DOCSLIB.ORG

High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA: a Resource for Assessing Risk and Improving Resiliency

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA: a Resource for Assessing Risk and Improving Resiliency High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA: A Resource for Assessing Risk and Improving Resiliency Franklin Regional Council of Governments September 2018 Notice of Nondiscrimination Rights and Protections to Beneficiaries Federal “Title VI/Nondiscrimination” Protections The Franklin Regional Council of Governments (FRCOG) operates its programs, services, and activities in compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, and related statutes and regulations. Title VI prohibits discrimination in federally assisted programs and requires that no person in the United States of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin (including limited English proficiency), be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal assistance. Related federal nondiscrimination laws administrated by the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, or both prohibit discrimination on the basis of age, sex, and disability. These protected categories are contemplated within FRCOG’s Title VI Programs consistent with federal interpretation and administration. Additionally, FRCOG provides meaningful access to its programs, services, and activities to individuals with limited English proficiency, in compliance with U.S. Department of Transportation policy and guidance on federal Executive Order 13166. State Nondiscrimination Protections FRCOG also complies with the Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law, M.G.L c 272 §§ 92a, 98, 98a, prohibiting making any distinction, discrimination, or restriction in admission to or treatment in a place of public accommodation based on race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability, or ancestry. Likewise, FRCOG complies with the Governor’s Executive Order 526, section 4 requiring all programs, activities, and services provided, performed, licensed, chartered, funded, regulated, or contracted for by the state shall be conducted without unlawful discrimination based on race, color, age, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, religion, creed, ancestry, national origin, disability, veteran’s status (including Vietnam-era veterans), or background. If you need help understanding this document because you do not speak English or have a disability which impacts your ability to read the text, please contact FRCOG’s Title VI Specialist at (413) 774-3167 (voice) (MA Relay System: 800-439-2370), 413- 774-3169 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail). If you believe that you or anyone in a specific class of persons has been subjected to discrimination prohibited by Title VI and other nondiscrimination laws based on race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, or gender, you or your representative may file a complaint with the FRCOG, which we can help complete. A complaint must be filed no later than 180 days after the date of the alleged discrimination for Title VI complaints and no later than 300 days for state protected category complaints. If you High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA September 2018 i require further information, please contact FRCOG’s Title VI Specialist at (413) 774-3167 (voice) (MA Relay System: 800-439- 2370), 413-774-3169 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail). English: If this information is needed in another language, please contact the FRCOG Title VI Specialist at (413) 774-3167. Spanish: Si necesita esta información en otro idioma, por favor contacte al especialista de FRCOG del Título VI al (413)774- 3167. Russian: Если Вам необходима данная информация на любом другом языке, пожалуйста, свяжитесь со cпециалистом по Титулу VI FRCOG по тел: (413) 774-3167. High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA September 2018 ii Table of Contents Introduction and Project Background……………………………………………………………… 1 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2 Massachusetts Stream Crossing Standards………………………………………………………. 2 High Risk Crossing Tables…………………………………………………………………………………. 3 High Risk Crossing Map……………………………………………………………………………………. 14 Instructions for Using Stream Crossing Data Tools…………………………………………… 15 Funding Opportunities for Upgrading Stream Crossings…………………………………… 24 High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA September 2018 iii Introduction and Project Background This report provides a summary of the road-stream crossings (culverts and bridges) in the Town of Ashfield that are considered to be at high risk of failure from heavy precipitation events. The purpose of this project is to FIGURE 1 help municipal officials and public works staff prioritize bridge and culvert upgrades in their towns. This report also provides information on how to make road-stream upgrades more resilient to current and projected precipitation conditions. Roads, bridges, and culverts in the Deerfield River Watershed are particularly vulnerable to flooding, as Tropical Storm Irene demonstrated in 2011. Events like Tropical Storm Irene are projected to become more frequent due to climate change. Upgrading and replacing culverts and bridges with structures that can withstand higher flows will save money over the long term, help protect critical infrastructure, and improve aquatic habitat in the watershed. The information in this report comes from a pilot project completed by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst (UMass). The intent of the project was to develop a methodology for determining the vulnerability of inland transportation networks to climate change, and specifically, to extreme precipitation events. The analysis identified and mapped road-stream Figure 1: The MassDOT project considered five factors crossings in each town within the Deerfield River Watershed. Over 900 when determining overall vulnerability of a crossing: crossings were evaluated through field work completed by Trout structural condition; geomorphic condition; hydraulic Unlimited. The analysis looked at five factors (Figure 1) when considering condition; disruption of emergency response; and the vulnerability of a crossing. An interactive online tool, SHEDS: Stream potential to improve aquatic organism passage. Image Crossing Explorer,1 was created showing the results of the evaluations, and source: UMass Amherst is described in more detail on pages 18 to 23. 1 http://sce.ecosheds.org/ High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA September 2018 1 Definitions For the purpose of this report, the crossings identified as having a high Overall Risk of Failure in the SHEDS tool have been included. These crossings are vulnerable due to one or more of the following factors: Structural Condition – Risk of failure is based on the structural condition of the crossing. Data comes from MassDOT bridge inspection reports or culvert condition assessments conducted in the field by Trout Unlimited or UMass Amherst students. Hydraulic Risk – Risk of failure is based on how much water a crossing can handle before collapsing, overtopping, or washing out. Hydraulic Risk was determined through models of current and future stream flows for different storm events. Geomorphic Risk – Risk of failure is based on the likelihood of sediment plugging, woody debris, and channel adjustment at the crossing structure. A geomorphic scoring index was used to assess each crossing for structural alignment, structure width versus stream channel width, stream power versus substrate type, evidence of deposition or erosion, condition of the structure’s footings, existence of a scour pool, and existing blockage. Massachusetts Stream Crossing Standards The Massachusetts Stream Crossing Standards2 apply to all new permanent crossings, and to replacement crossings to the extent feasible. The standards were created to protect and improve stream health by designing culverts and bridges to accommodate fish and wildlife passage. Common problems for fish and wildlife passage at crossings (Figure 2) also tend to place these crossings at a higher risk for failure during a flood event. While the standards focus on improving river and stream ecosystems, designing crossings with rivers in mind also makes those structures more resilient to flooding, allowing for larger volumes of water and debris to safely pass through. The Stream Crossing Standards establish minimum criteria necessary for fish and wildlife movement and to maintain stream continuity (Figure 3). Further engineering is required to determine appropriate size and design to provide adequate flood capacity and stability. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) updated its Design of Bridges and Culverts for Wildlife 2 https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/08/23/Stream%20Crossings%20booklet%20Web.pdf High Risk Stream Crossings in Ashfield, MA September 2018 2 FIGURE 2 Passages at Freshwater Streams3 to incorporate the most recent Stream Crossing Standards and to provide design templates and guidance for municipal officials. The new guidance document is expected to be available in January 2019. High Risk Crossing Tables The following tables display the high risk road- stream crossings in Ashfield. Each crossing has a Map ID that corresponds to a number on the High Risk Crossing Map. The Crossing ID for each entry was used to download data from two sources: the SHEDS Stream Crossing Explorer tool (data source for Overall Risk of Failure assessment), and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DCR's Beaver Brook Reservation
    Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation Bureau of Planning and Resource Protection Resource Management Planning Program RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN DCR’s Beaver Brook Reservation Historic Beaver Brook Reservation and Beaver Brook North Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts March 2010 DCR’s Beaver Brook Reservation Historic Beaver Brook Reservation and Beaver Brook North Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010 Deval L. Patrick, Governor Timothy P. Murray, Lt. Governor Ian A. Bowles, Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr., Commissioner Jack Murray, Deputy Commissioner for Parks Operations The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), an agency of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, oversees 450,000 acres of parks and forests, beaches, bike trails, watersheds, dams, and parkways. Led by Commissioner Richard K. Sullivan Jr., the agency’s mission is to protect, promote, and enhance our common wealth of natural, cultural, and recreational resources. To learn more about DCR, our facilities, and our programs, please visit www.mass.gov/dcr. Contact us at [email protected]. Printed on Recycled Paper RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Expanded Beaver Brook Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1 Planning Process 2 Distinctive Characteristics of the Expanded Reservation 2 Priority Findings 3 Recommendations 5 Capital Improvements 7 Land Stewardship Zoning Guidelines 9 Management
    [Show full text]
  • COMMONWEALTH of MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, Ss
    COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss SUPERIOR COURT _________________________________________ ) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, ) ) STATEMENT OF Plaintiff, ) INTEREST BY THE ) UNITED STATES v. ) ) PENNSYLVANIA HIGHER EDUCATION ) Case No. 1784CV02682 ASSISTANCE AGENCY, ) d/b/a FedLoan Servicing, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) INTRODUCTION The United States respectfully submits this brief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 517.1 The United States has a substantial interest in, and a long history of, developing programs to help students access postsecondary education. For decades, the United States has sought to increase access to higher education by serving as a reinsurer and guarantor of private loans, serving as the sole originator and holder of Direct Loans, and also establishing a variety of other federal programs to aid students. Here, Massachusetts alleges that the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA), an entity that contracts with the Federal Government to service federal loans, has violated state and federal consumer protection laws. As relevant here, Massachusetts alleges that PHEAA wrongfully failed to count periods of forbearance for borrowers to satisfy the requirements of certain loan forgiveness programs, that PHEAA 1 “The Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States, or in a court of a State, or to attend to any other interest of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 517. wrongfully converted the grants of participants who had not filed the correct documentation for loans as required by the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program, and that PHEAA wrongfully allocated certain overpayments to interest and fees.
    [Show full text]
  • Walden Pond R O Oa W R D L Oreau’S O R Ty I a K N N U 226 O
    TO MBTA FITCHBURG COMMUTER LINE ROUTE 495, ACTON h Fire d Sout Road North T 147 Fire Roa th Fir idge r Pa e e R a 167 Pond I R Pin i c o l Long Cove e ad F N Ice Fort Cove o or rt th Cove Roa Heywood’s Meadow d FIELD 187 l i Path ail Lo a w r Tr op r do e T a k e s h r F M E e t k a s a Heyw ’s E 187 i P 187 ood 206 r h d n a a w 167 o v o e T R n H e y t e v B 187 2 y n o a 167 w a 187 C y o h Little Cove t o R S r 167 d o o ’ H s F a e d m th M e loc Pa k 270 80 c e 100 I B a E e m a d 40 n W C Baker Bridge Road o EMERSON’S e Concord Road r o w s 60 F a n CLIFF i o e t c e R n l o 206 265 d r r o ’s 20 d t a o F d C Walden Pond R o oa w R d l oreau’s o r ty i a k n n u 226 o 246 Cove d C T d F Ol r o a O r i k l l d C 187 o h n h t THOREAU t c 187 a a HOUSE SITE o P P Wyman 167 r ORIGINAL d d 167 R l n e Meadow i o d ra P g .
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Population Sampling
    2005 Deerfield River Watershed Fish Population Assessment Robert J. Maietta Watershed Planning Program Worcester, MA January, 2007 CN: 223.4 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Arleen O’Donnell, Acting Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director Introduction Fish population surveys were conducted in the Deerfield River Watershed during the late summer of 2005 using techniques similar to Rapid Bioassessment Protocol V as described originally by Plafkin et al.(1989) and later by Barbour et al. (1999). Standard Operating Procedures are described in MassDEP Method CN 075.1 Fish Population SOP. Surveys also included a habitat assessment component modified from that described in the aforementioned document (Barbour et al. 1999). Fish populations were sampled by electrofishing using a Smith Root Model 12 battery powered backpack electrofisher. A reach of between 80m and 100m was sampled by passing a pole mounted anode ring, side to side through the stream channel and in and around likely fish holding cover. All fish shocked were netted and held in buckets. Sampling proceeded from an obstruction or constriction, upstream to an endpoint at another obstruction or constriction such as a waterfall or shallow riffle. Following completion of a sampling run, all fish were identified to species, measured, and released. Results of the fish population surveys can be found in Table 1. It should be noted that young of the year (yoy) fish from most species, with the exception of salmonids are not targeted for collection. Young-of-the-year fishes which are collected, either on purpose or inadvertently, are noted in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Earned Sick Time Faqs
    Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office – Earned Sick Time FAQs Earned Sick Time in Massachusetts Frequently Asked Questions These FAQs are based upon the Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law, M.G.L. c. 149, § 148C, and its accompanying regulations, 940 CMR 33.00. The Earned Sick Time Law sets minimum requirements; employers may choose to provide more generous policies. Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction, Applicability & Eligibility .......................................................................................................... 2 Subsection A: Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Subsection B: Employees Eligible for Earned Sick Time ............................................................................................... 2 Subsection C: Which Employers Need to Provide Earned Sick Time? ......................................................................... 4 Section 2: Paid versus Unpaid Earned Sick Time ............................................................................................................. 5 Section 3: General Rules .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Subsection A: How is Earned Sick Time Accrued? ....................................................................................................... 6 Subsection B: Carryover of hours from one year to the next .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Parker River National Wildlife Refuge Canoeing/Kayaking Information
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Parker River National Wildlife Refuge Canoeing/Kayaking Information Thank you for your interest in recommended. Do not rely on the map Permits and Fees canoeing/kayaking at Parker River on the reverse which is intended only A permit is not required. However, a National Wildlife Refuge. Please read for general orientation. Also check refuge entrance fee applies to access the following information thoroughly the forecast to avoid being caught in the boat ramp for launching. A Daily so that we may ensure your canoeing/ inclement weather. During the warmer refuge entrance fee of $5/vehicle or $2/ kayaking experience is as safe and months, mosquitoes and other biting walk-on or bicycle is in effect year- enjoyable as possible. Please do not insects can be very bothersome. round. Annual passes and commercial hesitate to contact us if you have any Greenheads are aggressive, blood rates are available. questions or concerns. feeding horse flies that may be Enjoy your visit! abundant from July through mid- Parker River National Wildlife Refuge August. From September 15 - May 15, 6 Plum Island Turnpike General all canoe and kayak occupants must Newburyport, MA 01950 Opportunities are available to launch wear a U.S. Coast Guard approved 978/465 5753 a non-motorized canoe, kayak, or Personal Flotation Device. 978/465 2807 Fax rowboat from the refuge for access to e-mail:[email protected] Plum Island Sound and points beyond. Suggested Equipment and Supplies www.fws.gov/northeast/parkerriver All boat motors (including electric) and n extra paddle the launching of all other watercraft, n sunglasses Federal Relay Service including sailboats, are prohibited.
    [Show full text]
  • Rural Walking in Massachusetts a Tool Kit for Municipalities
    Rural Walking in Massachusetts A Tool Kit for Municipalities A WalkBoston report Prepared for The Massachusetts Department of Public Health March 2013 Table of Contents Introduction 1. Background 1.1. A long history of rural walking in Massachusetts 1.2. The present rural areas of Massachusetts 1.3. Resident perceptions of rural character 2. Rural Walking Design Choices 2.1. Sidewalk with curb 2.2. Roadside path 2.3. Meandering roadside path 2.4. Local and regional recreational trails 2.5. Regional trail for multiple users 2.6. Road shoulder for hiking and biking 2.7. Traffic calming and vehicle speeds 2.8. Standards of design used by case study towns 2.9. Potential users of walkways 2.10. ADA requirements 3. Findings 3.1. Increased walking has the potential to bring significant benefits to rural and semi-rural communities. 3.2. Walking infrastructure is needed in rural and semi-rural communities. 3.3. Building walkways takes time and creativity. 3.4. There are significant challenges to creating rural walking infrastructure. 3.5. Walkway destinations are important 3.6. Safe walking access to schools is essential. 3.7. The design of a walkway should respond to existing conditions and intended uses. 3.8. Traffic calming measures may improve safety and be cost-effective. 3.9. Transparent, inclusive, and collaborative planning processes help towns implement walking routes. 3.10. Pedestrians and drivers need basic information about walking. 4. Case Studies 4.1. Amherst 4.2. Ashfield 4.3. Barnstable 4.4. Barre 4.5. Bolton 4.6. Boxborough 4.7. Dudley 4.8.
    [Show full text]
  • Walden Pond State Reservation Continued His Studies at Harvard College
    Visitor Information Walden Pond 915 Walden Street (Rte. 126), Concord, MA 01742 978-369-3254 “…my friends ask what I will do when I get there. Visitors are welcome to swim, picnic, hike, use canoes State Reservation and rowboats, fish, cross-country ski and snowshoe. Will it not be employment enough to watch the Please help control erosion of Walden’s shoreline by progress of the seasons?” staying on the paths and using established access Henry David Thoreau areas. The reservation is open year round. Certain services and hours of operation may vary with the season. All organized groups must call in advance to make a reservation. There are no trash barrels on the beach. Please carry out what you carry in. There is a year round parking fee of $5.00 per vehicle. Parking is only permitted in the lot off Rte. 126. When the park reaches capacity it will close. In order to avoid disappointment, call 978-369-3254, particu- larly on hot summer days. Annual park passes are available. Welcome to Thoreau was born on July 12, 1817 in the village of Thoreau’s House: copied In September of 1847, Thoreau completed his experi- Concord, Massachusetts. Under the influence of his by Charles H. Overly from ment in simplicity and became a sojourner in civilized Please No: Walden Pond brother John, an amateur ornithologist, he developed an a drawing done by life again. Emerson then sold the house to his gardener. Dogs Alcoholic beverages Thoreau’s sister, Sophia. State Reservation early interest in nature and spent much of his youth Two years later two farmers bought it and moved it to Fires Gasoline engines exploring the town’s ponds and woods.
    [Show full text]
  • Walden Pond and Woods Special Resource Study
    National Park Service United States Department of the Interior Boston Support Office Northeast Region Walden Pond and Woods Special Resource Study September 2002 I-.a. ■i-.’fTxr-'«i«?* J?:- *•.$.. ■*!•' ¿¡F*«" - ; -,<■ ï r-' . ' vr~>s -• - - .-• •• I è--- “ .-‘v ÿ . ■> =: ; . ,• V:- '■ : ■ # . ;*v' - - ■4% -r'Î;:',W «Sfc& / 4 i f : * This report has been prepared to provide Congress and the public with information about the resources in the study area and how they relate to criteria for inclusion within the national park system applied by the professional staff of the National Park Service Publication and transmittal of this report should not be considered an endorsement or a commitment by the National Park Service to seek or support either specific legislative authorization for the project or appropriation for its implementation Authorization and funding for any new commitments by the National Park Service will have to be considered in light of competing priorities for existing units of the national park system and other programs. For additional copies or more information contact National Park Service Boston Support Office Planning and Legislation 15 State Street Boston, Massachusetts 02109 (617) 223-5051 Cover photograph © Scot Miller/suntomoon cow All rights reserved Interior photographs by Herbert W Gleason courtesy of the Thoreau Society, Lincoln, Massachusetts and the Thoreau Institute at Walden Woods Walden Pond and Woods Special Resource Study: Reconnaissance Survey Massachusetts September 2002 Produced by the Boston Support Office
    [Show full text]
  • Station Plum Island, Massachusetts Formerly-Knobbs Beach USLSS Station #1, Second District Coast Guard Station #21
    U.S. Coast Guard History Program Station Plum Island, Massachusetts Formerly-Knobbs Beach USLSS Station #1, Second District Coast Guard Station #21 On Plum Island, 2 1/4 (?) miles from the south end; 42-44' 00"N Location: x 70-47' 15"W Date of 1873 Conveyance: Station Built: 1889 (?) Fate: Knobbs Beach / Plum Island (#21): This station was completed and placed into operation in 1893 - at a position "on Plum Island, two and a quarter miles from the south end." Until July 1, 1902, it was known as Knobbs Beach. In 1922, the note appears that the mailing address for the station was in Rowley, Massachusetts from April 1 to November 30 and in Newburyport, Massachusetts from December 1 to March 31. The station was rebuilt in 1890. Keepers: The first keeper, James N. Elliot, was appointed on October 29, 1879. He resigned on December 2, 1880. He was followed by George F. Woodman (December 3, 1880 until his resignation on April 1, 1882), James N. Elliot (April 4, 1882 for unknown period (may be the same James Elliot)), Frank E. Stevens (December 16, 1890 until his retirement with thirty years service on July 31, 1916), Harry F. Burnham (February 20, 1917 until his reassignment to the Newburyport station on March 1, 1919), and Almond C. Maker (December 1, 1919 until his reassignment to the Isle of Shoals station on December 23, 1924). 1 Next, Chief Petty Officer H. A. Schwartz is listed as being in charge in 1927 and he is followed by Albert F. Jones who was appointed on November 7, 1930 and reassigned to the Portsmouth Harbor station on January 12, 1932.
    [Show full text]
  • Mystic River Master Plan
    Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation MYSTIC RIVER MASTER PLAN Arlington | Boston | Everett | Medford | Somerville November 2009 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Deval Patrick, Governor Timothy Murray, Lieutenant Governor Ian A. Bowles, Secretary, EOEEA Phil Griffiths, Undersecretary, EOEEA Department of Conservation and Recreation Richard K. Sullivan, Commissioner, DCR Jack Murray, Deputy Commissioner for Operations Joe Orfant, Director, Bureau of Planning and Resource Protection Dan Driscoll, Project Manager The Consultant Team Crosby | Schlessinger | Smallridge, LLC: Landscape Architecture and Planning Deneen Crosby, Principal in Charge Carole Schlessinger, Project Manager Carolyn Campbell Ashley Hill Chris Riale Mary Webb Tamar Zimmerman AECOM: Natural Resources Assessment and Environmental Planning Victor Frankenthaler Kimberley Kubera Michael Wierbonics Boelter & Associates, Inc.: Watersheet Planning Alice Boelter i Mystic River Master Plan ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 Project Area 2 Project Goals 4 Public Process 4 CHAPTER II: EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 Natural Resources 6 Cultural Resources 19 CHAPTER III: THE PLAN 25 Continuous River Corridor Trail System 28 Overlooks and Views 42 Water Trail 43 Signage and Interpretive Elements 44 Fencing Strategy 45 Property Acquisitions and Easement Needs 46 Encroachment on Public Land 47 Access and Connections 47 Dog Recreation 49 Specific Recommendations by Area 50 Section 1: Harvard Avenue Bridge to Auburn Street Bridge 50 Section 2: Auburn Street Bridge to Craddock
    [Show full text]
  • The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Elder Affairs One Ashburton Place, 5Th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108
    The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Elder Affairs One Ashburton Place, 5th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108 CHARLES D. BAKER Tel: (617) 727-7750 Governor Fax: (617) 727-9368 TTY/TTD: 1-800-872-0166 KARYN E. POLITO www.mass.gov/elders Lieutenant Governor MARYLOU SUDDERS Secretary , Executive Office of Health and Human Services ELIZABETH C. CHEN, PhD, MBA, MPH Secretary TO: Assisted Living Residence Executive Directors FROM: Elizabeth C. Chen, Secretary SUBJECT: Amended Assisted Living Residence Operators Guidance and Policies and Procedures to Protect Residents, Facilities, and Services during the COVID-19 Outbreak DATE: June 1, 2020 This memorandum replaces the memorandum issued on March 16, 2020 and is effective as of June 3, 2020. On March 10, 2020, Governor Baker declared a state of emergency to support the Commonwealth’s response during the outbreak of Coronavirus (COVID-19). The Commonwealth continues to work with state and federal agencies and local partners on the outbreak COVID-19, and we continue to appreciate the essential role you play in responding to this evolving situation. Assisted Living Residences (ALRs) should immediately implement the following provisions to protect the health and safety of residents and staff. Resident Visitors Policies and Procedures: ALRs may allow visits with residents, provided that the physical distancing and protection requirements described in detail below are followed. As much as possible, ALRs should continue to use alternative electronic methods for communication between residents and visitors, such as Skype, FaceTime, WhatsApp or Google Duo. Designated Outdoor Visitation Space: An ALR may allow in-person visitation in a designated outdoor visitation space, provided that the ALR implements all of the following safety, care, and infection control measures: • A resident who is suspected or confirmed to be infected with COVID-19 cannot be visited; a resident who has recovered from COVID-19 may be visited.
    [Show full text]