DOCSLIB.ORG

Marine and Freshwater Beach Testing in Massachusetts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marine and Freshwater Beach Testing in Massachusetts Marine and Freshwater Beach Testing in Massachusetts Annual Report 2004 Season Prepared by Massachusetts Department of Public Health Center for Environmental Health Environmental Toxicology Program June 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 2 A. OVERVIEW ..............................................................................................................2 II. BACKGROUND.................................................................................................... 8 A. INFORMATION ON BEACH WATER QUALITY ...............................................................8 1. Health Effects from Swimming in Marine Waters ........................................................ 8 2. Beach Water Quality Testing Methods - Marine.......................................................... 8 3. Historical and Current Water Quality Criteria - Marine ............................................ 11 4. Health Effects From Swimming in Freshwater ........................................................... 13 5. Beach Water Quality Testing Methods – Freshwater............................................... 13 6. Current Water Quality Criteria – Freshwater............................................................... 14 B. MDPH ACCOMPLISHMENTS - 2004........................................................................15 1. Beaches Website................................................................................................................. 15 2. Beach Mapping Project...................................................................................................... 16 3. Tiered Monitoring - Sanitary Surveys............................................................................ 16 4. Training................................................................................................................................... 17 5. Laboratory Programs.......................................................................................................... 17 6. Press Event ........................................................................................................................... 18 III. METHODS .......................................................................................................... 19 A. SAMPLE COLLECTION............................................................................................19 B. LABORATORY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................20 C. DATA REPORTING .................................................................................................21 D. DATA VALIDATION .................................................................................................21 E. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION ...........................................................................................21 F. LIMITATIONS..........................................................................................................22 IV. RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 24 A. MARINE BEACHES ............................................................................................25 B. FRESHWATER BEACHES .................................................................................26 V. DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 29 A. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS..........................................................................................29 B. FUTURE PLANS .....................................................................................................32 VI. SUMMARY.......................................................................................................... 35 VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................... 36 VIII. REFERENCES.................................................................................................... 37 IX. TABLES .................................................................................................................. 40 X. FIGURES............................................................................................................... 109 XI. APPENDICES ....................................................................................................... 137 A. MASSACHUSETTS STATE REGULATIONS B. GENERAL LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS C. MASSACHUSETTS’ BEACH ACT D. FEDERAL BEACH ACT E. MDPH BEACH SAMPLING FIELD DATA FORM 1 I. INTRODUCTION A. OVERVIEW Massachusetts has an extensive collection of recreational waters, including both freshwater and marine bathing beaches. These beaches serve as recreational resources to the local communities. Bathing beach water quality is an important public health concern, and it is of vital importance to ensure that the beaches meet all current public health standards. Recreational use of waters contaminated with microbial contamination can result in human health problems such as sore throat, gastroenteritis, or even meningitis or encephalitis (Cabelli, 1983; USEPA, 1986; Cabelli, 1989; Haile, 1996; Pruss, 1998). As a result, beach water quality is regulated to protect public health. In Massachusetts, bathing beach water quality is regulated by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) under Massachusetts General Law (MGL) Chapter (C) 111, § Section (S)5 and regulations cited as 105 Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 445.000: Minimum Standards for Bathing Beaches (State Sanitary Code, Chapter VII; Appendix A and B). All public and semi-public (e.g., campgrounds, motels) bathing beaches in Massachusetts must be monitored for bacterial and sometimes other types of contamination during the bathing season. The bathing beach season in Massachusetts runs from as early as Memorial Day in some areas, through Labor Day during most years. Local boards of health (BOH), the Barnstable County Department of Health and the Environment, and the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) conduct the vast majority of beach water sampling in Massachusetts. Most marine beach samples are analyzed at MDPH contracted laboratories. Most freshwater samples are analyzed at private laboratories, while some are analyzed at municipal facilities. Bathing water samples that are found to contain levels of bacterial contamination in excess of regulatory standards are termed exceedances. If water samples from a beach are found to be in exceedance of regulatory standards, the beach must be posted as unsafe for swimming due to bacterial contamination. The general public is notified via signs posted at access points to a beach indicating the beach posting. For marine 2 beaches, the general public is also notified via the MDPH website, which is operated in collaboration with local health officials and MDPH contract laboratories. Local health officials and MDPH contract laboratories collect and analyze the samples and perform a majority of the data entry onto the website. MDPH is notified of exceedences within 24 hours (105 CMR 445.040). These beaches are to remain posted until the levels of bacterial contamination lower to safe levels, at which point the postings can be removed, and the MDPH is notified of the beach opening. The Massachusetts Beaches Act (Appendix C) was passed in 2000, requiring all public and semi-public beaches to be tested weekly during beach season using standard indicators. In 2000, the U.S. Congress enacted the Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act that amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act, or CWA) to improve the quality of coastal recreational waters (Appendix D). The BEACH Act seeks to reduce the risk of disease to users of the Nation’s marine recreational waters through the identification of high-risk beaches, identification and mitigation of sources of pollution, and notification/risk communication to the public. It also authorizes grants to eligible states to support these objectives. Since late 2001, MDPH has received funding from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) that partially supports MDPH efforts to (1) develop and maintain an inventory of marine bathing beaches, (2) compile and analyze monitoring data, and (3) to conduct assessments of those beaches identified as high-risk. Based on work through the MDPH Beaches Project, MDPH has been able to make several major accomplishments in support of these goals: Bathing Beaches Inventory Prior to 2001, MDPH conducted a survey of Massachusetts municipalities in order to initiate the establishment of an inventory of all public and semi-public marine and freshwater beaches. Through the collection of beach water data and contacts with local boards of health, beach managers, and others, MDPH has been able to develop an inventory of over 500 marine public and semi-public beaches and over 600 freshwater public and semi-public beaches. 3 Bathing Beaches Mapping Project In 2003, a detailed geographic information system (GIS) layer for Massachusetts marine bathing beaches was developed by MDPH with assistance from Applied Geographics, Inc. (AGI), and with considerable information from local health officials. State health officials, working with local health officials, identified the locations and specific boundaries of each known beach, the designations of each beach – public or semi-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Massachusetts Commercial Fishing Port Profiles
    MASSACHUSETTS COMMERCIAL FISHING PORT PROFILES The Massachusetts Commercial Fishing Port Profiles were developed through a collaboration between the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, the University of Massachusetts Boston’s Urban Harbors Institute, and the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance. Using data from commercial regional permits, the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program’s (ACCSP) Standard Atlantic Fisheries Information System (SAFIS) Dealer Database, and harbormaster and fishermen surveys, these profiles provide an overview of the commercial fishing activity and infrastructure within each municipality. The Port Profiles are part of a larger report which describes the status of the Commonwealth’s commercial fishing and port infrastructure, as well as how profile data can inform policy, programming, funding, infrastructure improvements, and other important industry- related decisions. For the full report, visit the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries website. Key Terms: Permitted Harvesters: Commercially permitted harvesters residing in the municipality Vessels: Commercially permitted vessels with the municipality listed as the homeport Trips: Discrete commercial trips unloading fish or shellfish in this municipality Active Permitted Harvesters: Commercially permitted harvesters with at least one reported trans- action in a given year Active Dealers: Permitted dealers with at least one reported purchase from a harvester in a given year Ex-Vessel Value: Total amount ($) paid directly to permitted harvesters by dealers at the first point of sale file Port Port SCITUATE Pro Located on the South Shore, Scituate has three harbors: Scituate, North River, and South River- Humarock. Permitted commercial fisheries, which may or may not be active during the survey period, include: Lobster Pot, Dragger, Gillnetter, Clam Dredge, Scallop Dredge, Rod & Reel, For Hire/ Charter.
    [Show full text]
  • English Settlement Before the Mayhews: the “Pease Tradition”
    151 Lagoon Pond Road Vineyard Haven, MA 02568 Formerly MVMUSEUM The Dukes County Intelligencer NOVEMBER 2018 VOLUME 59 Quarterly NO. 4 Martha’s Vineyard Museum’s Journal of Island History MVMUSEUM.ORG English settlement before the Mayhews: Edgartown The “Pease Tradition” from the Sea Revisited View from the deck of a sailing ship in Nantucket Sound, looking south toward Edgartown, around the American Revolution. The land would have looked much the same to the first English settlers in the early 1600s (from The Atlantic Neptune, 1777). On the Cover: A modern replica of the Godspeed, a typical English merchant sailing ship from the early 1600s (photo by Trader Doc Hogan). Also in this Issue: Place Names and Hidden Histories MVMUSEUM.ORG MVMUSEUM Cover, Vol. 59 No. 4.indd 1 1/23/19 8:19:04 AM MVM Membership Categories Details at mvmuseum.org/membership Basic ..............................................$55 Partner ........................................$150 Sustainer .....................................$250 Patron ..........................................$500 Benefactor................................$1,000 Basic membership includes one adult; higher levels include two adults. All levels include children through age 18. Full-time Island residents are eligible for discounted membership rates. Contact Teresa Kruszewski at 508-627-4441 x117. Traces Some past events offer the historians who study them an embarrassment of riches. The archives of a successful company or an influential US president can easily fill a building, and distilling them into an authoritative book can consume decades. Other events leave behind only the barest traces—scraps and fragments of records, fleeting references by contemporary observers, and shadows thrown on other events of the time—and can be reconstructed only with the aid of inference, imagination, and ingenuity.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Michael Graikoski and Porter Hoagland1 I. Introduction Along The
    COMPARING POLICIES FOR ENCOURAGING RETREAT FROM THE MASSACHUSETTS COAST Michael Graikoski and Porter Hoagland1 I. Introduction Along the US Atlantic coast, the lands and infrastructure located on barrier islands and beaches and in backbay estuarine environments face mounting threats from king tides, storm surges, and sea-level rise.2 From the late 19th century to the present, sea-level rise on the United States’ Atlantic coast has been more rapid than any other century-scale increase over the last 2000 years.3 Even slight increases in sea-level rise now have been hypothesized to significantly increase the risks of coastal flooding in many places.4 In New England, some of the most severe northeast storms (“nor’easters”) have become notorious for consequent extreme losses of coastal properties. Some 1 Michael Graikoski, Guest Student, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution & Porter Hoagland, Senior Research Specialist, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. This article was prepared under award number NA10OAR4170083 (WHOI Sea Grant Omnibus) from the US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Northeast Regional Sea Grant Consortium project 2014-R/P-NERR- 14-1-REG); award number AGS-1518503 from the US National Science Foundation (Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems [CNH]); award number OCE-1333826 from the US National Science Foundation (Science and Engineering for Sustainability [SEES]) to the Virginia Institute of Marine Science; and with support from the J. Seward Johnson Fund in Support of the Marine Policy Center. The authors thank Chris Hein, John Duff, Di Jin, Peter Rosen, Andy Fallon, Billy Phalen, and Sarah Ertle for helpful insights and suggestions and Jun Qiu for help with the map of Plum Island in Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vision for Scituate's Coast in 2070
    AUGUST 2020 A Vision for Scituate’s Coast in 2070 1 APhoto Vision courtesy for Scituate’sof Theresa O’Connor, Coast in Flickr. 2070 | August 2020 Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................... 2 Ten-year Action Plan ................................................... 36 Acknowledgments ......................................................... 3 Priorities and Wrestling With Trade-offs to Achieve a Resilient Future .................................... 37 Executive Summary ..................................... 4 Overarching Considerations ...................................... 37 Key components of the community’s vision Impermanence ........................................................ 37 for Scituate’s coast in 2070 ......................................... 6 Coastal Connectivity .............................................. 38 The Vision: A Vibrant and Prioritizing Beaches ............................................... 38 Resilient Coast .............................................. 8 The Harbor ................................................................ 41 Coastal Risks .............................................. 12 Zoning ....................................................................... 42 Utilities ...................................................................... 42 Issues to Plan For .......................................................... 14 Managed Retreat .................................................... 43 Beach Erosion .........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NSRWA October 01 Newsletter
    RiverWaAptril 200c8 h therivershed.org THE NORTH AND SOUTH RIVERS WATERSHED ASSOCIATION, INC. Looking Back and Looking Forward nnual report time is a great time to take stock of NSRWA’s many ac- complishments during 2007. With a small staff, a cadre of loyal volun- Here are some resolutions from some of teers, and an active, engaged board, we were able to see many projects our more prominent watershed citizens: come to fruition and many goals fulfilled. Some highlights: Kezia Bacon Bernstein, Mari- A• The opening of 50 more acres of clam flats in the North River; ner Newspapers Correspon- • The completion of an interactive Herring Kiosk for display at area libraries; dent - “This year I am trying to • Started the process for designation of a No Discharge Zone for the coastal waters be more vigilant about reducing of Marshfield, Scituate and Cohasset - including the North and South Rivers; and my use of plastic grocery bags. I • Successfully advocated for a condition to be placed on Scituate’s Water keep a mesh shopping bag in my Withdrawal Permit that requires the town to investigate restoring flows to sup- car at all times, and bring mesh port the herring run on First Herring Brook. and canvas bags along with me to the grocery store. The next step will be to use We added new events like our Cranberry Harvest Walk, the North to South these reusable shopping bags in places other than River Paddle, and Rivershed Jeopardy; saw signs installed to denote the Third Her- the grocery store.” ring Brook; installed more rain gardens in the watershed and on the South Shore; and continued to provide input on local and state permit processes for decreasing Representative Frank Hynes, impacts to the watershed from significant development projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Return of Organization Exempt from Income
    r Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax Form 990 527, or 4947(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (except black lung Under section 501(c), LOOL benefit trust or private foundation) Department or me Ti2asury Internal Revenue Service 1 The organization may have to use a copy of this return to satisfy state reporting requirements A For the 2002 calendar year, or tax year period beginning APR 1 2002 and i MAR 31, 2003 B Check if Please C Name of organization D Employer identification number use IRS nddmss label or [::]change print or HE TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS 04-2105780 ~changa s~ Number and street (or P.0 box if mad is not delivered to street address) Room/suite E Telephone number =Initial return sPecisc572 ESSEX STREET 978 921-1944 Final = City or town, state or country, and ZIP +4 F Pccoun6npmethad 0 Cash [K] Accrual return Other =Amended~'d~° [BEVERLY , MA 01915 licatio" ~ o S ~~ . El Section 501(c)(3) organizations and 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trusts H and I are not applicable to section 527 organizations. :'dl°° must attach a completed Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) . H(a) Is this a group retain for affiliates ~ Yes OX No G web site: OWW " THETRUSTEES . ORG H(b) It 'Yes,' enter number of affiliates 10, J Organization type (cnakonly one) " OX 501(c) ( 3 ) 1 (Insert no) = 4947(a)(1) or = 52 H(c) Are all affiliates inciuded9 N/A 0 Yes 0 No (If -NO,- attach a list ) K Check here " 0 if the organization's gross receipts are normally not more than $25,000 .
    [Show full text]
  • YAS 1 Blue 2018 PROGRAM GUIDE
    YAS 1 Blue 2018 PROGRAM GUIDE Camp Check in: June 24, 12:00pm Camp Check out: July 21, 12:00pm TRAVEL AND SERVICE PROGRAMS LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT SERVICE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 3 2018 TSP CALENDER ................................................................................... 3 ABOUT TSP ...................................................................................................... 3 Program Goals ............................................................................................ 4 PARTICIPANT ARRIVAL & DEPARTURE ................................................. 4 About Check Ins ........................................................................................ 5 About Check Outs ..................................................................................... 5 TRANSPORTATION TO CAMP .................................................................... 5 TUITION INFORMATION ............................................................................. 5 Cancellation Policy .................................................................................... 6 SPENDING MONEY ........................................................................................ 6 PARENT/PARTICIPANT WEBINAR ............................................................ 6 TSP TRIP LEADERS ....................................................................................... 6 PROGRAM SAFETY .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cape Poge Wildlife Refuge, Leland Beach, Wasque Point, and Norton Point Beach Edgartown
    Impact Avoidance and Minimization Plan: Cape Poge Wildlife Refuge, Leland Beach, Wasque Point, and Norton Point Beach Edgartown, Martha’s Vineyard January 2020 The Trustees of Reservations 200 High Street Boston, MA 02110 Table of Contents 1. Site Description 1.a Maps……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.b Description of site…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3 1.c habitat and management………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 1.d Plover breeding a productivity………………………………………………………..…………………….. 6 2. Responsible Staff 2.a Staff biographies……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 3. Beach Management 3.a.i Recreational Activities………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 3.a.ii Parking and Roads……………………………………………………………………………………….……. 9 3.a.iii Beach cleaning and refuse management…………………………………..……………………. 10 3.a.iv Rules and regulations…………………………………………………………………………….……….... 10 3.a.v Law enforcement…………………………………………………………………………….………………… 10 3.a.vi Other management……………………………………………………………………………………………. 10 3.a.vi Piping plover management……………………………………………………………………………….. 10 4. Covered Activities 4.1.a OSV use in vicinity of piping plover chicks…………………………………………………………….. 12 4.1.b Reduced symbolic fencing……………………………………………………………………………………. 15 4.1.c Reduced proactive symbolic fencing……………………………………………………………………… 16 4.2 Contingency Plan…………………………………………………………………………………….……………. 18 4.3 Violations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18 4.4 Self-escort program reporting………………………………………………………………………………… 18 5. Budget………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Freshwater Beaches [2018]: Water Quality Data for Public and Semi-Public Beaches
    Massachusetts Freshwater Beaches [2018]: Water quality data for public and semi-public beaches The table below summarizes testing and posting information for each freshwater beach in Massachusetts. Under the state regulations, freshwater beaches must test for either E. coli or Enterococci. Most beaches do not have to post after each exceedance, provided that (1) they take an immediate resample and (2) that resample does not exceed the standard. Thus, a beach may have an exceedance but no days posted. Conversely, a beach may have days posted, but no exceedances, if it was posted for a reason other than a bacterial exceedance (e.g. rainfall, a cyanobacterial harmful algae bloom, or another hazard such as limited visibility due to poor water clarity). Single Minimum Maximum Testing Days Community Beach Name Tests Indicator Sample Exceedance Exceedance Frequency Posted Exceedances (cfu/100mL) (cfu/100mL) Abington Island Grove Beach Weekly 12 E. coli 3 236 312 3 Acton NARA Beach Weekly 16 E. coli Agawam Robinson Pond Beach (DCR) Weekly 15 Enterococci Amesbury Camp Bauercrest Weekly 10 E. coli Amesbury Glen Devin Condominiums Weekly 11 E. coli 2 261 1553 14 Amesbury Lake Attitash - A.L.S.I.A. Weekly 11 E. coli Amesbury Lake Gardner Weekly 11 E. coli 1 261 261 7 Amesbury Tuxbury RV Resort Lagoon Weekly 11 E. coli Amherst Puffers Pond (North) Weekly 17 E. coli 4 240 1986.3 8 Amherst Puffers Pond (South) Weekly 18 E. coli 4 285.1 1986.3 8 Andover Camp Maude Eaton (1) Weekly 11 E. Coli Andover Camp Maude Eaton (2) Weekly 11 E.
    [Show full text]
  • GO Pass User Benefits at Trustees Properties with an Admission Fee
    GO Pass User Benefits at Trustees Properties with an Admission Fee Trustees Property Non-Member Admission Member Admission GO Pass Admission Appleton Grass Rides $5 Parking Kiosk Free $5 Parking Kiosk Ashley House $5 House Tour/Grounds Free Free Free Bartholomew’s Cobble $5 Adult/ $1 Child (6-12) + $5 Free Free + $5 Parking Kiosk Parking Kiosk Bryant Homestead $5 General House Tour Free Free Cape Poge $5 Adult/ Child 15 and under free Free Free Castle Hill* $10 Grounds + Tour Admission Grounds Free/Discounted Tours Grounds Free/ Discounted Tours Chesterfield Gorge $2 Free Free Crane Beach* Price per car/varies by season Up to 50% discounted admission Up to 50% discounted admission Fruitlands Museum $14 Adult/Child $6 Free Free Halibut Point $5 Parking w/MA plate per DCR Free (display card on dash) $5 Parking w/MA plate per DCR Little Tom Mountain $5 Parking w/MA plate per DCR $5 Parking w/MA plate per DCR $5 Parking w/MA plate per DCR Long Point Beach $10 Per Car + $5 Per Adult Free Admission + 50% off Parking Free Admission + 50% off Parking Misery Island – June thru Labor $5 Adult/ $3 Child Free Free Day Mission House $5 Free Free Monument Mountain $5 Parking Kiosk Free $5 Parking Kiosk Naumkeag $15 Adult (age 15+) Free Free Notchview – on season skiing $15 Adult/ $6 Child (6-12) Wknd: $8 A/ $3 C | Wkdy: Free Wknd: $8 A/ $3 C | Wkdy: Free Old Manse $10 A/ $5 C/ $9 SR+ST/ $25 Family Free Free Rocky Woods $5 Parking Kiosk Free $5 Parking Kiosk Ward Reservation $5 Parking Kiosk Free $5 Parking Kiosk Wasque – Memorial to Columbus $5 Parking + $5 Per Person Free Free World’s End $6 Free Free *See separate pricing sheets for detailed pricing structure .
    [Show full text]
  • Birdobserver7.2 Page52-60 a Guide to Birding on Martha's
    A GUIDE TO BIRDING ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD Richard M. Sargent, Montclair, New Jersey A total of 35T species have been recorded on Martha’s Vineyard, This represents 85 per cent of all the hirds recorded in the state of Massa- chusetts, Prohably the Most faMous of theM, excluding the now extinct Heath Hen, was the Eurasian Curlew, first identified on February I8, 1978» and subsequently seen by several hundred birders during the Month that it reMained "on location." Of the 357 species, approxiMately 275 are regular, occuring annually. The variety of species present and the overall charM of the Vineyard Make it a fun place to bird. The Island is reached by ferry froM Woods Hole and if you plan to tahe your car it is very advisable, if not a necessity, to Make advance res- ervations with the SteaMship Authority for both in-season and out-of~ season trips. And heré a note of caution: Much of the property around the ponds and access to Many of the back areas is private property and posted. The areas discussed in this article are open to the public and offer a good cross-section of Vineyard birding areas. If there are private areas you want to cover, be sure to obtain perMission before entering them. The Vineyard is roughly triangular in shape with the base of the triangle twenty Miles, east to west, and the height, north to south, ten Miles. It is of glacial origin with Much of the north shore hilly and forMed by glacial Morain. To the south there are broad, fíat outwash plains cut by Many fresh water or brackish ponds separated froM the ocean by bar- rier beaches, Probably the best tiMe to bird the Vineyard is the Month of SepteMber.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vision for Scituate's Coast in 2070
    A Vision for Scituate’s Coast in 2070 Draft for public review - July 2, 2020 1 DRAFT: Scituate 2070 Vision Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 The Vision: A Vibrant and Resilient Coast 7 Coastal Risks 11 Issues to Plan For 11 Beach erosion 11 Storm Impacts 14 Sea Level Rise 16 Property Damage 18 Critical Infrastructure 20 Implementation Considerations 21 Understand Resilience Strategies 22 Accommodate 22 Defend 23 Move 25 No intervention 26 Review and build on existing studies/plans 27 Ten-year action plan 29 Priorities and wrestling with trade-offs to achieve a resilient future 29 Impermanence 30 Coastal Connectivity 30 Prioritizing beaches 30 Community Support 31 Funding 32 Regulations 32 The Harbor 33 Zoning 34 Utilities 35 Managed Retreat 35 Coastal Community Character 36 Appendices 38 2 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT JULY 2020 Appendix A: Glossary of key terms 38 Appendix B: Community Engagement Process 39 Appendix C: Relevant land use regulations from other municipalities 44 3 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT JULY 2020 Acknowledgements Thank you to all Scituate residents who participated in this process and shared their input in any form to help shape this vision, particularly those who opened their homes to host and invited friends to a Neighborhood Gathering. Thank you to the Scituate Coastal Advisory Commission, especially the Chair, Louise Pfund Villani, for providing key insights and on-the-ground partnership to spread the word about the vision process through the Commission’s networks. This vision is the result of the shared efforts of a large project team: Kyle Boyd, the Town of Scituate Coastal Management Officer; John Ramsey, Principal Coastal Engineer and Morgan Simms, Coastal Scientist of Applied Coastal Research and Engineering; Josh Fiala, Principal Planner and Darci Schofield, Senior Environmental Planner of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council; Barbara Landau, Noble, Wickersham and Heart, LLP.
    [Show full text]