitalized open space areas. Supplemental information provided by the Proponent indicates that the proposed bridge design in the Preferred Alternative is designed utilizing concrete abutments with spread footing as the subsurface conditions at the project site were determined by the Proponent to support spread footings. Helical piles were described by the Proponent as not able to support the required vertical and lateral loads and factor of safety required for a span of this size. Further, a clear span bridge resting on traditional concrete abutments was originally selected by the Proponent to better comply with stream crossing standards. While the overall recreational goals of the project are not in question,reviewing agencies previously requested alternatives to minimize the erosion and coastal wetland impacts of the pedestrian bridge. The Proponent was directed in the Certificate for the EENF/Proposed EIR to continue to consider alternatives, such as the use of a pile-supported structure, and respond to agency comments in the next filing. The Proponent indicated that the Land Management and Pedestrian Path Improvements without a Pedestrian Bridge Alternative will be carried through to subsequent permitting as a backup option, in the event full funding is not available. As this alternative would presumably eliminate concerns about the bridge design(since the bridge would not be built), the Proponent was directed to continue to consider whether this alternative should serve as the Preferred Alternative for the project. In response to the Certificate for the EENF/Proposed EIR,the FEIR included an additional Alternatives Analysis that considered four designs for the bridge and approaches as described below. Alternative 1 consists of the EENF/Proposed EIR Preferred Design which includes a conventional concrete spread footing below a concrete abutment that serves the function of holding back the fill material behind the abutment and supporting the bridge structure. Alternative 2 consists of a similar approach to Alternative 1 with the abutment for earth retention on the back side and bridge support,but the abutment was supported on timber piles and a pile cap, eliminating the spread footing and reducing excavation in the wet condition. Alternative 3 (New Preferred Alternative)uses timber piles arranged in rows with caps to support the bridge and raised boardwalk approaches on both sides. Alternative 4 consists of a similar approach to Alternative 3 but utilizes a network of helical piles instead of timber piles. After discussion of these alternatives at a meeting with CZM held on October 4, 2024, the Proponent now proposes Alternative 3 as the New Preferred Alternative. The updated proposed conditions plans detail two rows of timber piles that will support the bridge structure and two rows that will support the approach boardwalks to provide an accessible route to the bridge. This design will provide a reduced permanent footprint in the coastal AE zone which, in turn, is anticipated to reduce the impact of scouring in large tide events. 6 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 Environmental Justice/Public Health As stated above, the project site is located within or within one mile of nine EJ populations designated as Income, Minority, and Minority&Income. The site is located within five miles of 21 EJ populations designated as Minority,Minority&Income,Minority& English Isolation, and Minority, Income&English Isolation. The FEIR identified the DGA for the project as one mile, included a review of potential impacts and benefits to the EJ populations within this DGA, and described public involvement efforts undertaken to date. Languages spoken by 5% or more of residents who identify as not speaking English"very well"located in whole or in part within one mile of the project site include Portuguese or Portuguese Creole. Effective January 1, 2022, all new projects in"Designated Geographic Areas"("DGA,"as defined in 301 CMR 11.02, as amended) around EJ populations are subject to new requirements imposed by the Chapter 8 of the Acts of 2021:An Act Creating a Next-Generation Roadmap for Massachusetts Climate Policy(the"Climate Roadmap Map")and amended MEPA regulations at 301 CMR 11.00. Two related MEPA protocols the MEPA Public Involvement Protocol for Environmental Justice Populations(the"MEPA EJ Public Involvement Protocol")and MEPA Interim Protocol for Analysis of project Impacts on Environmental Justice Populations(the"MEPA Interim Protocol for Analysis of EJ Impacts")—are also in effect for new projects filed on or after January 1, 2022. Under the new regulations and protocols, all projects located in a DGA around one or more EJ populations must take steps to enhance public involvement opportunities for EJ populations,and must submit analysis of impacts to such EJ populations in the form of an EIR. Community Engagement The Proponent provided Advance Notification through the preparation of an EJ Screening Form that was distributed in English, and Portuguese to a list of community-based organizations (CBOs)and tribes/indigenous organizations(the"EJ Reference List") developed by the Proponent from a list provided by the MEPA Office. The EJ Screening Form included contact information to allow interested parties to request a public meeting. The EJ Screening Form and a Community Outreach Flyer translated into both Portuguese and Portuguese Creole were also posted in the municipal offices in Yarmouth and included in the April 2,2024, Yarmouth Selectboard meeting packet. Copies of the Community Outreach flyer was distributed via email on April 3,2024,to all Town of Yarmouth Boards and Committees and local social service agencies, as well as to the Hyannis Park Civic Association via email, and all abutters via USPS mail. Flyers were posted with additional copies made available at the following locations: • West Yarmouth Congregational Church • CCRTA bus stops located at both the Massachusetts State Police Barracks and Yarmouth Gardens Housing Development • South Yarmouth and West Yarmouth Post Offices • West Yarmouth and South Yarmouth Libraries • Yarmouth Senior Center • Yarmouth Chamber of Commerce • South Yarmouth Methodist Church The Community Outreach flyer was made accessible on the Town of Yarmouth's website. The Proponent issued a public notice and conducted a Community Outreach meeting on April 10,2024, at 7 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29,2024 5:30 p.m. at Yarmouth Town Hall to present the proposed project and solicit feedback from community members. Yarmouth Town Hall is conveniently located along a Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority(CCRTA)bus route H2O. The Community Outreach meeting provided information on the project's necessity and benefits, including specifics on project design, location, anticipated schedule, and construction activities, as well as detailed information on the LMP. A Portuguese translator was present at the meeting to assist community members who required translation services. As the project progresses into the construction stages,the Proponent plans to maintain an active and ongoing level of consultation and public outreach, ensuring continued engagement with stakeholders and addressing any concerns in a prompt and responsive manner. As noted in the FEIR,The Proponent is committed to continuing engagement with stakeholders,regulators, and community members through the planning and permitting process. As mentioned above,the Proponent met with CZM on October 4,2024,to discuss several alternatives to the pedestrian bridge design. As a result of that consultation, the Proponent is now proposing a timber pile supported structure. Baseline Assessment and Project Impacts The FEIR contained a baseline assessment of any existing unfair or inequitable Environmental Burden and related public health consequences impacting EJ populations in accordance with 301 CMR 11.07(6)(n)1. and the MEPA Interim Protocol for Analysis of EJ Impacts. According to the FEIR,the data surveyed show some indication of an existing"unfair or inequitable"burden impacting the identified EJ populations. The FEIR notes that the DPH EJ Tool identifies the Town of Yarmouth as exhibiting"vulnerable health EJ criteria" for heart attack;this term is defined in the DPH EJ Tool to include any one of four environmentally related health indicators that are measured to be 110%above statewide rates based on a five-year rolling average.5 In addition,the FEIR indicates that the following sources of potential pollution exist within the identified EJ populations,based on the mapping layers available in the DPH EJ Tool: • Large Quantity Generator: 1 , _ • MassDEP Tier Classified 21E Sites: 1 • MassDEP Tier II Facilities: 4 • MassDEP Sites with Activity and Use Limitations(AUL): 3 • MassDEP Groundwater Discharge Permits: 4 • Underground Storage Tanks: 3 • Regional Transit Agencies: 1 • Road Infrastructure: 1 5 See https://matracking.ehs.state.ma.us/Environmental-Data/ej-vulnerable-health/environmental-justice.html.Four vulnerable health EJ criteria are tracked at the municipal level in the DPH EJ Viewer(heart attack hospitalization, childhood asthma,childhood blood lead,and low birth weight);of these,two(childhood blood lead and low birth weight) are also available at the census tract level. 8 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29,2024 According to the FEIR,the northern abutting property at 280 Route 28 which was impacted by a past release has been closed with a permanent solution, subject to an AUL. Parcels 275 and 281, also impacted by past releases of volatile organic compounds(VOCs)and fuel oil,have also been closed. According to the FEIR,the proposed project is not expected to materially exacerbate environmental burdens for the identified EJ populations and will benefit those populations by improving access to open space and recreational opportunities, including new walkways through wildlife habitats with waterfront views. It will also enhance water quality with the removal of the former motel and associated septic system allowing for the addition of native vegetation. Additionally, the installation of educational, interpretive, and wayfinding signage will provide environmental and cultural information and improve navigation for visitors. Land Alteration and Stormwater The project will alter 0.15 new acres of land by adding pedestrian walkways, seating, and a prefabricated timber bridge. Invasive plants throughout the project site will be removed, and the remaining native plant communities will be augmented and supplemented to create a diverse, aesthetically and ecologically valuable landscape mosaic,with a long-term plan for managing invasive species.As stated in the FEIR,although there will be short-term disturbances to environmental resources during the construction period vegetation clearing,the project is anticipated to provide significant ecological benefits. Proposed walkways will follow most of the existing walkways. Additional walkways will traverse the project site around healthy,mature, native trees to avoid their removal. Soil disturbance will be minimized to only be in necessary areas. Limits of work will be clearly marked as to avoid areas not to be disturbed. The project includes a stormwater management strategy to reduce runoff for both the current 2- year and 10-year storm events and to improve water quality by reducing the existing impervious from 0.106 acres to 0.031 acres by replacing existing impervious paved/brick walkways with semi- permeable stabilized aggregate walkways throughout the site. The system is designed to allow stormwater to naturally infiltrate into the soil,reducing peak discharge rates and enhancing groundwater recharge. The project will also include the removal of invasive species and the restoration of native vegetation, which further supports natural stormwater management and improves the ecological health of the area. According to the FEIR, short-term impacts such as stormwater runoff and dust generation are expected during the construction of the bridge and walkways, and will be mitigated through the implementation of construction-period Best Management Practices (BMPs). Dust will be controlled using sediment and erosion control barriers, and construction related stormwater runoff will be managed with appropriate erosion and sediment controls. Wetlands and Waterways As reported in the FEIR, the project will temporarily alter 255 if of Coastal Bank; 5,572 sf of Salt Marsh; 131,121 sf of LSCSF; and 129,260 sf of Riverfront Area. It will permanently alter 11,913 sf of LSCSF and 11,821 sf of Riverfront Area. Temporary impacts involve the removal of invasive species and the implementation of the LMP, including restoration plantings. Permanent impacts are related to grading for access to the bridge and walking paths. The FEIR notes that erosion along the shoreline of Mill Creek Park near the existing overlook will be mitigated by installing fiber rolls along 9 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 the eroded bank to stabilize the area and reduce erosion while vegetation is established. The fiber roll installation area is approximately 35 sf. Erosion and sedimentation controls will be installed prior to construction, and all temporarily impacted wetland resources areas will be restored. Temporary and permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands will be minimized using erosion and sedimentation controls during construction, and restoration efforts aimed to enhance wetland functions with native vegetation. As noted above,the Yarmouth Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions on January 8, 2024,which was not appealed. However,the Order of Conditions documents different impacts than those listed in the FEIR. This should be clarified in subsequent permitting. The project also includes the removal of invasive plant species and restoring native vegetation, to improve the aesthetic and environmental health of the parklands and support local wildlife. A long- term LMP will be implemented to ensure sustainable management of the parklands and ongoing control of invasive species. Proposed vegetation removal will involve the cut-and-wipe method using an EPA-approved herbicide to minimize soil disturbance and protect nearby native species, which may also be regeneratively pruned if necessary. Japanese knotweed will be treated with an injection method during the first season,while Phragmites reed will be managed through mowing and a bundle-cut-wipe method. Downed coarse woody debris in Chase Brook will be removed and disposed of,but root masses will remain in place.According to the FEIR, the Proponent will obtain a(BRP WM04 License to Apply Herbicides)prior to phragmites treatment from MassDEP. Comments from MassDEP Wetlands on the EENF/Proposed EIR previously acknowledge that the project is expected to improve several wetlands resources on site through the removal of the existing impervious surfaces and invasive species. Comments on the EENF/Proposed EIR previously indicated that replacement of existing impervious paved/brick walkways with stabilized aggregate walkways, and improvement of the plant community in the surrounding vegetated areas including through invasives removal,will reduce the runoff generated on the site and support the health of onsite wetlands, including Salt Marsh,LSCSF, and Buffer Zone. Comments previously received on the EENF/Proposed EIR noted a preference for stabilization and erosion control along the shoreline at Mill Creek Park, and indicated that any materials placed at this location shall have compatible grain size and would be considered nourishment. MassDEP comments on the EENF/Proposed EIR previously indicated, as a general note and for expediency,that the applicant should have initiated the MEPA process with agency comments prior to the Orders of Conditions. Based on the total area of wetland impacts,MassDEP previously indicated that the project would be consistent with an Ecological Restoration Limited Project under wetlands regulations. The Proponent should coordinate with the Yarmouth Conservation Commission on whether an Amended OOC would be required due to any changes made to the project since issuance of the OOC. The FEIR acknowledged this comment and states that the Proponent will continue to coordinate with the Yarmouth Conservation Commission to determine whether an Amended OOC is required or whether the design changes can be handled via an Administrative Approval. Additionally, as noted in the FEIR, the shoreline erosion along Mill Creek Park will be mitigated by the placement of fiber rolls along the scarp to stabilize the area while new vegetation establishes. Updated project drawings included in the FEIR have been revised to remove the proposed toe stone formerly associated with the fiber rolls with coir rolls to provide a softer stabilization material. According to the FEIR,no nourishment is proposed as part of the project. As a result of the New Preferred Alternative,permanent impacts to RFA have been reduced from 12,556 sf to 11,821 sf and permanent impacts to LSCSF have been reduced from 12,647 sf to 11,913 sf. 10 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 The FEIR asserts that the project is expected to have minimal impact on flow paths, as no new vertical structures are proposed apart from the pedestrian bridge, which occupies a small footprint relative to the overall site area. Comments previously received from CZM note that the proposed use of solid concrete abutments for the bridge foundation, as outlined in the supplemental information dated September 4, 2024, was selected to meet stream crossing standards. However, given that the site is located in a Coastal A Zone—a high-hazard area subject to 1.5 to 3-foot waves—there is a potential for scour adjacent to the concrete abutments. CZM recommended that the Proponent consider pile- supported foundation options to minimize the risk of scour in this zone. CZM noted that the pilings do not have to be helical piles, and they do not necessarily need to be restricted to the banks of the steam; driven piles could also work in this location. As described above, the previously proposed concrete abutment design has been replaced with the recommended pile design. Comments previously submitted by the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries(DMF) recommend a time-of-year(TOY)restriction on all herbicide treatments to protect sensitive life stages of river herring,prohibiting treatments in intertidal and wetland areas from April 1 to June 30. Additionally, DMF previously noted that the proposed bridge design over Chase Brook,which crosses fringing marsh, is likely to cause shading of marsh vegetation due to its five-foot width and orientation. To mitigate this impact,DMF suggested applying a height-to-width ratio of 1.5:1 for bridge sections spanning Salt Marsh, as studies show this reduces shading compared to the typical 1:1 ratio.Alternatively,relocating the bridge to sections of Chase Brook with unvegetated gaps in the marsh could further reduce impacts. Comments previously submitted from DMF also supported the spill prevention and control measures outlined in the FEIR, which call for avoiding equipment storage and refueling in jurisdictional areas and ensuring containment measures are in place if refueling on- site. In response to the comments on the EENF/Proposed EIR,the FEIR states that the new preferred alternative design sets the height of the bottom stringer of the bridge deck at approximately 5.5 feet and 7.5 feet above mean high water providing a height-to-width ratio of between 1.1:1 and 1.5:1 depending on the tide. The new preferred alternative was designed in an effort to provide ADA access and limit impacts to the resource areas and will balance the height of the bridge deck and the need to fill LSCSF. Additionally,the FEIR states that herbicide treatment work windows will be performed in accordance with any TOY restrictions as determined by the DMF. Restoration activities will occur during the recommended planting and growing seasons, and the contractor will be required to comply with the spill prevention arid control protocol that is included in the EENF, along with industry-standard practices and best management practices for fueling, servicing and operation in environmentally sensitive areas. As described in the FEIR, the project consists of connecting the existing Chase Brook Park and Mill Creek Park by improving the lots' existing pedestrian walkways and adding new pedestrian walkways and seating on the site at the former Yankee Motel property which resides between them. To increase accessibility and continuity across all three properties, a bridge over Chase Brook will be constructed. The MassDEP Waterways Program(MassDEP Waterways)requires a review and issuance of a Chapter 91 License for any work seaward of the Mean High-Water Line or Historic High Tide Line. The proposed bridge and its supporting abutments fall within the jurisdiction of MassDEP Waterways, and the project must obtain a Chapter 91 License before commencing any work on the bridge. MassDEP's previous comments on the EENF/Proposed EIR indicated that,based on the information contained therein,the Waterways Program determined that the proposed activities would 11 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 be classified as a water-dependent use project pursuant to the Waterways Regulations at 310 CMR 9.12. Public Benefits Determination Consistent with the provisions of An Act Relative to Licensing Requirements for Certain Tidelands(2007 Mass. Acts ch. 168, sec. 8) (the Act),which is now encoded at M.G.L. c. 91, § 18B, I must conduct a Public Benefit Review for projects in tidelands that are required to file an EIR. The legislation states the following regarding the PBD: "In making said public benefit determination,the secretary shall consider the purpose and effect of the development; the impact on abutters and the surrounding community; enhancement to the property;benefits to the public trust rights in tidelands or other associated rights,including,but not limited to,benefits provided through previously obtained municipal permits; community activities on the development site; environmental protection and preservation;public health and safety; and the general welfare; provided further,that the secretary shall also consider the differences between tidelands, landlocked tidelands and great pond lands when assessing the public benefit and shall consider the practical impact of the public benefit on the development." The project is required to prepare an EIR under 301 CMR 11.06(7)(b) of the MEPA regulations because it is located within one mile of one or more of EJ populations. Therefore, I must issue a PBD in accordance with the regulations at 301 CMR 13.00. The FEIR contained information regarding the public benefits associated with the project, which include improved safety and universal access through improvements to deteriorated walkways to waterfront views and recreation opportunities and the preservation and enhancement of natural resources and ecological integrity of the area. Under PBD regulations at 301 CMR 13.00, a water-dependent use is presumed to provide a public benefit. Comments from the MassDEP on the EENF/Proposed EIR included a determination that the proposed activities would be classified as a water-dependent use project pursuant to the Waterways Regulations at 310 CMR 9.12. For this reason for in consideration of the above benefits of the project, I find that the Single EIR has demonstrated that the project will have a public benefit in accordance with M.G.L. c. 91, § 18B and 301 CMR 13.00. Thus, this Single EIR Certificate shall serve as the PBD for this project. Historic and Cultural Resources The FEIR indicates that a structure previously located at 281 Route 28, the Thomas Black House, was listed in the Massachusetts Cultural Resources Inventory System(MACRIS)and the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth but was demolished in 2008 and is unrelated to the current project. The proposed project will not impact any currently listed or inventoried historical or archaeological resources. The Proponent will submit a Project Notification Form (PNF)to the Massachusetts Historical Commission to address potential impacts to historic resources,although no impacts are anticipated. 12 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 Previous comments from CCC on the EENF/Proposed EIR noted that the project proposes to enhance public access to the shore and is unlikely to have negative impacts on cultural resources, consistent with CCC's cultural heritage goal and objectives. Most of the areas where walkways are proposed have been previously developed or disturbed, so there is little likelihood for impacts to archaeological resources. Undisturbed portions of the property, such as near the footings for the proposed pedestrian bridge, could be archaeologically sensitive and should be reviewed by archaeology staff at MHC. Climate Change Adaptation and Resiliency Effective October 1,2021, all MEPA projects are required to submit an output report from the MA Resilience Design Tool to assess the climate risks of the project. Based on the output report attached to the FEIR, the project has a"High"exposure rating based on the project's location for the following climate parameters: sea level rise/storm surge, extreme precipitation(urban flooding), and extreme heat. It also received a"High" Ecosystem Service Benefits score. The Proponent evaluated the proposed bridge. Based on the 40-year useful life and the self-assessed criticality of the pedestrian bridge, the Tool recommends a planning horizon of 2070, and a return period associated with a 100- year(1%chance) storm event when designing the pedestrian bridge component of the project for the extreme precipitation parameter. It also recommends planning for the 50th percentile for applicable extreme heat parameters. The FEIR indicates that the project involves the restoration and revitalization of three open space parcels to enhance public accessibility and includes ecological restoration efforts designed to reduce the exposure to climate hazards through improved stormwater management and flood control. The restoration plans include a diverse mix of native and drought-tolerant species which are described as low maintenance, requiring no fertilizers, less pesticide use, minimal irrigation, and offering greater resilience to storm and flood events compared to the invasive species currently on site. The FEIR states that the total impervious area will decrease as part of the project,with existing impervious paved and brick walkways being replaced by stabilized aggregate walkways. Improvements to the surrounding vegetated areas will reduce site runoff,which will be managed through natural onsite infiltration into vegetated meadow and restored native vegetation areas. The design of the pedestrian bridge incorporates rainfall and storm surge data from the MA Resilience Design Standards Tool,with consideration of the 100-year,24-hour storm event and a projected wave action water surface elevation of 20.4 ft-NAVD88 in 2070.According to the FEIR the bridge is designed to accommodate the 100-year flood elevation and is designed with a 5-foot clearance above Mean High Water(MHW) of 1.32 ft-NAVD88 and approximately 3.5 feet above the High Tide Line (HTL)of 2.74.Additionally, the FEIR notes that the project aligns with the Cape Cod Commission's Cape Cod Climate Action Plan(2021)to promote the protection and restoration of natural ecosystems. Additional correspondence6 previously received from the Proponent described several bridge design options that were considered by the Proponent during the planning phase. To elevate the bridge above the Zone AE BFE of 13ft NAVD88 and comply with accessibility requirements—a key goal of 6 Additional information was provided by Briony Angus of Tighe&Bond in an email to Matthew Sokop,MEPA Analyst, dated August 28,2024.The email included further details on the multiple approaches considered for the bridge design. 13 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 the project—a substantial amount of fill would have been required in LSCSF to adjust the grades on the approaching pathways. A conceptual design was developed for discussion, which indicated that this approach would necessitate 14,835 sf of impact and 1,097 cubic yards(cy) of fill in LSCSF to raise parts of the site by 5 feet. However,the Proponent determined that the required fill would have a more significant negative impact on flood storage capacity than the potential risk of flooding or storm surge to the bridge itself. As a result,the bridge design includes features like breakaway railings to accommodate its location below the Zone AE BFE. The filing notes that the bridge is proposed for pedestrian uses. Comments previously received from the CCC on the EENF/Proposed EIR noted that the Proponent should continue to work with MassDEP, CZM, and the local Conservation Commission to ensure the proposed pedestrian bridge will be designed and constructed to accommodate anticipated sea level rise and minimize the potential for erosion as much as possible while still providing improved year-round access for all users. Greenhouse Gas (GHG)Emissions In accordance with the MEPA Interim Protocol for Analysis of EJ Impacts, a GHG analysis was not required because the project does not exceed mandatory EIR thresholds and is anticipated to generate less than 2,000 tons per year(tpy) of GHG emissions. Specifically,the project does not contain any conditioned spaces and is not expected to generate GHG emissions after construction is complete. Construction Period As described in the FEIR, the anticipated construction period for the project is expected to begin in Summer 2025 and be completed by Fall 2025. Construction contracts will require contractors use measures to reduce potential emissions and minimize impacts from construction vehicles including: • Implementation of construction-period best management practices to minimize and mitigate potential impacts during construction. • Use of on-road low sulfur diesel fuel for construction equipment and strict adherence to Massachusetts anti-idling regulations to limit vehicle idling. • Dust mitigation through the installation of sediment and erosion control barriers,with stormwater runoff managed using similar erosion and sediment control measures. • Temporary construction noise-generating activities will comply with all applicable local and state noise regulations. All construction and demolition activities should be managed in accordance with applicable MassDEP's regulations regarding Air Pollution Control (310 CMR 7.01, 7.09-7.10), and Solid Waste Facilities (310 CMR 16.00 and 310 CMR 19.00, including the waste ban provision at 310 CMR 19.017). The project should include measures to reduce construction period impacts (e.g.,noise, dust, odor, solid waste management) and emissions of air pollutants from equipment, including anti-idling measures in accordance with the Air Quality regulations(310 CMR 7.11). I encourage the Proponent to require that its contractors use construction equipment with engines manufactured to Tier 4 federal emission standards, or select project contractors that have installed retrofit emissions control devices 14 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 or vehicles that use alternative fuels to reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide(CO) and particulate matter(PM) from diesel-powered equipment. Off-road vehicles are required to use ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD). If oil and/or hazardous materials are found during construction,the Proponent should notify MassDEP in accordance with the Massachusetts Contingency Plan(310 CMR 40.00). All construction activities should be undertaken in compliance with the conditions of all State and local permits. I encourage the Proponent to reuse or recycle construction and demolition(C&D)debris to the maximum extent. Mitigation and Section 61 Findings The FEIR includes a separate chapter summarizing proposed mitigation measures and also includes draft Section 61 Findings for each Permit to be issued by Agencies. It contains commitments to implement these mitigation measures,identifies the parties responsible for implementation, and includes a scrtied to for implementation. As described in the FEIR,the Proponent has committed to implement the following measures to avoid, minimize and mitigate Damage to the Environment: Environmental Justice • Project improvements are expected to enhance recreational access and environmental benefits. • Installation of educational signage, accessible pathways, and seating to guide public use and prevent damage to sensitive environmental areas. Land Alteration • Use of semi-permeable surfaces to reduce stormwater runoff and improve infiltration, minimizing environmental impact. • Comprehensive LMP to manage and remove invasive species throughout the project site, followed by the replanting of native species to restore ecological balance. Wetlands& Waterways • Wetland restoration through invasive species removal and replanting with native species. • Stormwater runoff will be directed to vegetated areas and meadows for natural infiltration, reducing the potential for erosion and water pollution. • Strategic placement of pathways and public amenities to concentrate foot traffic and prevent unnecessary disturbance to sensitive areas, including wetlands and wildlife habitats. • Use of fiber rolls (coir rolls)along the shoreline to stabilize banks,prevent erosion, and support the growth of native vegetation. • Increase year-round accessible recreational opportunities that incorporates improved stormwater management, invasive species management, habitat preservation, and wetland restoration. • Preservation and enhancement of natural resources and ecological integrity of the area. • Educational information via interpretive signage to park users on the ecological value of the area. • Use of timber piles in multiple bents(rows)with pile caps to support the bridge and raised boardwalk approaches to reduce impacts to wetland resource areas by minimizing ground disturbance. 15 EEA# 16861 FEIR Certificate November 29, 2024 • Provides a height-to-width ratio of between 1.1:1 and 1.5:1 for the proposed bridge depending on the tide to mitigate shading of marsh vegetation. Climate Change and Resiliency • Reduction of impervious surfaces to manage stormwater naturally and reduce flood risks. • Project designed to withstand climate change impacts, including sea-level rise and extreme weather events, through nature-based solutions and a flood-resilient design. • The placement and elevation of the pedestrian bridge have been planned to account for climate impacts, specifically the 100-year flood elevation. • The bridge design provides 5.5 feet of clearance above Mean High Water(MHW) and approximately 4.0 feet of clearance between the bridge and the High Tide Line(HTL). • The bride is designed to resist buoyancy and have breakaway railings to accommodate high flows, as an alternative to raising the bridge to the Zone AE BFE of 13 feet NAVD88 or the 2070, 100 year(1%return period)projected water surface elevation of 16.4 ft NAVD88 or the project wave action water elevation of 20.4 ft NAVD88 as recommended by the MA Resilience Design Tool. Construction Period • Implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs)to control dust,prevent erosion, and manage noise during construction. • Use of low-sulfur fuel and limited idling to minimize air pollution during construction activities. Conclusion Based on a review of the FEIR, I find that it adequately and properly complies with MEPA and its implementing regulations. No further MEPA review is required, and the project may proceed to permitting. Participating Agencies should forward copies of the final Section 61 Findings to the MEPA Office for publication in accordance with 301 CMR 11.12. _ — November 29, 2024 Date Rebecca L. Tepper Comments received: none RLT/MJS/mj s 16