[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]






   tU-O                 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
       ADE 1 5 1COASTAL SERVICES CENTER                           DRAFT REPOR
       [* DECt '5 1     2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                       CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413




           Comprehensive Harbor Management Plan


                                                  Chatham, Massachusetts


                                                                 18 May 1990
                     Property of C5S Library
         I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                      Prepared For:

                        Town of Chatham, Massachusetts




                                      Pre pared By:

                            Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.
                            Post Office Box 7, 3179 Main Street
                                  Barnstable, MA 02630
                                     (508)362-5570

            3X "~~~~Aubrey Consulting, Inc.
                                       Suite 2-3
         KX ~~~~~~~ HE    0350 Gifford Street
       H554                        Falmouth, MA 02540
       .C53                           (508)457-0810
       C66
       1990
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,D.  d 







                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.    INTRODUCTION
     A.    Why Harbor Planning
     B.    Harbor Issues
     C.    Description of the Planning Process

2.    COASTAL AREA FUNCTIONAL BOUNDARIES
     A.    Environmental Boundaries
            *Ground-water Recharge Area and Viral Buffer Zone
            *Stormwater Drainage Watershed Area
            *Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storm Hazard Zone
     B.    Cultural Boundaries
            *Viewsheds
            *Public Access/Ownership Zone

3.    INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
     A.    Natural Resources
            *Wetlands
            *Wildlife
            *Marine Resources
            *Coastal Hazard
            *Sea Level Rise
      B.    Existing Land Use and Zoning
      C.    Harbor Uses
            *Town Landings
            *Commercial Fishing Piers
            *Marina and Pleasure Boat Facilities
            *Moorings
            *Private Piers
            *Analysis of Harbor Use and Waterfront Access
            ï¿½Impacts of Public Water Uses on Harbor Resources
            *Sediment Transport and Tidal Flushing
      D.    Water Quality
            ï¿½Sources of Pollution
            * Existing Conditions
            *Extent of Future Development/Buildout analysis
            *Implications for Water Quality and Ecological Systems
            *Sediment transport and tidal flushing
      E.    Regulatory Review
            ï¿½Zoning Bylaw
            *Subdivision Rules and Regulations
            *Board of health Regulations
            *Wetlands Regulations
            *Waterways Regulations
            *Implications of Future Development








GOALS AND POLICIES FOR RESOLVING HARBOR ISSUES
     A. Public Access to the Waterfront
     B.    Navigation and Harbor Safety
     C.    Commercial Fishing and Shellfishing
     D.    Water Quality and Natural Resources
     E.    Recreational Use of Waterways
     F.    Land Use and Visual Character

ACTION PLAN

REFERENCES









                           LIST OF FIGURES


Figure 1    Stage Harbor Shellfish Landings
Figure 2    Water Quality Sampling Locations in Study Area
Figure 3    Study Area Boundaries
Figure 4    Common Nitrogen Process
Figure 5    Nitrogen Sources in Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond
            Sub-Study Area at Occupancy Rate = 1.86
Figure 6    Nitrogen Sources in Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond
            Sub-Study Area at Occupany Rate = 3.0
Figure 7    Nitrogen Sources in Oyster Pond/River Sub-Study Area at
            Occupancy Rate = 1.86.
Figure 8    Nitrogen Sources in Oyster Pond/River Sub-Study Area at
            Occupany Rate = 3.0




                             LIST OF MAPS


Map 1       Coastal Area Boundaries
Map 2       Shorefront Property Ownership
Map 3       Study Area Boundaries
Map 4       Bottom Sediment Types
Map 5       Natural Resource Areas
Map 6       Shellfish Beds
Map 7       Quahog Density
Map 8       Flood Zone and Bathymetry
Map 9       Land Use
Map 10      Zoning
Map 11      Harbor Use
Map 12      Harbor, Shellfish and Recreational Uses
Map 13      Pollution Sources










                                      LIST OF TABLES

         Table I     Wetland Summary
        Table 2      Bushels of Shellfish Harvested Annually
         Table 3     Stage Harbor System: Town Landings
         Table 4     Location of Private Piers
         Table 5     Maintenance Dredging - Stage Harbor, MA
         Table 6     Annual Shoaling Rates - Stage Harbor, MA
         Table 7     Water Quality Summary - Fecal Coliforms in Harbor Areas
I       ~ ~Table 8    Minimum Lot Size and Frontage by Zoning District
         Table 9     Summarized Residential Buildout Data
         Table 10    Study Area Open Space Information
I       ~ ~Table 11    Total Nitrogen Concentrations in Septic System Effluent
         Table 12    Leaching Rate for Fertilizers Applied to Turf Areas
         Table 13    Total Nitrogen Concentrations in Road Runoff
I       ~ ~Table 14    Nitrogen Concentrations in Precipitation
         Table 15    Lot Sizes and Percentages Used for the Study Area
         Table 16    Nitrogen Loading Values
I       ~ ~Table 17    Summarized Nitrogen Loading in Pounds/Year by Source and
                      Scenario
          Table 18    Estimated Nitrate-Nitrogen Concentrations in Ground Water
   I                ~ ~~~~Under Various Development Scenarios
          Table 19    Impacts of Uses in Harbor Resources



I
I
I


l
I


l
                                     Introduction
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I







               *                                                ~~~~Access becomes issue'

         Shellf~5Is shloci    of boat ya'rd parking
    Summer may be bleak it                                             yCRA                   ~       5~*e has not been
    dosures not revrsd                                                asistant toP  *


        CHATHAM -Shellfih Constable Stuart Moore) ~~                                                        ~ ~ .~             nth
  Edoesn't see the fact that the town's overall shellfis1]-V.
    landings have remained constant this yearo            ofth
    sarily agood thing.Due to state adwtol.-  5                                                                         ,ahd   o
    Bures of two important, produ~~
  Ifish that are being h~k"
    more concentrated--e                                                                                                   ar t t
    resource.
        And if the MonoeN-.
  I  are not reopened byin
     dollar industry could bi;                                                                                                      M   o
         "If that remains   Th~q''                                                                  ~                              ed
     effectively," said sheifr/                                                                                       -            and
         The impact of last 0dL   ie
  * sures --imposed by the                                                                                                         c
  *  F'heries on shellfsh bc.v1  ~                                                                                      I S          n
           -alth where shoei__
          n ot completied-W'S",
   I  ~~~   '~~Nned Moore. sely                              d~$u.
              0'ham~plain fla                                                           -e. tlac
  *       But on.          A       t(G$~~                                                                            ragemnttan
  *  Ala;ohe kE70, 4          '41tryal4.-
     time shellfish,                 ork                 pr~i                                                    oducree orotehard
     Oyster Pond                       wit                                                             surace  tohambroueroad
  *  possibility that G,~r    uoZacrig oLmet
        smtime uring'                       the bF                                          day  the   Mrends of Trees, Inc. is ex-
                         To, help ease the situ. ~~~~~board  has  the  pected to handle plantings for
                          To help ease the situ~~~~~~                           ...e the handia       ren  space  Incorporatedi
  dietrRbr Duncanson                                                                           dic~~9?qleenbttat  Labr' Iln. 


   ~~N tercraft byla 4,Stt  plans to help

   e strictly enforcecith harbor study

ly DAVID CURRAINI* )                                                                                       half of which must be covered by
tape Cod NeWpapmr SUN                     Th   towseo            t                                          non-federal funds.
          Trafic ickes fr Je Sk ridrs, have given ths,~"AUl that remains  to get the
JAL proposed bylaw regulating the       matter muc                     f1t..                                decide to provide the remnaining
  Reof personal watercraft would       considerationAi, a                              7$55,000. According to selectmen
give the harbor patrol the author-      feel that this by]             nem ,   V                            chairman  Andrew  Young,  the
 to I!,ssue non-criminal. citations    is necessary for                                                 -mnyIs available under a two-
  - viltors                                                       1   By DAVIDCF1eaol  town meeting appropria-
Rif the bylaw is passed at the            reservation of           - C (p* Cod NeeaeI'.He said the selectmen would

annual town meeting (Aticle 42,               a .."                      The             sat ba  amdsuste Issue at their
Section E on the warrant), tribut                                 15,00                   t study                   -mieeting yesterday (Apri]
     r ==t donsforcemestaccordin  tobility                                           o rtiga federal ciw J
  "We've  asked  the police de-       Miller said the propos             Leslie Lewis of the state De.                          che feaasilit
  a tent to really step up vigi-  Is a  rewritten  versiox            partmnent of, Environmental Man.   stt.                     '  meeting
Once," Miller told the selectmen   state's personal waterci            agement's Di1vision of Waterways   yil. ~study's
      *  outinin  the  ylawApril 10.  lotion. He said it address       confirmed Frday that the agency   pricetb              .           ak
"Frankly, I'd like to see a whole   problems -  speed, pr-c            Wm~ match the local contribution   apprwzLma11
ale  of successful violation cita-                   Please wr         to the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-  plete. The  b              7      egir.
                ---r   -j%*.Sa isU vuue Use Of 1XIAPwa 9 "- --      neers feasibility study. The study   "almost  ime.               "Oung
                 V- c~ ctermricallv state that we'll not alloi       carries a total price of $220,000,                    Pleab..        page II




*Friends -Of Chatham'Wtrwy

*Fund. Harbor Study.R-~ P-Aj









          Closures -frustrate shellfish, bard

         New state p 19iy ma
         further cu6pen  arasviduewsIs (the~
                       By DAVID CURRAN  ~~~~                      Z    definition of marina Isnt'
         caec1!w DtAVI C                                                  ongt  IAcue  morn 9~
              Jutit was administrative closures. NOW  Cape             al area   widh Iswht.e"er
 -       ~~shelfhers have learned of a new interstate Polc                 l   fado.
         banning sheilfshing near marinas. ".:    -   -                    .St, '.                             Moore
           Shellfish warden Stuart Moore told the shellfish
 I      ~ ~advisory committee last week that the Interstate 
           Selfie-SntainC   ..-mnce policy Is scheduled to  areas open," Moore said, explaining the ptate1 citing
          go into efetJlI                   'a   t details have. staffig and money shortages, does not expect to be
             no Ienfinlzd                                         able to do the'water quality testing necessary to
 I          "Y~~ouont be e   abl's"*llow the areato open.
          Moore sUPme  uptWht bothers me," Moore added, "is right away
           The deftiollo C,                                          .1  locked into the fact that they're not going to
                  *  said  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~.ced particular c6ncern over the
 -                                                                 '~ecI .,a                   Along with'kssentlally all of
                                                                                            'retheIsad's
                                                   go~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.Ity testing


                                                  ~~~Wj~~~*l~~ad~~~aa             10        1t
              i.~~~~ WM   "44z                                           A~    fome   Ch'ea 



                   I~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 44krlc                                                             OOp'3CD?

                                                     110~~~~~~~~~~ djta  cot)a   eti                        ojr C ast                e '5
                         rea                                                 vpj~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~je"D,   -CO's   t o  th~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ~ --~-~.'.--.
                              -~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  .        - P.r~                                    1.                   i tdija



                                                                            ,  /  --a   "I'd expect them to under-
I    __ ('HATHAM
       Or w"*'Vessel grounding illustrates dredging


           .S. Wildlife and Stage Island residents
         spar :over property access .. cl
                Zf -.
                       i.  '.. *'; ' '- *  " . --}' by Tlm Wood   '' damaging property.
        .: .._CHATHAM. - A Stage Island orooertv. ownerL.                   RavmnnA COfafr a tnrulat   of the .StnaR imland


       ;::"  R.....' un,,pOut Of Room:
        stil a few years ago, Chatham's tub trawleirs cobj    "      can't compete with th     e offers being    '- tday for thes  '
                 ttpools of their stiff, now nylon fishing fine by  tracts by developers., ,
 }.pnr~plling it along the old railroad's right of way:                  aWe see a problem arisind by
     . .But that strip of uninterrupted space, so perfect for        fishermen to dry their nets a'       k                  "
    ,been appropriated for recreational use by the town.             will be sold and he wit'        * 
     t Likeise, a bike path will cut through   a l  cre lot of         ' AnoLher aspect of' 1-                            ' 
    private land.where trap fishermen used to spread their.           hoe lots on the,                       9           Co
   I nets, each measuring up to 200,000 square feet, to dry and       being what it it
    mend every fall. And condominiums have usurped a tract          , she aid."Stc 
   I of open space once available to them on a lot in West            you would'         ,     -                                   s  
    ; Chatham.                      -                                *  ost  _q                  8>               Cf    g
-: 'Itisatrend. _, ;,.                -...-. .  -;Abreu,that           SO,                 .b..



                                             'AY used byBFA@W6bJ Cnd.   ~
                                                 other                                           a       w     i
                                                 t the                               '.l t,  



                                      '%                      s'oV ;9
   *  -~cj'                                                                                           , taimhs oredissn .u


                             *0-t arDO1 Yari. togpi  *etSï¿½Ss~o'S  *e   .ï¿½ o  fcepa we           e.
       6n|~* ofi.cialsP ' e and pi    citzen atbnd o                                                    that unreas  Bolu noise
    f,' is   t                                                        Ayaps were  transported past their
    U r~  oC tlsrz~  BO~e(,esC~.~195~b:.p~Cr~gbtbe~ï¿½te~                       ~            judge ruled in favor of Mr Koski,
   {':'[ . - comite 'sPiLk purpose,      -;~~:~: ~-;~                     .202'i2 ~         lbt         was a customary home
   ' '.p thee inusr a'vr' ascne ri                  tefu. 'ar                                  tfavst, ae q.swaid  to   ome
                     In M-                                               e2tB~e~_\deC1~SI~e~," .;cificai ly allowed by special permit in Mr
     Commut                                                                        e...  watched other  towns  pass bylaws prohibiting
     touhr ii BseP-8~t:~J~~I~~tbe .    O~.*       ,99~`~Y        +eS~  ~D',            district and by thetown's bylaws.
   ti   uh 'o-ru,,e    e~                           %"~c" ,V151',0               ge of pots in residential areas." said Mr Bassett.
     a:Committeon  ï¿½yarn  ~ .& ~ . ;, .-~ c.,o. ;.,".                       .hJnam has traditionally supported its fishing fleet, but
    *   induttryee                     Ne p~                '" ~         o  ace as well as the mentality of the town is changing.
     among varic.                                           .  AI o  well .sther men,"
           The  app'~oV'- i                                             W~e . e mem eL9    re are faced with a change, possibly from a commercial
     scheduled to  'c""P            .;Fa                              i fishing industry to a private boat basin."
     scheduled to Wi~           ..d  an   wlweek,  according tow    A'    Trap fisherman Paul Lucas bought 30.000 square feet of
     Selectman Wil. .        ,iteld, and will include  town            'industrial property just over a year ago to contain a
     oif,_ndpr.t  izesaustryh.h  ihn business that has grown over the past 25 years. But this
     industry. " ï¿½ ' , . year, he said, he couldn't have afforded to provide for his
     ;: ' The committee's purpose, Mrs Abrcu said, would be to'         own space needs.
   ,-;help the industry avert a space needs crisis in the future.         'Prices are rising that fast," he said. He, too. mentioned
   ~'i. "We would look for a space in town that would be                 . .   . .n n,    wki
   :raceSSible to commercial fishermen to continue drying
   ,.. their nets and storint nots." Mrs Ahrn. %aid








                                      INTRODUCTION

I        ~~The sun sets over the mud flats on Harding's Reach. The air is warm and
          smells of low tide. Land earlier inundated is now visible and its creatures
        appear. Here the harbor is rich with varied natural life. Myriads of small fish
             datthrough the shallows at the edge of the marsh. It is a fine thing to live
          near the water.

U        ~~~I think back to days as a child digging for quahog with a bucket and bare
          hands. I think about the sea and its changes. I think about the harbor and its
I        ~~~changes. I look up and see a vessel grounded at the mouth of Stage Harbor.
          In time the coast guard arrives.

3        ~~~The beauty and solitude of a walk along Hardings Beach is one of the simple
          pleasures which Chatham's residents and visitors know. There are other
          pleasures too, like swimming, fishing and boating in the harbor's waters. The
I       ~ ~~harbor is a source of recreation and livelihood.
          Will these opportunities be available for future generations to enjoy?

          People ask "why harbor planning?" The newspaper clippings give some
          indication: shoreline erosion. ..marinas ... shellfish stock ... watercraft
I       ~ ~~ban... .storm runoff causing problems..-town landings declared
          substandard..-beach access a hot issue... Whereas once it seemed that the
          harbor offered plenty of space and resources for everyone, today conflicts over
I       ~ ~~its use have arisen. Chatham officials and residents are faced with its
          limitations, and realize that decisions cannot be made without considering
3        ~~~their impact on the entire harbor system.

          There are several benefits to adopting a harbor management plan. Perhaps
          the most important is that the information and analyses conducted as a part
I       ~ ~~of this study will allow town officials to better determine the impacts and
          land and water use decisions on the harbor's activities. Chatham's Stage
          Harbor supports a variety of uses including recreational boating, swimming
          and shellfishing. This harbor management plan provides guidance as to how
          to retain these uses.

1        ~~~The harbor management plan will also allow town officials to better plan for
          capital improvements. For example, the plan examines the current condition
          of, and projected need for, various facilities and improvements of the harbor
          area, such as public fishing piers, pump-out stations, town landings, beaches,
          etc.



U         ~~~Horsley Witten Hegermann, Inc.1
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







          Third, the harbor management plan will ensure that Chatham's goals and
          objectives for future development will be met. The Massachusetts
          Waterways Regulations (310 CMR 9.00), is implemented by the Department of
I       ~ ~Environmental Protection, and oversees waterway and tidal development.
          These state regulations are currently being revised to better incorporate the
          development goals of coastal communities. According to proposed revisions
I       ~ ~to the state regulations, in cases where communities have adopted an
          approved harbor management plan, waterways licenses will generally only be
          granted for developments which are consistent with the local plan.

          Last, adoption of a harbor management plan may aid the Town of Chatham
          in receiving federal funding for projects. Under federal law, coastal projects,
          such as the dredging of Stage Harbor, must be consistent with the policies of
          the Massachusetts Department of Coastal Zone Management (CZM). The
          local harbor management plan is considered the local expression of those
          policies. Therefore, actions and improvements specified in local harbor
          management plans are more likely to receive federal funding.

I        ~~This harbor plan defines the issues surrounding use of Chatham's Stage
          Harbor system. The Stage Harbor complex consists of Stage Harbor, Mitchell
          River, Mill Pond, Oyster River and Oyster Pond waters, and includes one of
          Chatham's most productive estuarine systems. These waters, and the land
          areas which are functionally tied to them, are defined as the Stage Harbor
          system. In order to address these issues and gain a better knowledge of the
          interrelationships between activities in the harbor and its surrounding land
          uses, an inventory and analysis of the natural and man-made resources
          which make up the Stage Harbor system has been conducted. Based upon
          scientific analysis and input from town residents, goals for future use of the
          harbor system have been determined and future actions are proposed. We
*        ~~~invite you to read on.


                                         Harbor Issues

          Through discussion with town officials and residents, including fishermen
          and marina owners, the Harbor Planning Committee has identified several
          issues facing the Stage Harbor system which must be addressed, before its
          fishing productivity and recreational assets are lost. This harbor plan
          attempts to resolve these issues.

I        ~~~1. Public Access to the Waterfront

          The vast majority of shoreline property in Chatham is privately owned.
I       ~ ~~Intensive residential development has limited both residents' and visitors'

U         ~~~Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.     2
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







         use of the shoreline. Private property rights often extend to mean low water
         and many beaches are posted against trespassing.

         Town Landinas

         There is a tremendous demand for water-related recreational facilities in the
         Stage Harbor system: piers, boat launching facilities, moorings, swimming
         areas. While the Town owns nine landings and numerous other access
         points to the harbor, the use of these areas is. constrained by very limited
I      ~ ~parking. There have been complaints from some abutting property owners
          about parking and trespassing on private property, and overuse of some
         landings has caused damage to dunes and wetlands.

         Needed Services

I        ~~Mooring space is extremely limited, especially in the inner part of Stage
          Harbor, the Little Mill Pond and the Oyster River. There are also very few
          mooring facilities available for transient boaters. Other necessary services
          such as water, fuel, dinghy storage and boat launching facilities are also in
          great demand. While access to Stage Harbor has been improved considerably
          by the Town's acquisition of Old Mill Boatyard, provision of necessary
          services there will require daily staffing. Someone must be available to
          supervise activities at the pier while the Harbormaster handles his myriad
*        ~~other duties on the water.


          2. Navigation and Harbor Safety

          Aids to Navieation

          The responsibility for navigation and harbor safety in Chatham is divided
          between three separate entities: the Harbormaster, the Harbor Patrol
I       ~ ~(Chatham Police) and the United States Coast Guard. The Harbormaster
          oversees all activities in the harbor. One of his primary responsibilities is
          maintenance and installation of aids to navigation with authorization from
I       ~ ~the Coast Guard. Because Chatham has such an extensive network of
          waterways, and because conditions are so changeable, it is both time-
          consuming and expensive to manage the maintenance and the required
          moving of navigational buoys.
*        ~~Law Enforcement Search and Rescue

          The Harbor Patrol is responsible for law enforcement on the water including
          the 5 mph speed limit which applies throughout the Stage Harbor/Oyster
          River/Mill Pond area during the summer months. The Coast Guard handles
          emergency search and rescue operations but they do not routinely tow vessels
          Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.       3
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







          in trouble unless it is a life threatening situation. The commercial fishermen
          generally have to rely on other members of the fleet for assistance since there
          are few commercial operations on Cape Cod which can tow large fishing
I       ~ ~boats. There is a need for good communications among Town officials and
          the Coast Guard', especially regarding overdue vessels.

I        ~~Moorings

          The Stage Harbor system is heavily used for mooring boats. Since the breach
          in North Beach there has been increasing pressure for moorings in the
          protected inner harbor areas. The Town has established mooring regulations
          as part of its Waterways Bylaw. Under these regulations the H-arbormaster
I       ~ ~assigns the location and approves the type and adequacy of every mooring.
          However, it is difficult to implement an overall mooring plan because
          seasonal moorings are installed by individuals. The Hlarbormaster does not
          have the manpower to supervise installation so actual locations may not
          conform to a theoretical layout plan.

I        ~~~Conflicts in Use

          The Stage Harbor system supports a wide variety of activities including
          swimming, sailing, windsurfing, waterskiing, jet skiing, pleasure boating, and
          both commercial and recreational fishing and shellfishing. There are
          numerous existing and potential conflicts of use in various parts of the
          harbor. The worst problems with congestion occur in the bottleneck at the
          channel entrance to Stage Harbor. The use of windsurfers and small sailboats
I       ~ ~~in or near navigational channels can also pose safety hazards in that large
          motor vessels cannot easily maneuver around smaller craft. jet skis and
          waterskiing can create noise problems and safety hazards for swimmers.
I       ~ ~~There is a need to coordinate the location and timing of various activities and
          to educate users about safe navigational practices.

I        ~~Dredging

          Maintaining adequate water depths for navigation has become a serious
          problem in several Town waterways. Chatham Harbor and Aunt Lydia's
          Cove are in need of dredging due to the shoaling from the North Beach
          breach. Likewise, the channel entrance to Stage Harbor has deteriorated
I       ~ ~~substantially since it was last dredged in 1987 and it needs to be cleared again.
          The Oyster River has also been slated for dredging for a number of years but
          funding is not yet available. There may be other parts of the harbor which
          will require dredging in the future in order to provide adequate depths for
          launching and operating boats.



H         ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.      4
           Draft Report, 18 May 1990







U       ~~DisDosal of DredgeeSoi

3        ~~The permitting process for dredging and disposal of dredge spoil is extremely
          cumbersome and time-consum-ing. The Harbormaster and Waterways
          Committee have spent considerable time and effort securing the necessary
I      ~~permits and funds for various dredging projects. Dredging and disposal of
          spoils also have to be evaluated in terms of their environmental effects:
          impact on wildlife habitat and shellfish beds can be significant. This may be
          of particular concern in the Oyster River.

1        ~~3. Commercial Finfishing and Shellfishing

          Commercial finfishing and shellfishing are a very important element of
I      ~ ~Chatham's economy. It is estimated that the fishing industry brings in
          approximately $6.4 million to the Town's economy annually. The majority
          of Chatham's fishing fleet is based on Chatham Harbor, working out of the
          municipal Fish Pier. The Fish Pier serves approximately eighty (80)
          commercial fishing vessels, a fluctuating commercial shellfish fleet of 50-100
          vessels, (fleet size determined by season and available shellstock) and two
          local seafood companies who lease and staff the fish packing houses with an
          additional space provided at the Pier for independent dealers. In addition, the
5        ~~~Fish Pier offers fuel, ice, and water services to both the fishing fleet and
          hundreds of private sports fishing and pleasure boats. The Fish Pier is also a
          major tourist attraction in Chatham, providing the only direct viewing of the
*        ~~fish off-loading and packing process on lower Cape Cod.

          Breach in North Beach

          Changes in water current and sediment deposition resulting from the 1987
          breach of North Beach have made use of the municipal Fish Pier increasingly
I       ~~difficult. The channel through the new inlet is treacherous and changeable.
          Currents in the harbor are more powerful and the Fish Pier and many of the
          moorings are exposed to ocean swells. This has made docking difficult and
I       ~~~boats moored in the harbor are at risk: If they break loose from their
          moorings, they could be washed out with the tide or smashed up against the
          rock revetments which now line the shore. The breach has also caused
          serious shoaling problems in Chatham Harbor and has contributed to the
          deterioration of the Stage Harbor entrance channel.

I        ~~~Staize Harbor Facilities

          Problems with the use of the Fish Pier have placed greater demand on Stage
          Harbor to provide fishing off-loading and packing facilities. Currently, there
          are several trap fishing companies which operate out of Stage Harbor, using

H        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.5
I~~~~rf eot 8My19







          the Eldredge Pier and adjacent properties for off-loading of fish. Stage Harbor
          may be needed as an alternative site for the main fleet if conditions worsen in
          Chatham Harbor. The winter months are the most difficult for the fishing
I       ~ ~~fleet due to the easterly and northeasterly storms which occur at that time of
          year. Stage Harbor could serve as an alternative mooring site for the fleet
          during the winter. This would not conflict with recreational users since it is
          off-season. However, ice could be a serious problem during a cold winter.
I        ~~Shellfishing
          Shellfishing is not only an important segment of Chatham's economy but it
          is also one of the key recreational activities offered by this seaside community.
          The Stage Harbor system is Chatham's primary shelifishery. However,
          portions of the Oyster Pond and Stage Harbor have been closed periodically to

I        ~~~shelifishing due to pollution problems.
          In 1989, 259 commercial shellfish permits, 1,236 resident family permits and
          335 non-resident shellfish permits were issued by the Town. More than
          25,600 bushels of shellfish were harvested for an estimated wholesale value of
          $1,106,885. The Shellfish Department uses a substantial portion (45-50%) of its
          operating budget for cultivation, propagation and transplanting of hatchery,
          natural and contaminated shellstock. It is essential that the resource be
          protected in the future.

          4. Water Quality and Natural Resource Protection

          Chatham's waterways and ponds are the Town's greatest asset. Water-related
          recreation, tourism and fishing are the mainstays of the local economy. Thus,
I       ~ ~~protection of water quality is of paramount importance in preserving
          Chatham's character and appeal.

3. ~~Pollution Sources

           Over development and resulting pollution threaten the aesthetic and
           recreational appeal of Chatham's waterways and endanger the productivity of
           these waters for fishing and shellfishing. Sources of pollution include
           effluent from failed septic systems in coastal areas, stormwater runoff from
I       ~ ~~roads and parking areas, fertilizers and pesticides used on lawns and golf
           courses, animal wastes, chemical contamination from careless disposal of
3        ~~household hazardous wastes, and oil and gasoline spills from motorboats and
           marinas. It is often difficult to detect the sources of contamination and it can
           be very expensive to correct the problems, once identified.



B         ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.       6
           Draft Report, 18 May 1990








          Stormwater

I        ~~Stormwater runoff is a major cause of shellfish closures. Stormwater collects
          oil and gasoline, animal droppings, bacteria and all types of debris from paved
          surfaces and carries these materials through the collection system into the
          harbor. This is a particular problem in the Oyster Pond. The storm drainage
          system for the entire downtown area empties directly into the Pond. The
          eastern end of the pond (approximately 12 acres) is annually closed to
          shellfishing. The remaining 103 acres is closed during the summer and fall
          seasons each year.

I        ~~Shellfish Closures

          Part of the problem with shellfish closures relates to the testing methods used
I       ~ ~by the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries. Test sites are not
          necessarily located where the shellfish beds are located. If mean fecal coliform
          counts exceeding 14 organisms per 100 milliliters are found in the water, large
          areas may be dosed to shellfishing. It is not dear that these sweeping closures
          are warranted. Moreover, there is considerable evidence that wild animals
I        ~~and birds are causing high counts in some areas. This is a source which is
          difficult to control.

          Septic Systems

          Failed septic systems in coastal areas are another source of surface water
I       ~ ~pollution. The Board of Health currently requires that septic systems be
          inspected prior to transfer of title but this regulation only identifies failed
          systems when a property is sold. A more comprehensive inspection system is
          needed with priority given to properties in coastal areas.
          There are numerous other sources of water pollution which need attention.
I       ~ ~~Overuse of lawn fertilizers and pesticides near surface water can cause
          problems. Buffer strips of natural vegetation are needed to filter out
          nutrients. Sewage discharge from boats is also a potential hazard. Chatham
I       ~ ~currently has not pumnp-out facility for marine holding tanks. While there
          are not many live-aboard boats in the harbor, visiting boats could have a
          significant effect in the summer. Animal droppings on beaches and in areas
          which drain towards the harbor are also a real concern.
          Public Education

          There is a need for public education regarding water quality issues. Residents
          need to understand how to responsibly use fertilizers and pesticides, where to
          walk dogs and the necessity of cleaning up after them. Likewise, feeding of

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         7
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







waterfowl should be discouraged. There is also a need to educate both
residents and visitors about dumping trash and sewage in the harbor.

Fuelina Orerations

Finally, fueling operations at the various marinas need to be handled
carefully. Tanks must be inspected on a regular basis and the dispensation of
fuel should be carefully supervised.


5. Recreational Use of Waterways

The Stage Harbor complex accommodates a wide variety of recreational uses,
including sailboat races, swimming, fishing and shellfishing, windsurfing,
scuba-diving, water-skiing, jet-skiing and pleasure-boating. There are four
private marinas which serve the area: Chatham Yacht Basin, Oyster River
Boatyard, Stage Harbor Marine and Mill Pond Boatyard. All the marinas offer
basic services: launching, hauling, repairs/maintenance and storage. All but
Mill Pond Boatyard have fueling facilities. None of the marinas have pump-
out facilities for septic holding tanks. Available parking is variable,
depending upon the season. Areas used for boat storage in the winter can
often be used for parking during the summer months.

Marinas

The demand for marina facilities is growing. Virtually all the boatyards have
waiting lists for available slips and moorings. While an expansion of
facilities may be desirable, the permitting process through local, State and
Federal regulations is very cumbersome and time consuming. Moreover, the
demand for recreational facilities has to be balanced with natural resource
protection. The federal government is now requiring precautionary closures
of shellfish beds around marinas, so any expansions must be carefully
evaluated in terms of their effects on shellfishing.

Dockominiums

At present there are no dockominiums in Chatham; all of the marinas rent
their slips. There is some concern that the extremely high land values along
the shore could force conversions to dockominiums, and that marina
services could be lost. The dockominium concept provides a quick way to
recapitalize a business in the short term. One possible consequence of such a
conversion could be an increase in live-aboard vessels in the harbor with the
accompanying problem of sewage disposal.




Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Transient Moorings

At present there are only a limited number of moorings available for
transients in Stage Harbor. Visitors entering the harbor can call on Channel
16 and contact either the Harbormaster or Stage Harbor Marine. If an assigned
mooring is not being used it is sometimes possible for visitors to use it on a
temporary basis. The outer harbor can be used for open anchorage.

Water Transportation

There is limited public water transportation in Stage Harbor, Oyster Pond and
Mill Pond. Outermost Harbor Marine in Chatham Harbor offers shuttle
transportation to South Beach and Monomoy Island. Stage Harbor Marine
offers a launch service within Stage Harbor, and can service the other ponds
as needed.


6. Land Use and Visual Character

Water-Dependent Uses

Virtually all of Chatham's shorefront property is residentially zoned.
However, there are many existing non-residential uses which depend upon,
or at least benefit from, water frontage. The fishing industry utilizes the
Municipal Fish Pier, the Bloomer, Powell, Eldredge and Hoyt piers in Stage
Harbor, the fish shanties on the Oyster River, and numerous town landings.
In the Stage Harbor/Oyster/Mill Pond complex, there are four private
marinas: Chatham Yacht Basin, Oyster River Boatyard, Stage Harbor Marine
and the Mill Pond Boatyard. In addition, Stage Harbor Yacht Club and
Monomoy Yacht Club are based in the harbor. As shoreline conditions and
the level of water usage change along Chatham's coastline, demand for water-
dependent uses will vary. There is little public land available to meet the
changing demand.

Residential Develovment

There are hundreds of private residential properties which abut the harbor.
Density of development varies from neighborhood to neighborhood. On the
north side of the Oyster River in West Chatham, and in the old village
abutting the Oyster and Mill Ponds, lot sizes are quite small, generally 15,000
square feet or less. Along Bridge Street, Cedar Street, out on Stage Neck and
on Morris and Stage Islands, lot sizes are substantially larger, ranging from
20,000 square feet up to several acres in size. There are very few vacant
developable lots left on the waterfront. However, there is potential for


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        9
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~numerous small subdivisions and also for redevelopment of existing
          properties, most notably conversion of seasonal dwellings to year-round use.

I        ~~~Private Piers

          At present there are approximately 115 private piers in Chatham. Sixty-seven
          (67) of these are located within the Stage Harbor/Oyster Pond and River/Mill
          Pond and Mitchell River area. Private piers pose problems with public usage
          of the harbor in that they can impede access along the shore, encroach on
          shellfish beds and obstruct navigation. For this reason the Town's Zoning
          Bylaw requires new piers to be seasonal. It also limits their length to eighty
        feet measured from mean high water, and requires that pedestrian passage be
          provided along the shore. Still, there are numerous pre-existing piers which
          do not comply with these requirements.

U        ~~Conservation Lands

          In addition to nine public landings, the Town owns several large
I      ~ ~conservation/recreation parcels within the harbor area. Hardings Beach
          provides more than 260 acres of open space between the Oyster River, Stage
          Harbor and Nantucket Sound. However pedestrian access along the inner
          portion of the Stage Harbor System is limited due to the private ownership of
          shorefront property.

          Views and Vistas

          The Morris Island dike provides access to the clamfiats of the inner harbor
          from the east. Oyster Pond Beach provides a supervised swimming area with
          bathroom facilities. Views of the harbor are afforded from numerous
I        ~~locations along Stage Harbor Road, Champlain Road, Bridge Street and
          Morris Island Road. The Town has established the Cedar Street/Champlain
          Road/Bridge Street/Main Street loop as a bicycle route. In addition, these
I       ~ ~~roads and several others near the harbor are designated as Scenic Roads under
          MGL Chapter 40.

*        ~~Natural Resources

          The Stage Harbor System contains a variety of natural resources offering
I       ~ ~~excellent wildlife habitat. As land development occurs, especially significant
          natural resources such as wetlands and endangered species habitat are often
        altered. Many of these resources provide an essential role in maintaining the
          environmental quality of the Stage Harbor system and its fisheries.




I        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.     10
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990








          Sea Level Rise

I        ~~Concern over the possible effects of global warming have grown during
          recent years. One serious potential problem associated with global warming is
          an increase in the rate of sea-level rise. As relative sea level rises, wetlands
I       ~ ~~will naturally migrate inland and upland will be lost. As this occurs,
          shorefront owners will likely demand protection from the sea and wetland
          migration to protect their property and structures. Wetlands perform an
          important function in maintaining Stage Harbor's water quality and fisheries.
          The risk of damage from coastal storms is very high and will increase as sea
          level rises. Lands which are currently at low risk may someday be impacted.

U        ~~~Description of the Planning Process

          This Harbor Plan is the culmination of 3 years of hard work directed by the
I       ~ ~Chatham Waterways Committee and Harbor Planning Committee.
          Chatham's Harbor Planning Process began in 1988 and was instigated by a
          lecture given by Ms. Barbara Ingrum from the Massachusetts Department of
          Coastal Zone Management about the merits of harbor planning. Realizing
          the importance of harbor planning in a town such as Chatham which relies
          heavily upon its coastal quality, Chatham's Waterways Committee invited
          representatives of the local special interest groups to meet with them to
          further discuss the issue. At this joint meeting, all agreed that the Town's
I        ~~harbors merited intensive study. The Harbor Planning Committee was
          formed in August, 1988. Members of the Harbor Planning Committee
          include fishermen, property owners, yacht clubs, marinas, town officials, the
I       ~ ~~director of the water quality laboratory, Harbormaster, Wharfinger, and
          Shellfish Warden.

U        ~~The Harbor Planning Committe set up a twice-monthly meeting schedule
          and began work. For the next 1 to 2 years the Harbor Planning Committee
          wrestled with Chatham's coastal issues. Public hearings have been held
I       ~ ~~throughout the harbor planning process to solicit ideas and support, and
          hearings have been lively and well-attended. The first question to be
          resolved was what would be the limits of the study area? Several sessions
I       ~ ~~were held to determine an appropriate area. Four harbor areas were
          considered: Pleasant Bay, Chatham Harbor, Nantucket Sound and the Stage
          Harbor/Oyster Pond/Mill River Complex. In the end, the Harbor Planning
1       ~ ~~Committee felt that it should first address the Stage Harbor Complex since
          this system contained the greatest variety and intensity of use. Following a
          public hearing held to discuss their harbor selection with residents, the
          Harbor Planning Committee focussed on defining the harbor's use issues.
          These issue statements are revised as additional information is gained. The

I        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.     1
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







3        ~~current issues statements precede this section. A public hearing was held to
          discuss the harbor's issues with town residents. During the next sessions, the
         Harbor Planning Committee prepared harbor planning goals and objectives
I      ~ ~and held a public hearing to gain public feedback.
          After the formulation of harbor planning goals and objectives, the Harbor
          Planning Committee decided that it was time to seek professional help in
          assessing the Stage Harbor Complex and formulating an action plan. An
          article was included in the 1989 Town Meeting war-rant to raise funds for
I      ~ ~harbor planning services. This article passed Town Meeting but was defeated
          in an over-ride. However, through their open planning process, the Harbor
          Planning Committee had gained considerable town support for its endeavor.
I      ~ ~A private non-profit organization, the Friends of Chatham Waterways, raised
          $27,900 from local residents and donated these monies to the Harbor Planning
          Committee for the hiring of professional environmental science and
          planning services.
          With the promise of funds, the Harbor Planning Committee drafted a
          Request For Proposals to environmental science consulting firms for harbor
          assessment and planning services. A joint proposal submitted by Horsley
I        ~~Witten H-egemnann, Inc. and Aubrey Consulting, Inc. was accepted.
          Since the hiring of Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc. and Aubrey Consulting,
I        ~~Inc. in October 1989, both firms have worked with the Harbor Planning
          Committee to conduct a resource inventory and land use analysis, and to
          estimate future impacts to water quality and ecological systems based upon
          local land use regulations. With this information., the harbor issues, goals
          and policies first formulated by the Harbor Planning Committee were
          revisited and revised. Finally, with the revised goals in mind, a harbor action
          plan was developed.
          Although this plan contains a wealth of information about the harbor system,
I       ~ ~~there are still many issues to be resolved. Therefore, in May 1990 a Town
          Meeting warrant is proposed to raise funds to complete this Harbor Plan. The
          Harbor Planning Committee recognizes that just as the Stage Harbor System
I       ~ ~~is constantly changing, so too are the issues facing it. Therefore, this plan is
          not intended as the end, but rather the beginning.









I        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.     12
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990



I
I
I
I

I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








                        COASTAL AREA FUNCTIONAL BOUNDARIES


          One of the most important tasks in completing a harbor plan for the Stage
3        ~~~Harbor system was the selection of the study area itself. This harbor plan
          attempts to resolve the major issues affecting the use of the Stage Harbor area.
          The limits of the study area have changed as the Harbor Planning Committee
          has wrestled with the harbor' s use issues. Originally the study area was
I       ~ ~defined to roughly indlude Stage Harbor, Oyster Pond and River, Mill Pond,
          and the Mitchell River and its associated flood plain. However, it became
3        ~~~apparent that additional lands were tied to the harbor. After long
          consideration, the Harbor Planning Committee recognized that the Stage
          Harbor system functions as a dynamic resource, and the limits of the harbor
          plan should include all the land area which is functionally tied to the system
          either environmentally or culturally.
          Five environmental and cultural functional study area boundaries have been
          defined and mapped (see Functional Overlay Maps #1 and 2). These
          functional boundaries are used to evaluate the impact of future development
          to the Stage Harbor system. Based upon our understanding of the
          interactions occurring within and among these functional boundaries, goals
          and policies for future development of the harbor and its contributing land
5        ~~~area were set, and an action plan was developed. The study area is defined as
          including all lands within the five functional boundaries and is presented in

i        ~~Map 3.
          The following is a discussion of the functional boundaries of the Stage Harbor
I        ~~~system:


                                  Environmental Boundaries


I        ~~Ground-water Recharge Area and Viral Buffer Zone
          Ground water is a primary source of water which contributes to the Stage
I        ~~~Harbor system. Approximately fifty percent of the precipitation which falls
          on            Cahmsland surface infiltrates (recharges) to the underlying ground
          water system. The ground water flows with the hydraulic gradient and
          ultimately discharges to a stream, vegetated wetland or directly to the Stage
          Harbor system waters.
3        ~~~Ground water provides a steady base flow of fresh water to the Stage Harbor
          system. This input is important in maintaining water quality within the
          estuary. The estuaries of the Stage Harbor system serve as important nursery

          Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       13
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







3        ~~~grounds for the harbor's fisheries. Salinity gradients, nutrient (nitrogen and
          phosphorus) concentrations, and bacterial and viral counts within the Stage
          Harbor system's waters are directly impacted by the quantity and quality of the
I       ~ ~incoming ground water. For example, if a large quantity of fresh ground
          water discharges into the Stage Harbor system, the salinity of Stage Harbor
3        ~~~will decrease.

          The ground-water drainage area to the Stage Harbor system was mapped
          utilizing the regional water table map prepared by USGS (1974) and pond
I       ~ ~~water elevations. As these data are very limited in the study area, ground-
          water drainage divides were inferred based in part on surface drainage
I        ~~~patterns.


I        ~~Storm Water Drainage Watershed Area
          Commercial fishing is a fundamental element of Chatham's heritage and
          economy. Threats to fishing include overfishing, loss of fishing area due to
          the presence of docks and piers, dredging and filling, and water pollution. As
          precipitation falls to the ground it either infiltrates into the soil or flows over
I        ~~~the land as surface runoff seeking a lower elevation. Surface water runoff
          flows over parking lots, roads, sidewalks and lawns, and picks up pollutants
          such as silt, fertilizers, animal wastes, and other organic and inorganic
I        ~~~materials. Storm water with its associated pollutants flows to Stage Harbor,
          Oyster Pond, Mill Pond and its tributaries and associated wetlands.

3        ~~~Since 1984, Oyster Pond has been routinely closed to shellfishing during a
          portion of the summer, and in 1989 a portion of Stage Harbor was closed to
           sheilfishing for the first time. Testing of culverts at Oyster Pond has linked
I       ~ ~~the influx of pathogens carried to the pond through storm water to
           shellfishing closures. It is important that the Town monitor the generation
           of pollutants in land areas which contribute storm water runoff to the Stage
U       ~ ~Harbor system either through overland runoff or through the Town's storm
           water drainage collection system.

I         ~~A USGS topographic quadrangle map (1974) was used to delineate the Stage
           Harbor system's surface water drainage area. Because runoff travels from
           higher to lower elevations the limits of the drainage area include land within
I       ~ ~~the topographic divide for the system. However, accuracy of the delineation
           is limited due to the large scale (1:25,000 or I inch = 2080 feet) of the
3         ~~~topographic map and the relatively large contour interval (10 foot interval).
           On-site testing and analysis is needed to more accurately define this area. It is
           hoped that in the future Chatham will obtain the funds necessary to conduct
I         ~~~a more in-depth delineation of Stage Harbor's surface watershed.


           Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       14
I~~~~rf eot 8My19







I        ~~Another key element in determining the storm water drainage area is the
          Town's storm water collection system. Through the use of a storm water
          collection system, it is possible that an area which would not naturally
I       ~ ~~contribute to the study area will in fact do so, as a result of collecting drainage
          and piping it into Stage Harbor, Mill Pond, Oyster Pond and their tributaries.
          The Town does not possess up-to-date information about the location and
I       ~ ~~design of their drainage collection and discharge system. Without this
          information only a rough delineation of watershed areas is possible. A storm
          water drainage study is currently underway, and it is hoped that the study will
1       ~ ~provide this information. Oyster Pond contains a large storm water culvert
          located next to the swimming beach. Culverts adjacent to Stage Harbor
          system waters also exist along Bridge Street.

          Sea-level Rise/Coastal Storm Hazard Zone

          Public concern over the possibility of global warming and climate change
          have grown during the past decade. One widely discussed potential impact of
          global warming is an increase in the rate of sea-level rise. Increases in the rate
          of sea-level rise will have substantial impact on our nation's low-lying coastal
           areas, many of which are densely built and populated. As sea-level rises,
          inland areas will become inundated by the sea. Inland areas, and the
           structures built upon them, will be lost. Chatham's Stage Harbor shorefront
           areas are generally developed. The results of an increase in sea level are
           already being'experienced in some areas.
I        ~~~Coastal engineering structures have been constructed to combat the rising sea.
          Modifications to buildings have been made to minimize adverse impacts.
           However, buildings and roads are still being lost during storms due to the
I       ~ ~~continued encroachment of the ocean. In some areas the problem is not as
           severe, since beaches are wide enough to prevent waves from reaching the
           nearby structures. However, with a continued rise in sea level, many of these
U       ~ ~~areas will also be affected.
           Aubrey Consulting, Inc. conducted a preliminary analysis of the potential
I       ~ ~~impacts of sea-level rise on the Town of Chatham. As a first step to show
           potential impacts of sea-level rise. 5 and 10 foot sea-level rise scenarios have
           been chosen. Due to the lack of scientific knowledge, it is impossible to
I       ~ ~~provide time estimates of when such rises might occur. There is a general
           consensus in the scientific community, however, that sea-level. rise during
           the next century will be closer to a 2 foot scenario than the 5 foot or 10 foot
           scenarios. However, these higher scenarios are realistic when tides and storm
           surges are considered and therefore should be used when evaluating the
           impact of sea-level rise on development. For example, the 10 year stillwater
           elevation for Stage Harbor is 5.2 feet (Federal Emergency Management Agency
           (FEMA), 1985); a 10-year storm coupled with high tides and sea-level rise may
U        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.       1
           Draft Report, 18 May 1990







          produce water elevations of more than 10 feet. The lower projections suggest
          a standard for zoning based on realistic oceanic changes. The higher
          projections identify those areas susceptible to increased flooding potential
I       ~ ~during storms.


      I                            ~~~~~~~Cultural Boundaries

          Viewsheds

          Chatham's character is largely defined by its visual assets. Both residents and
          tourists enjoy Chatham's small town, fishing village atmosphere and natural
          beauty.
          The viewsheds boundary includes those areas which contribute to Chatham's
          character and aesthetics, such as areas which are accessible to the public by
          land and water, and provide scenic views of the Stage Harbor system and its
          bordering lands.

          Three methods were used to map critical viewshed areas:
          1)    the first method relies upon input from the Harbor Management
                Committee in mapping locations from roads and public lands from
 I            ~ ~~~which exceptional views can be accessed;
          2)    in addition to views of the water from the land, residents and visitors
 I             ~~~~which partake of water-related recreational opportunities define Stage
                 Harbor by their views of the land from the water. The most visual and
                 therefore critical land areas are shorefront parcels. The land use map
 I            ~ ~~~was used to delineate all shorefront property in the Stage Harbor
                 system;

I        ~~~3)    a third scenic area in the Stage Harbor system is its natural topography.
                 As one looks from the water to the horizon you see the graceful,
                 natural topography of the land. Any structure which disrupts the
 I            ~ ~~~continuity of the horizon detracts from the natural beauty of the Stage
                 Harbor system land area. All land within the natural topographical
                 divide of the Stage Harbor system is important in defining the harbor's
                 topographic views. This land area boundary includes all land within
                 the storm water drainage boundary.

          Public Access/Ownership Zone

I        ~~~Public access to the water is of vital importance in Chatham since much of its
          economy depends on water-related activities such as boating, shellfishing and
          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        16
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~swimming.  Chatham cannot continue to support a shellfishing industry or
          provide water-related opportunities to all of its residents without the
*        ~~~provision of public access.
          The public access zone is defined as the landward boundary of individual
          parcels which are contiguous with the waterfront. The Town's land use map
          was used to determine which parcels currently have access to the water, and
          among these, which are privately, versus publicly, owned.

















~~~~HrlyWte eennIn.1
I~~~~rf eot 8My19



I
I
I
I
I
     I ~~~~~Inventory and Analysis
I
I
I
I
I 
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








                                INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS


          As a part of the harbor planning process, information about the Stage Harbor
          area's natural resources, marine resources, navigational aids and coastal
I       ~ ~hazards, and land and harbor uses was collected and mapped. The following
          section describes the natural and cultural resources of the Stage Harbor study
          area. The resources and land and harbor use patterns provide both
I       ~ ~~constraints to, and opportunities for, future use of the Stage Harbor system.
          Chatham is located on the southeast corner of Cape Cod, and is surrounded by
          water: Nantucket Sound to the south, the Atlantic Ocean to the east, and
          Pleasant Bay to the north. The town has approximately 66 miles of coastline.

       I                             ~~~~~~~~Natural Resources

          Chatham's natural resources are a major part of theTown's aesthetic appeal
          and are us ed for recreational hiking, swimming and boating by its residents
          and visitors. The beauty of a sunset over Chatham's wetlands and waters is
3        ~~~unheralded. In addition to scenic views, the presence of these resources is a
          constant reminder of the connection between man and his natural
          environment. Many people seed confirmation of this link between nature
          and man when visiting Chatham.
          The Stage Harbor study area is comprised of a series of estuarine systems
I       ~ ~which open to Nantucket Sound and contains many valuable natural
          resources. The most valuable natural resources for the purposes of harbor
          planning are wetlands, salt and fresh waterbodies, open lands, and rare or
I       ~ ~~especially sensitive wildlife and plant habitats. The value of the Town's
          water bodies and wetlands to Chatham's shellfish and finfish industry, and
          their beauty and function in controlling flooding, make them resources
          worth appreciating and protecting. Much of Chatham's economic prosperity
          depends upon the viability of these resources.

I        ~~Wetlands

          Chatham's wetlands, estuaries and waterbodies are important for many
I       ~ ~~reasons, including their ability to moderate flooding, to provide pollutant
          attenuation, to provide habitat for aquatic and terrestrial plants and animals,
          and for recreational opportunities. For example, wetlands have the capability
          to store large quantities of water, which reduces peak flows and helps to
          moderate flooding, thereby preventing storm damage to coastal properties
          and lessening erosion. Wetlands may lessen water pollution through the
          uptake or attenuation of nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus, and heavy
          metals.

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        18
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







U        ~~Wetlands and their associated open waters provide important habitat and
          nursery grounds for animals, birds, shellfish and finfish. The Stage Harbor
I       ~ ~system waters provide both soft and hard-bottomed substrate, allowing for the
          proliferation of shellfish. The variety of resource conditions provide in the
          Stage Harbor system is one important reason for its high productivity.
I       ~ ~Species such as quahog (Mercenaria mercenaria) and soft-shell dam (Mya
          arenaria) seek soft muddy bottom areas, while oysters (Crassostrea~and
          mussels (Mytilus) prefer hard-bottom substrate. The system also supports
I       ~ ~~healthy stands of eel grass (Zostera marina). Eel grass provides important
          cover and food for many aquatic species. Chatham's valuable bay scallop
          industry is dependent upon the health of its eelgrass, since scallops thrive
I       ~ ~among these beds. The location of hard and soft-bottomed substrates and the
          location of eelgrass beds was provided by the Chatham Shellfish Department
I        ~~~(1989) and is presented on Map 4.

          The approximate location of wetlands in the study area is shown on the
*        ~~~natural resources overlay map (Map 5). These locations were transferred
          from aerial photo maps prepared by the Massachusetts Department of the
          Environment Wetlands Restriction Program (DEM WVRP, 1978). Wetlands in
          the Stage Harbor system are classified by type: salt marsh, dune, shallow fresh
          marsh, deep marsh, beach, barrier beach, sea cliff, wooded swamp, tidal flat,
          shrub swamp and cranberry bog. There may be smaller wetlands in the study
*        ~~~area that do not appear on the overlay maps completed as a part of this harbor
          plan since field surveys were not undertaken. Table I summarizes wetland
          types and acreages in the two study area contributing areas (full details are
I       ~ ~shown in Appendix 1. Acreages were determined by planimetry from DEM
          WRP maps.

*        ~~Wildlife

          Wetlands and open waters serve as habitat for other riparian and terrestrial
          species and are known to support many rare and endangered species of plants
          and animals. The designations threatened, endangered, etc. are terms applied
          by federal and state agencies. The term "endangered" is applied to native
I       ~ ~~species considered to be in danger of extinction, "threatened" is applied to
          native species which are rare or declining in number and thought likely to
          become endangered in the future; "special concern"~ is applied to native
I       ~ ~~species that may become threatened; and "rare" is a general term for species
          that are infrequently observed. In Massachusetts, 321 CMR 8.00 lists
          regulations governing the use of these terms and specifies procedures for the
           development of species lists naming plants and animals whose abundance
          fits these categories. The Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program provides
          lists of such species to interested people.


U         ~~~Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.      19
           Draft Report, 18 May 1990






          The study area includes several special natural resources. The entire Harding
          Beach area falls within estimated habitat for rare wildlife species that occur in
          wetlands, according to the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program atlas
I       ~ ~(1989). The eastern tip of Harding Beach West supports a seabird colony
          which includes the Piping Plover (Chatham Open Space Plan, 1985). Piping
          Plover is a threatened species in Massachusetts. Other rare birds that may be
I       ~ ~found in the study area include: Least, Arctic and Common Terns (special
          concern), Roseate Tern (endangered), Northern Harrier (threatened). The
          Town's current Open Space Plan (1985) lists eight rare plant species found in
I       ~ ~Chatham; some of these may occur in the study area since most are associated
          with riparian (land adjacent to water) or wetland areas. A portion of the
          federal Monomoy Wildlife Refuge also falls within the study area and is an
          important source of wildlife habitat.
          The locations of Chatham's terrestrial resource areas generally coincide with
I       ~ ~two land uses: designated open lands and vacant undevelopable land. This
          suggests that many of the natural resource areas are already protected from
          development for dwellings or commercial purposes. However, additional
          protection may be necessary to prevent the degradation of these resources
          from other less direct impacts such as the release of stormwater drainage and
          its associated pollutants into these systems.

          Natural Resource Protection

U        ~~~Some protection of natural resource is provided by existing state legislation
          and local bylaws and regulations. Wetlands, including barrier beaches,
          beaches, bogs, dunes, fresh marshes, inland or coastal banks, land under any
          storm water, land with shellfish or fish runs, salt marshes, salt ponds, sea
          cliffs, shrub swamps, tidal flats, wooded swamps and the like, are protected by
          the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (1976), and Town of Chatham
          Wetlands Regulations (1986), administered by the Conservation Commission.
          The Wetlands Restriction Program was established to provide greater
I       ~ ~protection of valuable wetland resources. Development restrictions have
          been incorporated into the property deeds of landowners possessing lands
          with these resources. The Town of Chatham has established Conservancy
I       ~ ~Districts through zoning to provide more significant review of development
          in these areas. Conservancy districts include all wetlands protected by the
          Wetlands Restriction Program, as well as Chatham's floodplain areas, fresh
I       ~ ~waterbodies, and any saltwater shoreline areas not otherwise included. The
          locations of resources designated as Conservancy District were provided
          through the Town's Conservancy District maps (Nickerson and Berger, 1974)
          and are shown on Map 5.



U        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.       20
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







          Marine Resources

          Shellfish

          Chatham's Stage Harbor ecosystem has been described as the "bread and
          butter" of the Town's sheilfishing industry. Residents shellfish for
I       ~ ~recreational and commercial purposes. Commercial harvesting of bay
          scallops, quahogs, soft shell clams, and mussels occurs throughout Stage
          Harbor, Mitchell River, Mill Pond, Oyster River and Oyster Pond.
I       ~ ~Recreational shellfishing takes place throughout the Stage Harbor system.
          Residents shellfish for quahogs, soft-shell clams, bay scallops, and mussels, as
          well as oysters which are off-limits to commercial sheilfishermen. The
          general distribution of shellfish in the Stage Harbor system is presented in

I        ~~Quahogs and bay scallops generally concentrate off-shore in the soft muddy
          bottomed substrate where eel grass is abundant. The quahog and bay scallop
          are the two primary monetary commercial shellfish species in Chatham.
          Quahog production has been consistent from year to year making it the
          fundamental money crop of Chatham's shellfishermen. Map 7 presents the
          1989 distribution of quahiogs in the Stage Harbor System, as provided by the
          Town's Shellfish Warden. Quahogs are found in medium to high
          concentrations throughout most of Oyster Pond, Stage Harbor, Mitchell River
fl       ~~and Mill Pond.

          Bay scallops have a 2-year life-span and come and go at random in the system.
          During their peak years, scallops are a valuable cash crop to the
          shelifishermen of Chatham. Peak years have, in the past, produced as much
          as 20,000-25,000 bushels of scallops annually in the Stage Harbor system alone.
I       ~ ~~At present prices, such a catch is worth close to $800,000. As word spreads of
          the tremendous scallop yields, more residents begin commercial fishing. In a
          peak year, there have been as many as 550 commercial permidts sold in
I       ~ ~Chatham. Map 6 presents the location of bay scallops. Due to their sporadic
          nature, scallops do not appear annually in all the areas shown on Map 6, but
          are traditionally found there. Particular scalloping hot spots are the Oyster
I       ~ ~~River, Mitchell River, the Sears Point side of Stage Harbor and the edge of
          Island Flat.

I        ~~~Soft-shell clams, oysters and mussels are interspersed along the hard-
          bottomed shore areas. Soft-shell dams occur in virtually all the intertidal
          areas of the Stage Harbor system, and occur in commercially-viable quantities
I       ~ ~in Oyster Pond, Stage Harbor and Mitchell River. Oysters occur sporadically
          throughout the system, with the greatest concentrations being in the Mitchell
          River and east of the harbor inlet. Oysters cannot be commercially harvested
          in Chatham, but may be harvested by family permit holders during all but the

K        ~~~Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.      21
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







summer months (May 1-August 31) of the year. Mussels occur sporadically
throughout the system. Family permit holders may harvest mussels.

Shellfish predators in the Stage Harbor system include horseshoe crab, moon
snails, conches and various crabs and drills.

The Stage Harbor system generally contains exceptional water quality, as
evidenced by the viability of its shellfishery. However, problems of water
quality exist. The northeast portion of Oyster Pond has been annually dosed
due to high fecal coliform bacteria counts, and all of Oyster Pond has been
seasonally closed during the summer months to shellfishing. Closures at
Oyster Pond have been linked to storm water contamination. The
Champlain Flat area along Stage Harbor was dosed for the first time last year
due to high coliform counts. The source of coliform has not been
determined.

Changes in shellfish productivity are hard to assess due to the natural
fluctuation and variation in size of shellfish grounds, as well as changes in
harvesting equipment, quotas and the number of permits issued annually.
The largest source of fluctuation in production is the sporadic nature of
important monetary species like the bay scallop and soft-shell dam. In
contrast, quahog production has been consistent and may in fact be increasing
over time. Table 2 and Figure 1 present the number of bushels of shellfish
harvested annually in the Stage Harbor system since 1975. Anywhere from
275 to more than 500 commercial permits are issued annually town-wide. A
total of 305 commercial permits were solid in 1989. It is estimated that 2,000
resident and non-resident permit holders (or approximately 7,000 people)
enjoy shellfishing for food and recreation in Chatham.


                       Figure 1. Stage Harbor System Shellfish Landings

         35000-.
         30000..
         25000 --
Bushels of 20000.,
Shellfish
Harvested  15000-
         10000 -
          5000'
             0-
               1975197619771978 19791980 1981 19821983 19851986 19871988

                                        Year


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        22
Draft Report, 18 May 1990










           TABLE 2 BUSHELS OF SHELLFISH HARVESTED ANNUALLY


Year1 Oyster Pond & River     Stage Harbor     Mill Ponds           Total

1975            503                3,562         1,401               5,466
1976           1,389              8,568          1,314              11,271
1977           4,544               6,827         1,593              12,964
1978            823                4,634         1,312               6,769
1979            648                5,771         1,194               7,613
1980 8,627 190521 2,267 30,415
1981 995 8,753 2,155 11,903
1982           4,627              13,543         1,985              20,155
1983            798                6,823         1,372               8,993
1985           5,263              10,907         1,960              18,130
1986           1,018               7,829          751                9,598
1987            929                7,395          644                8,968
1988           1,071               9,199          737               11,007


Source: Town Shellfish Department


Shellfish Prooaiation Proaram

The high level of shellfish production in Chatham is due both to natural
processes and artificial propagation. The Town of Chatham has an extensive
shellfish propagation program aimed at increasing the natural productivity of
its shellfishing habitat. Through town meeting action and a special act of the
legislature, since 1983, 75% of each commercial permit ($150) is put into a
special commercial shellfish propagation revolving fund. Monies are used to
purchase shellfish stock and supplies, and to conduct shellfish-oriented
research. Quahog, oysters and soft-shell clam are currently propagated
townwide. The greatest propagation effort is directed toward the cultivation
of quahog due to the monetary importance of this species.

Quahog is currently the only propagated species in the Stage Harbor system.
Quahog seed have been planted throughout the Stage Harbor water system.
In 1989, through an expenditure of $66,000 from the revolving fund, the
Chatham Shellfish Department planted 6 million 8-15 millimeter quahog
hatchery seeds in the Stage Harbor System. Map 6 presents the location of
quahog seeding in 1989.

The Shellfish Constable is responsible for the supervision and maintenance
of the propagation equipment and supplies. As of February 1989, the Town


1Note: no information available for 1984 shellfish catch

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.           23
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








had purchased 24 million quahog seed for townwide propagation. In recent
years, it has become difficult to acquire a sufficient amount of shellfish seed
from hatcheries. If this situation continues, Chatham may need to consider
constructing and operating its own hatchery. The Shellfish Department has
begun a reserve hatchery fund to prepare for this need.

Aquaculture

The Stage Harbor system historically had an active aquaculture industry.
Private oyster aquaculture grants were active in the Oyster River in the mid-
century. However this industry declined as the Chesapeake and New York
Oyster became victim to over-fishing, pollution and disease, leading to
increased seed costs. Around this time, eel grass also became re-established in
the Oyster River leading to a decline in oyster growth and greater difficulty in
harvesting. Thus oyster aquaculture ended.

Aquaculture was once again practiced in the Oyster River in the mid-
seventies. One private grant holder currently cultivates quahogs and oysters
on 3 acres located on the east end of the Oyster River adjacent to Oyster Pond.
The location of the grant is shown on Map 6. The aquaculture program has
been successful and is expected to continue.

Finfish

The Stage Harbor system serves as nursery grounds for various finfish, and
provides great opportunity to the Town's residents and visitors for
recreational finfishing. Popular sport species include winter flounder, tautog,
bluefish, scup, and striped bass. Anglers fish throughout the Stage Harbor
system. In recent years, areas like the bridge on Bridge Street and the sand bar
off the Morris Island dike have been especially popular for recreational
finfishing.

Coastal Hazards

The natural resources in the study area are dynamic. The shorelines of Stage
Harbor, Mitchell River, Mill Pond, Oyster Pond, and Oyster River change
with the tides, storms and season. The recent formation of the North Beach
Inlet is a clear example of this change. Sea-level rise also leads to shoreline
changes.

Coastal management programs are uniquely involved with the protection of
lives and property along the coast. Such a program often has the
responsibility of controlling coastal development so as to avoid the hazards of
storm surge, hurricanes, long-term erosion or accretion, and sea-level rise.
Historically, important coastal zone management decisions have been made
without the use of vital coastal hazard databases. However, with future

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        24
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~~demands on coastal development increasing, it is crucial that new
          management policies be based on accurate coastal hazard data. Incorporation
          of these data into coastal management programs will promote decisions and
          choices whose long-term effects will be beneficial to as many people as
          possible.

          Specific coastal hazards which require careful planning for the Stage Harbor
          complex include the following: storm related wave activity, long-term
          shoreline erosion or accretion, sea-level rise, and storm surge and flooding
          associated with northeasters and hurricanes. Due to its orientation, Stage
          Harbor is protected by Nauset Spit and Monomoy Island from waves
I       ~ ~approaching from the Atlantic Ocean. Waves entering Stage Harbor directly
          from Nantucket Sound are limited to those approaching from the southwest;
          these waves are commonly generated during the summer months and are
I       ~ ~~associated with low potential energies. Because of the low wave energy,
          significant trends in long-term shoreline erosion or accretion inside the Stage
          Harbor system have not been recorded, and will not be addressed in this
I       ~ ~~report. One potential area of concern is the southeast side of the sand dike
          constructed in 1965-67 connecting Morris Island to Harding Beach. This dike
          area may be subject to waves from the Atlantic Ocean approaching from the
I       ~ ~southeast between Nauset Spit and Monomoy Island. Although most waves
          in this area will break on nearby shoals, it is possible that larger, long-period
          hurricane generated waves could cause erosion of the dike area. The
I       ~ ~~possibility of direct wave attack on the sand dike will decrease in the future, as
          the southern portion of Nauset Spit created during the 1987 breach, migrates
          south toward Monomoy Island.
          In order to assess the existence and severity of storm surge and associated
          wave activity in the Town of Chatham, the Federal Emergency Management
          Agency (FEMA) conducted a flood insurance study for the Town. This study
          provides the most accurate and up to date information on flood hazards for
          the harbor areas examined in this report (Stage Harbor, Oyster Pond, Mill
          Pond). Results of the FEMA study on flood hazards in the Town of Chatham
          will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

          FEMA Flood Insurance Study

          The principal results of the FEMA Flood Insurance Study for the Town of
          Chatham are a series of nine Flood Insurance Rate Maps. These maps are
          printed at a scale of Itt=4O00. As a part of the current study, information from
I       ~ ~~the Flood Insurance Rate Maps #6-9 were translated onto the Flood Zone and
           Bathymetry Map of the Stage Harbor, Oyster Pond, Mill Pond complex. This
          map denotes the 100-year flood boundary as well as the various FEMA flood
I        ~ ~~insurance zones. All elevations shown on these maps are referenced to the
          National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929.

           Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       25
I         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








To provide a national standard without regional discrimination, the 100-year
flood has been chosen by FEMA as the base flood for flood plain management
purposes. The 100-year flood boundary marks areas below which there is a
1% annual chance of flooding (Map 8). The location of the 100-year flood
boundary within a given community is determined using a series of
sophisticated hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. In the hydrologic analysis,
the 100-year stillwater elevation is determined from a synthesis of National
Ocean Survey tide gage records and historic high-water mark elevations for
major floods. The following storms were used for the Chatham Flood
Insurance Study:

                         September 23, 1938
                         September 14-15, 1944
                         August 31, 1954
                         February, 1978

Hydraulic analyses are then conducted to account for increases in water
elevation resulting from wave action. During the hydraulic analysis, wave
crest elevations, wave runup, changes in ground elevation, vegetation, and
physical features are combined to compute wave envelope elevations
associated with the 100-year storm surge. The wave envelope elevations are
then added to the 100-year stillwater elevations to determine the elevation of
the 100-year flood boundary. This elevation is referred to as the base flood
elevation (ft, NGVD). In areas protected from wave action, the elevation of
the 100-year flood boundary is simply the 100-year stillwater elevation. The
100-year flood boundary shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, therefore
reflects stillwater elevations due to tidal and wind setup effects, and includes
the contributions from wave action.

Additional information on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps include flood
insurance zones. There are five different categories of flood insurance zones
shown on the maps. A zones are special flood hazard areas inundated by the
100-year flood. B zones are flood hazard areas located above the 100-year flood
boundary and below the 500-year flood boundary. C zones are areas of
minimal flooding located above the 500-year flood boundary. D zones are
areas of undetermined, but possible, flooding. V zones are special flood
hazard areas inundated by the 100-year flood that have additional velocity
hazards associated with increased wave activity. V zones are denoted from A
zones when the elevation of the 100-year wave envelope is greater than three
feet above the 100-year stillwater elevation. The elevations shown in
parenthesis in the A and V zones represent the average base flood elevation
in that zone.

Within the Town of Chatham, the following general areas have been
designated as V zones: central Stage Harbor, north shore of Stage Harbor,
Mitchell River, Oyster Pond River, and the harbor side of West Harding

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         26
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~Beach. These areas will be inundated during a 100-year flood event, and will
          experience the effects of increased wave activity. The general areas designated
          as A zones include: Mill Pond, Oyster Pond, and the south and east shores of
          Stage Harbor. These areas will also be inundated during a 100-year flood
          event, however, the effects of wave action will be dampened due to sheltering
          from direct wave attack, or greater distance from the open waters of
          Nantucket Sound and the Atlantic Ocean.

          These maps contain a variety of important information which coastal
          managers and town officials can use to develop sound floodplain
          management policies. Mechanisms such as building setbacks, increased
I       ~ ~construction standards, evacuation planning and development of early
          warning systems can be used to improve protection of property and life from
          natural coastal hazards. Minimum setbacks of coastal development from the
I       ~ ~shoreline reduce damages from flooding and wave action. When
          development is already located in hazard prone areas, coastal programs can
*        ~~~assist in evacuation preparation or even relocation of structures.


          Effects of Sea-level Rise upon Wetlands and Future Development of Shoreline
I       ~~Areas

          Scientists project a slow rise in sea-level in the future. As the sea rises, land
          will be lost and lands once thought to be safe from storm hazards will be at
          risk. Land most susceptible to sea-level rise is presented on Map 1. The
          major impacts associated with sea-level rise are the loss of uplands and
I       ~ ~wetlands, saltwater intrusion into groundwater, and changes in river flow
          and sedimentation. A rise in sea level will have great impact on low-lying
          vegetated areas such as the salt marshes along Stage Harbor, the Oyster River
          and Morris Island. These marshes require periodic inundation of sea water
          but cannot exist where the land is constantly submerged. An increase in the
          elevation of the ocean may effectively drown these marshes. If the rise is too
          rapid, these marshes will not be able to keep up with the rising sea and will
          perish. However, areas newly inundated by a rising sea may evolve into
          marsh if conditions are suitable. If sea-level rise is slow, marsh areas simply
          migrate landward; the vegetation grows on the landward side of the marsh
          but dies on the seaward side. In the Stage Harbor study area, land above the
I       ~ ~Oyster River or beyond Hardings Beach may become wetland as sea level
          rises. If no suitable low-lying upland can be inundated due to the presence of
          coastal protection structures or bedrock, sea-level rise will result in a loss of
          marsh.
          Upland areas will also be impacted by sea-level rise. Unlike marshes, upland
I       ~ ~~cannot respond to sea-level rise by migrating. Loss of upland is irreversible;
          once'the upland is inundated, the land is lost (unless sea level falls). The
          amount of upland lost is a function of the rise in sea level and local

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        27
          Draft Report, IS May 1990







U        ~~topography: the lower the land and greater the rise in sea level, the greater

U        ~~~A rise in sea level will impact the salinity of aquifers. In some coastal
          aquifers, a freshwater lens overlies the more dense saltwater. The
          saltwater/freshwater interface is a zone of brackish water. The depth to the
          interface generally increases with distance from the shoreline: the higher the
          water table (ie., the thicker the layer of fresh water), the deeper the transition
I       ~ ~zone. A rise in sea level will cause a recession of the shoreline, and thus a
          recession of the transition zone and a rise in the fresh water/salt water
          interface. Already many coastal communities suffer from a shortage of
I       ~ ~freshwater due primarily to overpumping of coastal aquifers. A rise in sea
          level will likely exacerbate the fresh water problem by causing additional salt
          water intrusion into fresh water wells.


                                Existing Land Use and Zoning

          The previous sections illustrate that Chatham is blessed with a great variety
I       ~ ~of natural resources. The type, intensity and operation of land uses in town
          will have a direct impact upon the integrity of these resources. For example,
          industry may negatively impact air quality, while residential septic systems
          may decrease the quality of ground water. The impacts of uses also change
          seasonally for tourist-related and summer resident-related land uses.

          Land uses in the study area include designated open space; municipal uses;
          semi-public land (such as schools, churches, and cemeteries); industrial and
          commercial uses (including restaurants, tourist accommodations,
          entertainment and retail facilities); and residential lands. The land use
          overlay map (Map 9) presents the location of differing land uses in the study
I       ~ ~area, and identifies valuable open space parcels and their ownership. The
          land area which contributes surface water and ground water to the water
          bodies in the Stage Harbor system was defined earlier. A topographic divide
I       ~ ~separates the Stage Harbor study area into two sub-contributing areas. One
          portion of the study area drains into Stage Harbor and Mill Pond, and the
          other portion drains into the Oyster Pond and River.
          The predominant land use in the Stage Harbor and Mill Pond portion of the
          study area is single and two-family residential development. Commercial
I       ~ ~development is concentrated along Main Street, with a limited amount on
          Stage Harbor. There are also a few Town-owned lands in this portion of the
          study area. Designated open space and vacant undevelopable land parcels
I       ~ ~~(unofficial open space) are con-aon, and large open areas exist south of
          Bridge Street and west of Stage Harbor Road. Federal land located in the Stage
          Harbor study area also provide important open space, and include a small
          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         28
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







U        ~~portion of the Monornoy National Wildlife Refuge and a US Fish and
                  Wildife cces pacelon SageIsland.

H        ~~In the Oyster Pond and Oyster River portion of the study area, commercial
          uses of land are confined primarily to the Main Street downtown area of
          Chatham. Several town buildings are located along Main Street, indluding
          the town offices. Other than the Harding Beach West peninsula, designated
          open space and vacant undevelopable parcels near Oyster Pond and River are
I       ~ ~~not large, but are scattered throughout the area. Residential uses indlude
          several multi-family developments as well as single family and two-family
          units.

          The Stage Harbor area provides several beautiful views and vistas. Views of
          the harbor are afforded from numerous locations along Stage Harbor Road,
I       ~ ~Champlain Road, Bridge Street and Morris Island Road. The Town has
          established the Cedar Street/Champlain Road/Bridge Street/Main Street loop
          as a bicycle route. These roads and several others near the harbor are
I       ~ ~designated as Scenic Roads under MGL Chapter 40. The viewshed boundary
          shown on Maps 2 and 3 includes those areas which contribute to Chatham's
          character and aesthetics. The boundary includes areas which are accessible to
I       ~ ~~the public by land and water, and provide scenic views of the Stage Harbor
          system and its bordering lands. As Chatham grows and redevelops it is
          important that it be done in a way which will not destroy its natural beauty
          and fishing village atmosphere.
          Existing: Zonina and its Imoact uvon Future Harbor Uses

          The existing pattern of land use reflects the zoning of the study area.
          Chatham's land within the Stage Harbor area is zoned to allow residential,
          municipal, small business and general business uses. Chatham's industrial
          park is outside the drainage area to the Stage Harbor system. The location of
          each zoning district is presented in Map 10.

          Shoreline areas located along the Oyster Pond and River, Stage Harbor, and
          Mitchell River and Mill Pond are zoned either R-20, R-40, or municipal--
          with the exception of a Small Business district on Bridge Street. Harding's
          Beach and Harding's Beach Point are owned by the Town of Chatham and are
I       ~ ~~zoned Municipal. Uses allowed in Municipal districts include: agriculture,
          conservation, fishing, public education, public utilities and facilities,
          recreation, religion and municipal uses. All other proposed uses require a
I       ~ ~~special permit. The remainder of the shoreline areas in the Stage Harbor
           system are residentially zoned R-20 or R-40. The Town's R-20 and R-40
           districts allow low-intensity fishing, agriculture and residential uses.
I       ~ ~~Additional uses such as group dwellings, kennels and marina/boatyards are
           allowed with a special permit. Minimum lot size in the R-20 district is 20,000
           square feet, and in the R-40 district is 40,000 square feet.

           Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       29
           Draft Report, 18 May 1990








          As mentioned earlier, land located along Route 28/Main Street is within the
          drainage area of the Stage Harbor system and is commercially zoned.
          Commercial zones include: General Business-GBI, GB2, GB3 and Small
          Business-SB. The following minimum lot sizes are required:

                              Minimum Lot Size
                 GBI          5,000 sq. ft.
                 GB2          7,000 sq. ft.
                GB3          10,000 sq. ft.
                 SB          20,000 sq. ft.

          Permitted uses in the General Business districts include agriculture, fishing,
          marina/boatyards, and general retail establishments. Uses such as gas
          stations, animal hospitals, nursing homes, kennels, light industry and
I       ~ ~apartments incidental to commercial use are allowed with a special permit.
          Boarding and rooming houses, and restaurants are allowed under special
          condition. The Small Business district allows agriculture, fishing, single
          family homes, public education, religious facilities and roadside stands.
          Small business such as antique shops, art galleries, gift shops and rooming
          houses are allowed on special condition. Marinas, boatyards, and dorms are
          allowed with a special permit.
          A Conservancy Overlay District was adopted by town residents to preserve
          ground water quality, protect coastal and inland waters for shellfishing and
          fishing, lessen hazard from flood and tide waters, conserve natural
          conditions, wildlife and open space, as well as to retain other amenities of
          Chatham. Lands subject to the Conservancy Overlay District include all
          submerged lands and lands subject to flooding (including land within the 100
          year flood plain A and V zones), submerged lands in and under all ponds and
          wetlands, and areas lying below 2 feet above the natural high water mark of
          any freshwater pond, lake or watercourse. As was mentioned when
          discussing the town's natural resources, Stage Harbor's waters and its riparian
          wetlands, tributaries, and floodplain areas are included in the Conservancy
          District. In general, only low intensity agriculture; fishing, shellfishing and
I       ~ ~~their associated activities; outdoor recreation; dredging of navigational
          channels and mooring areas; boat launching ramps; public beaches; and bank
          stabilization projects are allowed. Approval by the Harbormaster to conduct
I       ~ ~~many of these activities is required. Many water-dependent uses are allowed
          with a special permit, including: catwalks, ramps, unpaved trails, boat
          shelters, foot bridges, marina and boatyards, and private boat ramps and
I       ~ ~~beaches. The filling, dumping, draining, excavation, and discharge of
          hazardous substances and any sewage effluent from private sewage treatment
          facilities is prohibited in a conservancy district. Residential dwellings are also
          prohibited. A building setback is established from conservancy districts. In
          general, there is a mandatory setback of 50 feet from all coastal conservancy
          districts and 25 feet from inland conservancy districts.

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        30
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990








          Chatham has also adopted a Flood Plain Overlay District which restricts
I        ~~~development in areas prone to flooding. The lowest floor of residential
          structures cannot be less than the base flood elevation. Non-residential uses
          must either have their lowest floor at or above the base flood elevation or
          must be flood-proofed. Land within V-velocity zones cannot be developed
          unless it is demonstrated that structures will be located landward of the reach
          of mean high tide.


       I                                ~~~~~~~~Harbor Uses

          The Stage Harbor system supports a variety of water-dependent uses
          including: recreational boating, commercial and recreational shellfishing,
I       ~ ~swimming, and shoreland hiking. Each of these uses in turn demands
          support facilities such as marinas, boatyards and town landings. Recreational
          boaters must have a place to launch, moor and repair their boats.
I       ~ ~Commercial fishermen require water launching access, mooring, packing and
          loading facilities, winter boat storage areas and boat repair facilities.
          Swimmers demand that land be set aside for public beaches, and hikers
          demand shorefront access. Map 11 presents the location of Stage Harbor's
          water-dependent uses. As the map indicates, many differing uses occur in the
I        ~~~same place and rely upon the same resources.
          Town Landings

1        ~~There are nine (9) town landings in the Stage Harbor System which provide
          either scenic, parking or boating access to the water. Town landings are
*        ~~provided in each waterway or water body in the Stage Harbor System.
          However, only three landings provide boat launching facilities, and parking
          at the landings is generally limited. There is no public boat launching facility
          at any town landings on Mill Pond. The location of town landings is shown
          on Map 11. Table 3 provides a list of town landings in the system and the
          facilities which they provide to the general public.












          Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.       31
5         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990









              TABLE 3 STAGE HARBOR SYSTEM: TOWN LANDINGS


Landing               Water Body/River     Scenic View    Parking  Boating

Oyster Pond Furlong   Oyster Pond          Y             Y         Y

Vineyard Street       Oyster River         Y             Y         N
Barn Hill             Oyster River         Y             Y         Y
Sears Point           Oyster River         Y             Y         N

Battlefield Road      Stage Harbor         Y             Y         N
Port Fortune          Stage Harbor         Y             N         N
Old Mill Boatyard     Stage Harbor         Y             Y         N*

Eliphamet's Lane      Mill Pond            Y             Y         N
Mill Pond             Mill Pond            Y             Y         N**

Key: Y = yes; N = no
* Boat ramp must be rebuilt
* Pier exists but no boat ramp

Source: Town of Chatham Waterways Committee. Review of Chatham's Town Landings.
December 1989.


Town landings are managed by the Board of Selectmen with the advice of the
Harbormaster and Waterways Committee. The Waterways Committee
recently (December, 1989) disclosed a report reviewing the town's saltwater
landings to determine which landings require repairs, maintenance or capital
improvements. The report reviewed the adequacy of public access provided
at each landing and identified any potential problems of storm water runoff
from the landings. The report calls for general maintenance repairs to most
of the landings in the Stage Harbor system. The Waterways Committee
report concluded that efforts should be made to limit surface water runoff to
prevent beach erosion and decrease runoff and its associated pollution
impacts. The committee recommends that impervious surfaces be avoided at
landings for parking areas. To bolster the level of water-related facilities, the
Waterways Committee recommends major capital improvements for the Old
Mill Boatyard to allow launching of larger vessels (up to 50'), renovation of
the wharf building (which currently include the harbormaster office), and the
addition of public floats and dinghy docks. The committee also
recommended exploring the possibility of purchasing a private landing along
the Mitchell River to provide boat access off Bridge Street (commercial
launching is available at Stage Harbor Marine, located on Bridge Street). The
only general boat access provided off Bridge Street is privately leased.



Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        32
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Commercial Fishing Piers

Four fishing piers are currently available to commercial fishermen in Stage
Harbor for the loading and packing of fish. The location of commercial
fishing piers in Stage Harbor is shown on Map 11. All four piers are privately
owned. Several trap fishing companies operate outside of Stage Harbor, using
these facilities for the off-loading of fish.

The Chatham Municipal Fish Pier, located in Chatham Harbor, has
traditionally provided off-loading and packing facilities for the Town's
commercial fishermen. With the formation of the North Beach inlet in 1987,
use of Fish Pier has become increasingly difficult. The channel through the
breach has led to stronger currents exposing many of the moorings to ocean
swells. Docking boats for off-loading fish has become more difficult due to
heavy wave action and shoaling has led to difficulty in navigating to the pier.
Stage Harbor may needed to provide an alternative site for the main fleet if
conditions worsen in Chatham Harbor. However, it must be kept in mind
that use of Stage Harbor has also become increasingly difficult due to shoaling
at the Harbor entrance.

Marina and Pleasure Boat Facilities

There are six private marinas in Chatham which provide a variety of services
to both recreational boats and the commercial fishing fleet, four of which are
located in the Stage Harbor study area: the Chatham Yacht Basin, Stage
Harbor Marine, Mill Pond Boat Yard, and Oyster River Boat Yard. Services
include boat launching, hauling, repairs/maintenance hnd storage. With the
exception of the Mill Pond Boatyard, all have fueling facilities. Private
marinas provide 124 slips and 95 moorings:

      Marina                          slips               Moorings
       Chatham Yacht Basin               75                  24
       Oyster River Boatyard            23                   23*
       Stage Harbor Marina               26                  38
       Mill Pond Boatyard                 0                  10

       *Some of these are T-floats which handle 2 boats

       Source: Harbor Planning Committee. Harbor Planning Issues: Recreational Use of
       Waterways. 1989.


Parking at the private marinas is variably available, depending upon the
season. Areas used for boat storage in the winter can often be utilized for
parking during the summer months. It is estimated that the four marinas in
the Stage Harbor/Oyster Pond complex can accommodate as many as 160 cars


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         33
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








I        ~~in the peak of the summer. None of the marinas have pump-out facilities for
          septic holding tanks.

U        ~~Moorings

3        ~~Most commercial and recreational boats are kept on moorings since the
          shallow nature of the Stage Harbor system requires that boats be left in deeper
          areas where they will stay afloat at low tide. The Town of Chatham provides
          moorings located throughout the Stage Harbor system. As mentioned in the
          previous section, moorings are also provided at private boatyards and
          marinas. Most large recreational boats and commercial fishing boats are
I       ~ ~moored in Stage Harbor and the Oyster River. Oyster Pond is less intensely
          used. Mill Pond's mooring areas are used by smaller recreational boats
          (usually under 20 ft long) such as small skiff or inboard/outboard boats due to
I       ~ ~~its limited access. Although there is a drawbridge to the entrance of Mill
          Pond making it possible to bring in larger vessels, it is inconvenient to do so.
          Therefore, boat size is generally limited to allow clearance under the
          drawbridge (listed at 8 feet height).
          The Harbormaster (or the Assistant Harbormaster) assigns the location of
          moorings in Chatham's waters. A mooring map is provided which divides
          the Stage Harbor system into several sections. Each owner of a mooring is
        assigned a location. Map 11 presents the designated mooring sections and
          gives a general indication of the concentration (number of moorings/total
          area) of moorings in each section.
I        ~~The following table lists the number of moorings provided by the Town of
          Chatham in the Stage Harbor System:

                                                           #Public Moorinus
                              Oyster River                     259
                              Oyster Pond                       95
                              Stage Harbor                     341
                              Little Mill Pond                  54
                              Mill Pond                         64
                              Mitchell[River                    49
                              Total                            862

                              Source: Chatham Permit Department. December, 1989.

I        ~~The assigned location of a mooring cannot be transferred without the
          approval of the Harbormaster or Assistant Harbormaster. There is currently a
          long waiting list for moorings in Stage Harbor and Oyster River.



          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        34
3        ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~Chatham relies on several sources to provide moorings to its visitor boaters.
          Visitors entering the harbor can call on Channel 16 and contact either the
          Harbormaster or Stage Harbor Marine. Under the direction of the
          Harbormaster, it is usually possible for visitors to temporarily use assigned
          moorings which are not in use. The Monomoy Yacht Club has five moorings
3        ~~in Stage Harbor for visitor use. Under emergency situations the Coast Guard
          has one mooring available to visitors. If no moorings are available in the
          inner harbor, the outer harbor can be used for open anchorage.

              PiaePiers

3        ~~~The Stage Harbor system has a total of 67 private piers. The location of piers
          was provided by members of the Harbor Planning Committee and is shown
          on Map 11. Private piers can limit public use of the harbor since they restrict
I       ~ ~~access along the shore, encroach on shellfish beds and obstruct navigation.
          Table 4 presents the number of pier structures within each river or water body
*        ~~in the Stage Harbor system:


     3                        ~~~~~~~TABLE 4 LOCATION OF PRIVATE PIERS

                              Water Body                      Number
                       Mill Pond and Mitchell River            17
                       Stage Harbor                            17
                       Oyster Pond River                       22
                       Oyster Pond                             11*
                       Total                                   67


   N                  ~~~~~~~Source: Town of Chatham Harbor Planning Committee, 1990.
                        *One additional pier proposed


          Recreational Uses

          Stage Harbor waters are a popular location for water-contact sports including
          swimming, waterskiing, windsurfing and jet skiing (see Map 12). There is
I       ~ ~only one public swimming beach in the Stage Harbor system, located on
          Oyster Pond off Stage Harbor Road. Oyster Pond Beach provides a supervised
          swimming area with bathroom facilities. The Park Department provides
I       ~ ~lifeguard service and swimming lessons for children during the summer
          months. There is ample public parking available. Waterskiing is only
          permitted in Oyster Pond. Windsurfers are seen throughout the Stage Harbor
I       ~ ~~system. There has recently been controversy over the allowance of jet skiing
          in Chatham. jet skiers are currently allowed throughout the Stage Harbor
3        ~~systems where the speed limit permits. The Waterways Committee

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        35
3         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








I         ~~~regulations currently mandate a 5 mile speed limit and require that watercraft
          cannot generate a wake throughout all Stage Harbor's waters, except Oyster
3         ~~Pond.

          Analysis of Harbor Use and Waterfront Access

          Chatham's Stage Harbor system supports a diversity of co-existing public and
          private uses. Recreational boating, boat mooring, skiing, swimming,
3         ~~~finfishing and sheilfishing take place in the Harbor's waters. These uses in
          turn generate demand for waterfront access and services and facilities such as
           town landings, marinas, boatyards, lodging, restaurants, and seasonal
I       ~ ~housing. With each mooring and fishing permit issued comes increased
           demand for these facilities and greater congestion of the water.

           Harbor Coneestion

           All of the various uses in the harbor compete with each other for space. Maps 11
           and 12 present the locations of the differing harbor uses. When these maps are
           overlaid, it is apparent that many of the harbor system's uses occur in the same
           place, leading to increasing congestion and the risk of accidents in the harbor area,
           especially within Stage Harbor and the Oyster River.
           In an effort to maintain safety, the Waterways Commission has adopted
I        ~ ~~regulations limiting speed limits throughout most of the Stage Harbor system
           during summer months. Due to the high level of harbor use, it is essential that
           the safe zone regulations (no swimming, windsurfing, diving, water-skiing,
           anchoring or scuba diving) be observed and enforced.
3         ~~~The following is a brief description of how each harbor use contributes to the
           congestion of the harbor system.

*         ~~Skiing

           Water-skiing and jet-skiing are only conducted in Oyster Pond due to speed and
           wake limitations throughout the remainder of the system waters, but pose
           problems in the Oyster Pond for two reasons. First, in the summer months, the
           pond is heavily used and there are safety hazards between skiers, swimmers and
           other boats. Skiers pose problems to fisherman as they have been known to be
           careless and have disrupted fishing nets and lines. Second, the noise generated by
           outboard engines and jet skis may become annoying to residents of the pond area.
           There are also safety and environmental problems associated with jet skis because
           they can operate in very shallow water near swimmers, piers and shellfishing
*         ~~~areas.




           Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.       36
3         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








U        ~~Sailing

          Sailboat racing is a longo-established use in Stage Harbor but with increasing
          congestion in the inner harbor, the race courses have had to be altered. The
          children's Sprites are too small to be raced outside the harbor, but the Yacht Club
          has moved many of the cat boat and day-sailor races outside. Therefore, there
          remains the need to ensure safety during the sprite races. There is also a
          continuing need to educate young sailors to stay clear of the channel and large
          boats which cannot maneuver easily. It may be necessary to coordinate race
          schedules with high tide so that the less congested outer harbor area could be used.

3        ~Swimming

          Swimming is a use which for safety reasons typically does not co-exist with other
          uses of the harbor such as boating, water skiing and jetskiing. The public
          swimming beach on Oyster Pond is off-linmits to other uses. Any future public
          swimming areas will be off-limits to watercraft.

          Boating

I        ~~Congestion has increased with the number of commercial and recreational boat
          increases. Of particular concern is the storage or mooring of boats. In the
3        ~~summertime the large number of moorings have led to the loss of open water.
          Waterskiing and sailing require large areas of open water to maneuver.

          Chatham currently does not regulate the location of the harbor system's various
I       ~ ~~water uses. The allowable intensity of water uses is limited through the
          permitting system administered by the Town's Harbormaster and Shellfish
          Warden. However, there is no clearly defined procedure for determining the
          maximum acceptable intensity of each use. For example, mooring permits are
          generally issued so long as there appears to be room for the boat itself. However
3        ~~~the impact of that boat upon water quality, congestion and service demand is not
          considered.

3        ~~~Adecuacv of Public Access to the Water and Water-related Supvort Facilities

          All of Stage Harbor's public water uses require some form of access to the
          water itself. The long waiting lists for moorings and the congestion of the
          town's landings suggest that the level of public water access and its associated
          support industries is not adequate to meet demand. For example, although
I       ~ ~~nine public landings exist in the Stage Harbor complex, the landings are small
          and boat launching facilities and parking are limited. A recent Waterways
          Committee report reveals that several town landings currently require repair,

          maintenance and capital improvements.


          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        37
3         ~~~Draft Report, IS May 1990







         Public access to the water is of vital importance in Chatham since much of its
          economy is dependent upon water-related activities. Map 2 illustrates the
          study area's public access zone which was defined to include the landward
          boundary of all land parcels which are contiguous with the waterfront. The
          access zone illustrates which lands in the Stage Harbor complex provide
          access to the system's waters. Most shorefront parcels are privately owned.
          This means that there are limited land opportunities for the general public to
          reach the water.

          The public access zone can be used for planning purposes to earmark new
          land acquisitions, and to decide where to accommodate new demands for
          town landings, etc. For example, as a result of the shoaling and storm surges
          which have occurred since the North Beach breach occurred two years ago,
          Fish Pier may not be useable as a fish off-loading station in the future. As a
I       ~ ~~result, there is increasing pressure on the Town to provide an alternative fish
          processing facility in Stage Harbor. The access zone presents the location of
          land parcels which are currently available to provide this facility.

          The access/ownership zone illustrates that there is little potential for public
          pedestrian shoreline access throughout most of the inner harbor area, unless
I       ~ ~~access easements are acquired, since the majority of the harbor's shoreline is
          privately owned.

U        ~~~In addition to the need for land access, there is also considerable demand for in-
          water access which is not met. Boaters require locations to moor their boats. Most
          boats in Chatham's Stage Harbor complex are moored on private moorings whose
I       ~ ~locations are designated by the Harbormaster. To a lesser extent boats are moored
          at marinas and docks. There is currently a waiting list for mooring locations in
          Stage Harbor and the Oyster River. Many private docks are located in the Stage
          Harbor system. However there is debate as to whether the use of docks should be
          encouraged since they may decrease shoreland access, can impede navigation and
          may encroach on shellfish beds located along the shore.

          Navigation and Harbor Safety

          Bathymetric Data

          Bathymetric maps of the Stage Harbor system will provide an invaluable
          resource for future management decisions. Accurate bathymetric data are
          required for safe navigation of many types of vessels, ranging from
I       ~ ~~commercial fisherman, to pleasure boaters, to safety and rescue vessels
          operated by the United States Coast Guard and local harbor patrol. In areas
          which experience rapidly changing shoals and water depths, the lack of up-to-
I       ~ ~date bathymetric maps can compromise the safety of boaters, sometimes
          resulting in the loss of life. Additionally, the acquisition of bathymetric data
          can help to identify problem shoal areas which require dredging, and are

          Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       38
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







          often used to identify the need for maintenance dredging in channel areas. If
          allowed to develop unchecked, large shoal areas can affect the water
          circulation and tidal flushing in small harbor areas such as the Stage Harbor
          complex.

          As a part of the current study, bathymetric data from the National Oceanic
          and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Nautical Chart #13229 were
          translated onto the Flood Zone and Bathymetry Map of the Stage Harbor,
          Oyster Pond, Mill Pond complex. Bathymetric data collected by Braman
          Engineering during December, 1989 in Oyster Pond River were also translated
          onto the Flood Zone and Bathymetry Map; these data provide a more accurate
I       ~ ~representation of water depths in this area. The Flood Zone and Bathymetry
          map produced for this study shows water depths in feet, and is referenced to
          Mean High Water (MHW).

          Since the water depths in Stage Harbor, Oyster Pond, and Mill Pond (taken
          from the NOAA chart) have not been updated since February, 1985, it is likely
I       ~ ~~that many inaccuracies exist in these data. This is especially true in light of
          the breach through Nauset Spit in January, 1987 which has resulted in
          significant changes in the shoaling rates and patterns of the Chatham area.
I       ~ ~The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has documented rapid shoaling and
          constantly changing water depths in the Chatham Harbor area following
          formation of the breach. Increased shoaling rates have also been documented
I       ~ ~in the approach channel to Stage Harbor. Even though there have been no
          reported cases of increased shoaling inside Stage Harbor as a result of the
          breach, it is certain that the entrance to Stage Harbor will continue to show
          higher than average shoaling rates for the next 5 to 20 years.
          Dredoine Needs

          Persistent shoaling conditions in the approach channel to Stage Harbor create
          navigation hazards for recreational and commercial vessels that utilize the
          harbor. Since the area is a summer resort which is dependent on water
          related activities, in addition to a well established harbor for a large fleet of
          commercial and recreational boats, a safe and navigable passage into the
          harbor is an important concern for many users. Past shoaling problems have
          also interfered with activities of the Coast Guard in providing protection and
*        ~~~assistance to boaters.

          Since the approach to Stage Harbor is a Federally authorized channel, the U.S.
          Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for maintaining navigable depths
          through the channel. The authorized dimensions of the channel are 150 feet
          wide and 10 feet deep at Mean Low Water (MLW); construction of the
I       ~ ~channel was completed in 1965-1967. Maintenance dredging of the entrance
          channel has been required since 1970 in order to maintain the project depth.
          Table 5 shows the history of maintenance dredging at the approach channel to

          Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       39
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Stage Harbor. By dividing the volume of material dredged by the total
number of years between dredging operations, the data in Table 5 have been
converted to annual shoaling rates in Table 6.


            TABLE 5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING - STAGE HARBOR, MA

                Year                     Volume Dredged (cu yd)
                1970                            30,700
                1973                            24,00O
                1974                            21,000
                1976                             8,500
                1977                             7,000
                1978                            52,000
                1984                           120,100
                1987                           117,000



            TABLE 6 ANNUAL SHOALING RATES - STAGE HARBOR, MA

              Year                       Volume Dredged (cu yd/yr)
               1967-1970                         10,000
               1970-1973                         8,000
               1973-1974                        21,000
               1974-1976                         4,000
               1976-1977                         7,000
               1977-1978                        52,000
               1978-1984                        20,000
               1984-1987                        39,000



The shoaling rates presented in Table 6 clearly indicate a wide range of annual
shoaling patterns. This is in part due to the variation in frequency of high
energy storms during the time periods considered. High wave and strong
current activity during these high energy events typically causes an increase
in sediment transport and shoaling rates. Another major factor affecting the
annual shoaling rates is the frequency of dredging. For example, a channel
which is dredged annually or bi-annually will tend to have a higher annual
shoaling rate than the same channel which is dredged less frequently. This is
true because the maximum rate of shoaling occurs right after dredging since
the channel is deeper than the surrounding area, and it tends to trap all
sediment crossing the inlet. As the channel shoals, more sediment is by-
passed around the inlet and the shoaling rate decreases. Even though the
frequency of dredging can significantly affect channel shoaling rates, the need
to maintain navigable water depths in the channel usually dictates when
maintenance dredging must occur.


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         40
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







         One trend shown in Tables 5 and 6 is that the quantity of shoaled material in
         the Stage Harbor approach channel has increased with time. Although
         dredging records were not available for Stage Harbor since formation of the
         1987 breach in Nauset Spit, it is clear that increased sediment transport and
         shoaling as a result of the breach will only exacerbate the problem at Stage
         Harbor.

         The preceding paragraphs have discussed the frequency and need for dredging
         in the approach channel to Stage Harbor. As mentioned before, the U.S.
         Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for maintaining this navigation
         channel. Should there be a need to dredge inside the Stage Harbor complex,
         either to mitigate shoaling problems or to allow construction of new facilities,
          a variety of dredging options are available for the Town of Chatham.
          Alternative dredging methods indlude the following: hydraulic, sidecast, and
I      ~ ~mechanical dredging (hopper or damshell). The disposal alternatives are
          either for open water disposal or upland disposal.

          State Permitting Requirements for Harbor Development

          Several permits are required from local, state and federal agencies before any
          dredging or harbor development can begin at Stage Harbor. The exact
          permitting requirements depend largely on the scope of the project. Below
          are described the agencies likely to be involved if work below high water is
          proposed.

          Agency: Conservation Commission Permit: Order of Conditions

           ANotice of Intent (NOI) must be filed for any project that will remove, fill,
          dredge of alter any Area Subject to Protection Under the Wetlands Act. These
          areas include beaches and land under the ocean. Engineering plans must be
          indluded with the NOI illustrating the dimensions and extent of the proposed
          project. The NOI is reviewed by the Conservation Commission; a public
          hearing is held at which time the project proponent can discuss the proposed
          project with the Commission and any other interested parties. An Order of
          Conditions is issued by the Conservation Commission either approving or
          denying the project. If the project is approved, there may be restrictions or
          guidelines to which the proponent must adhere.

          Agency: DEP, Wetlands Protection Program Permit: Superseding Order of
          Conditions

          The Southeast Region of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)
          reviews Orders of Conditions issued by the Chatham Conservation
I       ~ ~Commission. They or any other interested party (including the project
          proponent) can appeal an Order of Conditions. If this occurs, the DEP
          undertakes a more formal review and issues a Superseding Order of

          Horsley Witten H-egemann, Inc.       41
3        ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








N        ~~Conditions. Any person may request an adjudicatory hearing if they feel the
          Superseding Order is inconsistent with the Wetlands Act.

          Agency: DEP, Waterways Regulation Program Permit: Chapter 91 License

          A Chapter 91 License is required for "projects in, on, over and under tidal
          waters seaward of the mean high water mark". Detailed engineering plans,
          drawn to the required specifications, must accompany the permit application.
          The Chapter 91 License cannot be issued until an Order of Conditions has
U        ~~been received.

          Agency: DEP, Division of Water Pollution Permit: Water Quality
          Control Certification

          A Water Quality Certification is required to assure that the dredging and
          disposal will be in compliance with State standards and policies. Results of
          chemical and grain size analysis of the dredged material, in addition to
          engineering plans, must be included as part of the permit application.

          Agency: Army Corps of Engineers Permit: Section 404

          A permit from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) is required for any
          construction, dredging and/or filling within waterways and wetland areas.
1       ~ ~~The landward limit of the ACE's jurisdiction is typically the high water mark.
          The NOI generally can be submitted to the ACE as the permit application.
3        ~~Additional, engineering plans may be needed.

          There may be permitting requirements in addition to those described above.
          For example, some Towns have zoning ordinances which restrict certain
          activities (such as beach nourishment or dredging) in selected areas.
          Therefore, approval from additional agencies may be needed. Additionally, if
          the project exceeds thresholds established by the Massachusetts
          Environmental Policy Act Unit (MEPA), an Environmental Notification
          Form (ENF) must be submitted to MEPA and a Consistency Statement must
          be filed with the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (MCZM).
          Examples of thresholds which, if exceeded, will warrant the filing of an ENF
          and Consistency Statement include:

                 a. The issuance of a Superseding Order of Conditions permitting any
                    dredging, filling, altering or removal of one-half acre or more of
                    land under the ocean.
                 b. Dredging, including maintenance dredging, or disposal of 10,000
                    cubic yards or more of material.


          Horsley Witten Hegermann, Inc.       42
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







 I             ~~~~c. Licensing of the construction of new marinas having 50 or more
                   slips or of the additions to existing marinas involving an increase of
  *               ~~~~~50 or more slips.

                d. Filling, dredging, construction, rip-rapping, or otherwise directly
                   altering 500 feet or more of waterway bank.


          After reviewing the ENF, MEPA determines whether or not an
          Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for the proposed project. The
          MEPA review of the ENF (and EIR if it is required) must be completed before
I       ~ ~most of the other permits described previously can be issued.

       I                               ~~~~~~~~Water Quality

          Land use activities produce pollutants which may be captured in surface
          runoff during storm events and enter surface waters or infiltrate into ground
          water. Direct ground water pollution may also occur with land use, for
          example, via subsurface septic systems. Therefore, changes in land uses in the
I       ~ ~surface watershed and ground-water drainage area of the Stage Harbor system
          will impact its water quality. A decrease in environmental quality may lessen
          the aesthetic and recreational appeal of Chatham's waterways and the
          productivity of its shellfisheries and finfisheries. Such a decrease would
          negatively impact Chatham residents and visitors. Therefore, the
          maintenance of the Stage Harbor system's water quality is essential.

          According to the Town's shellfish department, the major threats to
          Chathamn's shellfishing are overuse of the resource and water pollution.
          Sources of water pollution include stormwater runoff from roads and parking
          areas; release of sewage effluent to ground water and to surface waters from
          failed septic systems located in coastal areas; fertilizers and pesticides used on
          lawns and golf courses; animal wastes; chemical contamination from careless
          disposal of household hazardous wastes; and oil and gasoline spills from
I       ~ ~motorboats and marinas. These pollution sources are discussed further
          below.

          Stormwater

          Stormwater runoff directly enters the Stage Harbor system from various
          sources including storm drains, boat ramps, roof runoff, and parking areas at
          town landings. The stormwater drainage collection system for Chatham's
          downtown area empties directly into Oyster Pond. The eastern 12 acre
I       ~ ~~portion of Oyster Pond is annually closed to shellfishing. The remaining 103
          acres of Oyster Pond are closed during the summer and fall seasons of each

          Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       43
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







1        ~~year. These closures of Oyster Pond has been linked to stormwater
          contamination.

N        ~~Map 13 was prepared by the Town's Water Quality Laboratory and presents
          the location of stormwater outlets to the Stage Harbor System. A stormwater
3        ~~committee is currently mapping Chatham's stormwater drainage system as a
          first step in finding alternatives to the Town's existing management of
          stormwater.

          Storm water runoff indirectly enters the Stage Harbor system through rivers,
          streams, and wetlands. Recent sanitary surveys identify numerous creeks.,
I       ~ ~ditches and culverts which drain wetlands and uplands and discharge into
          the Stage Harbor system (Duncanson and Sherwood, 1989 a~b,c,d). These
          surveys indicate, however, that discharging creeks and wetlands probably
I       ~ ~only have negative impacts at 3 locations in Stage Harbor. These three
          sampling locations yielded high coliform bacteria counts, but the cause is not
          certain. In Oyster Pond, discharging creeks, ditches and culverts do have a
          negative impact.
*        ~~Sewage

          Septic systems are another source of water pollution. Sewage effluent enters
3        ~~the Stage Harbor system through ground water. Where septic systems fail
          and sewage backs up at the land surface, effluent may also travel in overland
          runoff, conveying nutrients, bacteria and viruses to the Stage Harbor system.
          Inputs such as these decrease water quality in the harbor system. Map 13
          presents the portions of the study area which depend on on-site septic systems
          for sewage disposal. Chatham downtown buildings, as well as buildings
          located along the northeast portion of Oyster Pond and northwest portion of
          Mill Pond are sewered. Chatham is currently under a sewer moratorium
          imposed by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
          Therefore, additional public sewer hookups are not anticipated in the
          immediate future.
          Sewage discharge from boats is also a potential water quality hazard.
          Chatham currently has no pump-out facilities for holding tanks on boats, but
          hopes to remedy this through installation of a pump-out facility at the Old
I       ~ ~Mill Boatyard. Funding for the pump-out station has been obtained and town
          officials are working to obtain the necessary permits. The actual number of
          boats with heads is limited: in 1989, only eight percent of the 862 boats with
I       ~ ~town mooring permits possessed a sewage holding tank. It is estimated that
          only I or 2 live-aboard boats moor in the Stage Harbor system in the summer.
          Since no pump-out facilities are available, it is likely that boaters are dumping
I       ~ ~~their wastes directly into the harbor and ocean waters. On-shore toilet
          facilities are provided at Stage Harbor Marine and the Old Mill Boatyard.


          Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.       44
3        ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990







1        ~~~Fertilizers and Pesticides

          Fertilizers and pesticides are used by residents to maintain lawns and are a
          source of nutrient loading to ground water and surface water. Homeowners
          and lawn care companies may minimize impacts due to fertilizer and
          pesticide use through using smaller applications of slow release fertilizers and
          applying fertilizers when the likelihood of rain is small.

*        ~~Animal Wastes

          Animal wastes (including dog and waterfowl excrement) are common
          pollutants of Chatham's beaches and waters. No large-scale sources of animal
          wastes such as horse farms or dog kennels exist in the Stage Harbor system,
          however, in the summertime, the number of dogs becomes a problem.
I       ~ ~During the sanitary survey conducted in June 1989, water quality
          contamination from bird wastes was noted at several locations: under the
          Bridge Street bridge and near the old Coast Guard house in Stage Harbor,
I       ~ ~throughout Oyster Pond, and near several water quality monitoring stations
          in the Oyster River. Waterfowl concentrate throughout the Stage Harbor
          system at different times of the year.

          Household Hazardous Waste

I        ~~Household hazardous wastes enter the ground water and surface water
          through the dumping of cleaning solvents, paints and oils into toilets,
          stormwater drains and into the ground. These sources of water
          contamination are best controlled through public education.
*        ~~Marinas

          Marinas are a major source of hydrocarbons due to improper fueling
          operations. Fuel tanks must be inspected on a regular basis to detect leaking,
          and fueling operations should be closely supervised to prevent careless
          practices. Town officials are currently working with marina owners to replace
          underground gasoline tanks with above-ground holding tanks. Hazardous
          materials have been identified at the Mill Pond Boatyard, located on Mill
          Pond (Duncanson and Sherwood, 1989a). The quantities of hazardous
I       ~ ~~materials at the boatyard are small and consist of oils, paints, grease, resins,
          etc. Most of these materials are located inside the Boatyard's workshop.
          During the Town's most recent sanitary survey, drums of resins and various
I       ~ ~chemicals were also found along Stage Harbor (Duncanson and Sherwood,
          1989d). Hazardous materials were identified at four locations, including two
3        ~~marinas, along Oyster River (Duncanson and Sherwood, 1989c).



          Horsley Witten Hegermann, Inc.       45
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Water Quality in the Stage Harbor System

Existing water quality data for the Stage Harbor system is limited. Available
data focus on the coliform group of bacteria, which is used in the
Commonwealth's regulatory system to monitor shellfishing areas. Coliform
bacteria have been selected as indicator organisms representative of a broader
range of pathogenic organisms. Fecal coliforms are a subset group thought to
be derived more specifically from the intestinal tract of warm-blooded
organisms. They are relatively easier and less costly to test for than other
bacteria and viruses. However, they may not accurately portray the potential
health risks associated with contaminated waters. Most notably, viruses
behave differently than coliform bacteria in the environment. For instance,
viruses survive longer in colder temperatures, whereas coliform bacteria
thrive in warmer temperatures. Current water quality standards require that
average fecal coliform counts be less than 14 organisms per 100 milliliters
(ml) of water sampled and less than 10% of the samples may have 43 or more
organisms/100 ml.

The locations of sampling stations in the Stage Harbor system are presented
in Figure 2. Water quality data for fecal coliforms has been compiled for the
1984-1989 period (see Table 7). These data indicate that, in general, the 14
organisms per ml maximum water quality standard, based upon a geometric
mean calculation, is being met throughout the Stage Harbor estuarine system.
Station OP-7P in Oyster Pond exceeds this standard but is a stormwater
discharge sampling point, and the sampling location does not overlie active
shellfish beds. Therefore, it should be viewed as documentation of a source
of contamination, but not an indicator of unsafe shellfish conditions in
Oyster Pond.

On the other hand, several stations in Oyster Pond exceed the standard of no
more than 10% of samples with > 43 organisms/100 mls. Based upon these
data, the shellfish beds have been closed from 1 June to 30 November since
1985. Fecal coliform counts during the open season meet water quality
standards. It is believed that stormwater entering the system from two
stormwater culverts located at Oyster Pond Furlong and Stage Harbor Road is
the major contributor to the dosing of these waters.

Chatham's residents and officials recognize that the continued maintenance
of water quality in the Stage Harbor system is essential for the livelihood of
the shellfish industry. In the 1988 Town Meeting, $25,000 was appropriated to
begin study of the town landings, storm drains and catchbasins which impact
shellfishing grounds. In 1985 a part-time water quality laboratory opened in
reaction to Oyster Pond's shellfish closing. This has evolved into a full-time
laboratory headed by a full-time director who oversees seasonal monitoring
of salinities and coliform concentrations at sampling stations throughout the
Stage Harbor system. The laboratory has recently been awarded funds to

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        46
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









       51aï¿½    -I-. -~                                                .4'A



        ,r~~~~-            dp- ~' orï¿½F
                                 OP- 3  -'
                                   S.!
               J-H4                          2
     -O
                       ::                     ~~~~~~~~~~OF-9
                                      OP-10              .5



                   0R5 ~~         ~ /~ -- Yitk.
       ï¿½.                        sOP~~/ 9,'.  'L" .-~ * p



                       -  -2   ..        '1W    '
                                        ",* 


*   /   /         OR-2                    .- R.6
            / /      '.. OR-i











         //            *.                    SH-4i.L   , 2               4 f~-2 
               7/   --- 7               1 (1~
           7             OR-1                 SH-4cH


                          /r 9
                //-.       't                                    r /,I  I
 I~~                                       V







                    - ,     ~~SH-1
         I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~












       150     300'        9(3(
                               FIGURE 2. WATER QUALITY SAMPLING

                          Sm oLOCATIONS IN THE STUDY AREA
        SH-1 Sampling Location4


















     Chatham Harbor Study

     Chatham, MA                  Source: Chathamn Town Laboratory (1990)  HWH, Inc.
     I ~~ ~ ,V~








Table 7. Water Quality Summary: Fecal Coliforms in Harbor Areas*


Station Location            Number of    Stations with    Stations over
                              Stations    Geo. Mean under  43/100 more
                                            14 org./ml**   than 10%, (%)***


Stage Harbor                     9               all           SH-7, 25%
                                                              SH-C, 17%

Mitchell River, Mill Pond        4               all             none

Oyster River                     7               all          OR-7, 13.3%

Oyster Pond                      13         all but OP-7P     OP-3, 22.2%
                                                             OP-6, 18.2%#
                                                             OP-7, 20.0%#
                                                             OP-8, 12.5%#
                                                             OP-5P, 33.0%#
                                                             OP-7P, 58.3%#

During open season (Dec.-May), only OP-7P (37.5%) exceeds the 43/100 standard

*Based on data from Town of Chatham Water Quality Laboratory
**Fecal coliform: geometric mean most probable number is not to exceed
14 organisms per 100 ml of water
***Fecal coliform: not more than 10% of the samples are to exceed a most
probable number of 43 organisms per 100 ml
#In permanently closed area







          expand monitoring to include nutrient analysis. It is anticipated that
          nitrogen and phosphorus levels will be monitored for the first time in the
          summer of 1990.

          Extent of Future Development and Potential Impacts to Harbor Resources

          In order to evaluate the impacts of both existing and potential development on
          Chatham's harbor resources, a complete buildout/developable lot analysis was
I       ~ ~conducted for lands located within the ground water recharge area and surface
          water drainage area to the Stage Harbor system. The methodology used to
          delineate these contributing areas was described earlier in this report. Map 3 and
          Figure 3 present the ground water recharge area and surface watershed boundaries.
          A buildout analysis was used to determine existing and potential levels of
I       ~ ~development within the study area, based on the Town's current land-use
          regulations. Commonwealth land-use enabling legislation within Massachusetts
          dictates that once a community programs itself through zoning and subdivision
          control, it is tied into a development "blueprint"t which is difficult to alter. This
          blueprint frequently results in land development which exceeds the assimilative
          capacity of ground and surface water resources, particularly with respect to
I       ~ ~~nitrogen loading. A particularly difficult issue to resolve in controlling land-use
          within critical areas, is that of pre-existing lots protected from zoning changes by
          the state zoning act (MGL Chapter 40A, Section 6). Moreover, once a definitive
          subdivision plan has been filed with the local planning board, the property owner
          is protected from any new zoning changes for a period of 8 years. Consequently,
          recharge areas to surface and ground water resources may contain numerous
          small, vacant lots, which, if developed, could result in significant degradation in
          water quality.

          BuildoutMehdlv

          A "buildout analysis" is conducted to determine the level of development which
          would occur if a town was "builtout" according to zoning. The study area used for
          the buildout analysis is a combination of the ground-water recharge areas and the
          surface water drainage areas to Stage Harbor, Mitchell River, Mill Pond and Oyster
          Pond and River. Land within both the surface watershed and ground-water
          recharge areas is included because water and its associated pollutants may enter the
I       ~ ~Stage Harbor system through surface or underground routes. For example, inputs
          from sewage may travel in ground water, while runoff from pavement and roofs
          may travel overland and release pollutants directly into the waterbodies. Due to
I       ~ ~~study area topography, two sub-drainage areas contribute to the Stage Harbor
          system: 1) that area draining to Oyster Pond/River, and 2) that area contributing
          directly to Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond. Therefore, impacts to the Stage
I       ~ ~Harbor system were evaluated for both sub-study areas: The study area boundaries
          are shown in Figure 3.


          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        47
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990








 I~~~~~ ?3 





                 A'irper                              go%





          U~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~                                                                           I * 




   Ip...o/







           A

        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IN Pon                            ~ Ai


                                         ~~~~j~~~~~~*~N





                                                AM





                              Light    . .      ,...
                                   -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. .....

1        ~~250       1000    m m 0

              SW 0    mm   fee                 FIGURE 3. STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES



   C)     Oyster Pond/River
         Sub--study Area

   S      stage Hiarbor/Mitchell River/
         Mill Pond Sub-Study Area                                                                   N



* Chatham Harbor Study
-  Chatham, MA                               Sour Ca-ahfam Topographic Quadrangle (USGS 1974) HWVH, Inc.








For the two sub-study areas, the analysis followed a two step process. First, existing
levels of development were documented, based on 1989 assessor's maps and
records, and the town land use overlay map. The buildout potential was then
estimated to evaluate saturation development conditions based on Chatham's
zoning regulations. Buildout potential depends on frontage, lot size and other
requirements set forth in the town zoning regulations. Minimum lot sizes
specified in the Town's zoning bylaw range from 5,000 to 40,000 square feet,
depending on the zoning district. Table 8 lists lot size and frontage requirements
for each district in the study area.


          TABLE 8 MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND FRONTAGE BY ZONING DISTRICT


   Zoning District        Minimum Lot Size      Minimum Frontage       Zoning

      R-40               40,000 square feet         150 feet         Residential
      R-20               20,000 square feet         100 feet         Residential
      SB                 20,000 square feet         125 feet         Commercial
      GB-3                10,000 square feet        100 feet         Commercial
      GB-2                7,000 square feet          50 feet         Commercial
      GB-1                5/}00 sauare feet          50 feet         Commercial


Based on these requirements, the potential for future development was assessed.
On a lot-by-lot basis, the following were counted:

      a)    existing residences

      b)    vacant buildable lots (vacant lots not large enough to allow
             subdivision, but large enough for construction of one dwelling)

      c)    unbuildable lots (including private conservation lands and lands not
             buildable due to wetlands, small size, or lack of access)

      d)    subdividable lots (parcels large enough to allow division into 2 or
             more lots under zoning for the relevant district)

      e)    town-owned lots

      f)    commercial lots.

Setback requirements were also considered in the buildout analysis. Commercial
parcels not on sewer were examined to determine their current use, and the size of
restaurants (number of seats) and motels (number of units) was determined.
Assumptions used in the buildout are as follows:


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         48
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







 I             ~~~~a)    Lots falling partially into the study area boundaries are counted if at
                       least half the lot is within the bounds, or if, due to shape and/or
                    location of lot, septic systems are expected to be located in the study

 I             ~~~~b)    The land-use map is more up to date than individual assessor sheets.
                       However, if the land-use map does not indicate that a parcel is
                       residentially developed but a house is shown on the assessor sheet,
                       the house is counted.

                 c)    Parcels designated "group" are checked to determine their number of
   I                 ~ ~~~~~units; if their land-use code is"1090" (mixed single and multiple
                       housing), 4 houses are assumed.

 I             ~~~~d)    Subdivision of land is based on acreage and frontage requirements,
                        and in a general sense, setback requirements. On lots requiring an
                        access road, 15% of the acreage is subtracted for the road.

                 e)    All land uses are assumed to be year-round.

I         ~~~Results of the buildout analysis are summarized in Tables 9 and 10, details are
          shown in Appendix 2.











~~~HoseWitnHgmnIn.4
U~~~~rf eot 8My19










                   TABLE 9 SUMMARIZED RESIDENTIAL BUILDOUT DATA


                                                                 Stage Harbor/       Entire
                                                 Oyster          Mitchell RJ         Study
                                                 River/Pd.       Mill Pd.            Area


Existing residences                                 1213              526              1739
(sewered)                                           (178)             (36)              (214)

Existing commercial parcels                          148               53               201
(sewered)                                            (86)             (27)              (113)

Town-owned parcels                                    34               22                56
(sewered)                                             (3)              (1)                (4)

Unbuildable parcels                                  178              117               295

Single buildable lots (no potential
for further subdivision)                             202               74               276

Subdividable parcels                                  49               26                 75

Additional residences provided
through subdivision                                  149               61               210

Total potential increase
in residences                                        351              135               486

























Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.                  50
Draft Report, 18 May 1990










                 TABLE 10 STUDY AREA OPEN SPACE INFORMATION


                                                      Stage Harbor/   Entire
                                        Oyster       Mitchell R./    Study
                                        River/Pond    Mill Pd.       Area
                                        (acres)      (acres)         (acres)


Total size of contributing area          1,614           1,341         2,955

Amount of open space land in
contributing area                          324            223            547

Percent of open land                        20%            16%            18%

Amount of open water in
contributing area                          275            154            429

Percent of open water                       17%            11%            14%

Total open space                           599            377            976
(land and water)

Percent of Total Oven Soace                 37%            28%            33%


Extent of Existina Development and Potential for Future Develonment

The buildout analysis indicates that, while the Oyster Pond/River and Stage
Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond sub-study areas are close in size, the Oyster
Pond/River sub-area includes proportionately more of the existing development.
For example, of the 1739 existing residences in the study area, approximately 70%
are in the Oyster Pond/River sub-study area. This is due in part to the dense
development in the Waveland/Vineyard/Bayview Street area, as well as to the
group housing located off Main Street (Pilgrim Village, Waterview Colony and
Oyster Pond developments) and Barn Hill Road (several units listed under the
name "Hunter"). Although this area contains the greatest proportion of
development, many low density areas exist. The Oyster Pond and River sub-area
also contains a significant amount of open space land (324 acres or 20% of the sub-
area).

The Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond sub-study area contains
approximately 30% of the total number of existing units, with the most dense
development occurring along Main Street and east of Mill Pond. The least densely
developed area in the sub-area is near Sears Point. Approximately 16% of the
area's land is open space.



Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         51
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







Only 12% of the total existing residences in the study area are on sewer, with a
greater percentage of the sewered lots found in the Oyster Pond/River sub-study
area (83%) than in the Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond portion (17%). This
suggests that sewage effluent from existing development may be an important
source of nutrients in ground water.

The Oyster Pond/River sub-study area also includes a proportionately greater
number of commercial lots than the Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond sub-
study area. Commercial land-uses such as restaurants and motels generate large
quantities of sewage which must be serviced either through public sewer or on-site
sewage disposal systems. Roughly one-half of the commercial lots in both Stage
Harbor/Mitchell River/MiUl Pond and Oyster Pond/River are sewered, including
the elementary school and the small "downtown" shops.

The buildout analysis was used to estimate the number of additional residential
units and the amount of commercial square footage which may still be built on
lands within the Stage Harbor system contributing area. At maximum buildout,
2,225 total residences are expected, based on existing zoning regulations. Of the
additional residences projected for saturation conditions, slightly more than half
in both sub-study areas would occur on buildable lots, while fewer than half would
result from further subdivision of existing lots. Seventy percent of total future
residential development will fall within the Oyster Pond/River sub-study area,
where more of the land is zoned for smaller lots (20,000 square feet versus 40,000
square feet). Residentially, the Oyster Pond/River sub-study area is currently 78%
developed: the Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond sub-study area is 80%
developed; and overall, the study area is 78% developed.

There are several "unbuildable parcels" in the Stage Harbor system contributing
area. The category "unbuildable parcels" includes private conservation land,
wetland area, and parcels which are too small to be developed. In many instances,
small lots are owned by the same person who owns abutting land, where a
residence has been built. Although the Oyster Pond/River sub-study area includes
more unbuildable parcels than the Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond sub-
study area, the size of such parcels varies, thus number and acreage of unbuildable
parcels for the two sub-study areas are not directly comparable.

Subdividable parcels are scattered throughout the study area, but the majority lie
between Oyster Pond/Oyster River and Stage Harbor. The Oyster Pond/River sub-
study area includes 71% of all potential new residences resulting from subdivision.
The largest subdividable parcels are 8-10 acres in size. At buildout, as many as 210
new residences are expected in the entire study area as a result of land subdivision.

There are currently 56 town-owned parcels in the study area, with 60% (34 parcels)
found in the Oyster Pond/River sub-study area. Most town-owned parcels are
used for open space and recreation, although a few are used for community


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        52
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I       ~~purposes such as the Atwood House and the Boy Scout Hall. Town land in the
         study area includes 28 acres of cemetery.
I        ~~Occupancy rates may be used to estimate the number of additional people which
         will be supported by the increased residential units. For this study, 2 occupancy
          rates were used: 3 people per unit and 1.86 people per unit. The first occupancy
          rate is based on a Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission
          value determined for Cape Cod (CCPEDC, 1978). The second occupancy rate was
I        ~~determined specifically for Chatham by its Town Planner in 1989, and is based on
          the number of housing units and corresponding population in Chatham, and
          incorporates seasonal occupancy changes in the town.

          At buildout, a total residential population of 6,675 people is expected in the entire
          Stage Harbor contributing area if a rate of three (3) people per unit is used; 4,139
I      ~ ~people are expected with an occupancy rate of 1.86. Existing population counts are
          5,217 and 3,235 for occupancy rates of 3 and 1.86, respectively. These numbers do
          not include people who live in a residence that is combined with a commercial
I      ~ ~use. Therefore, it should be recognized that commuercial expansion may also cause
          some population growth.

I        ~~The level of commercial expansion possible in the Stage Harbor contributing areas
          was also considered. Lots in the older Main Street downtown area are small and
          densely developed. Due to parking, setback and height considerations, it is
I       ~ ~unlikely that lots in this area would be further developed for commercial
          purposes. However, significant expansion west of the Main Street rotary is
          possible. All of this western area is in the Oyster Pond/River sub-area. Therefore,
          environmental impacts of future commercial expansion will be felt by Oyster Pond
          and River.

I        ~~~It is not so much the level of expected growth which is at issue, but the impacts
          this growth will have on the harbor and associated resources. Besides adding
          nutrient inputs to ground water via waste water, increased population will place
          greater demands on municipal services and facilities. Commercial businesses may
          expand to serve the new residents; new businesses may be constructed. As open
          land. is lost and the population grows, increased demand for recreational resources
          is likely, possibly demanding additional town landings, parks, beaches, moorings,
          shellfishing areas, etc.

          Since the study area is nearly 80% developed, it is likely that much of the impact to
          natural resources from development-oriented pollutants has already occurred,
I       ~ ~~although it may not yet be apparent. Often, there is a lag time for products of
          development, such as nutrients from septic systems, to reach the resources which
          they will impact. For example, it may take 10-15 years for nitrate-nitrogen to travel
I       ~ ~in ground water from the most northern portions of the study area to the Oyster
          Pond and River.


          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        53
3        ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990







         oxygenated (anaerobic) conditions and is readily adsorbed by soil particles in the
         unsaturated oxidized zone above the water table. Once in the saturated zone,
         however, ammonium-nitrogen may travel long distances under anaerobic
         conditions. Ammonium-nitrogen is the primary form of nitrogen in septic
         system effluent and in wetland soils. Nitrite-nitrogen (N02) is an unstable form
         and is usually present in very small quantities as it is rapidly transformed into
         nitrate-nitrogen. Nitrate-nitrogen (N03) is characteristic of oxygenated (aerobic)
         conditions and is highly mobile in ground water. In this form, nitrogen may
         travel long distances with little attenuation.

         Nitrogen transformations are complex, bio-physio-chemical processes. Figure 4
         illustrates some common nitrogen processes. The process by which organic
         nitrogen is transformed to ammonium-nitrogen is called mineralization or
         ammonification, and occurs under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions. The
         process whereby ammonium-N is transformed to NO3-N is called nitrification
         and occurs under aerobic conditions. Denitrification is the process by which
         nitrate-nitrogen is converted to gaseous forms (such as N2 or nitrous oxide) and
         released to the atmosphere. Denitrification occurs under anaerobic conditions,
         particularly within wetland soils. The opposite transformation, whereby
         atmospheric nitrogen is converted to ammonium-nitrogen, is called nitrogen
         fixation, and is performed by bacteria and blue-green algae.



                               FIGURE 4 COMMONNITROGEN PROCESSES



                                                 Mn Pm"""_




                                         sad~~~~~I ,,.,,,   ,
                                      |Otrpil.i-N |   MNo ,;;;;













                                    Source: Freeze and Cherry, 1979.
                Horsley Witten Hegemann,             Inc. 55







          Draft Report, 18 May 1990
                                         E  3  ems t -1-~~~~~~O.i*,-




                                                Lefaeir.uits -  t m,


      I                           ~~~~~~~~~~~Source: Freeze and Cherry, 1979.




I        ~~Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.      55
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~The buildout analysis results have important implications for both the assesment
          of nitrogen contamination of ground and surface water, and for the development
I        ~~~of appropriate regulatory approaches in controlling growth in the Stage Harbor
          complex. Growth brings increases in pollutants that may impact harbor resources
          such as shellfish and swimming beaches, as well as demands for infrastructure and
3        ~~~access that, in turn, lead to impacts on natural and cultural resources in the study
          area. Current limitations to development include zoning, health regulations,
          subdivision rules and regulations, and wetlands protection regulations. It is
I       ~ ~important for the Town of Chatham to carefully plan for future development, so
          that any further increases are as environmentally benign as possible.

          Implications for Water Quality and Ecological Systems

          A principal contaminant of concern to coastal waters, such as those associated with
          the Stage Harbor system, is nitrogen. Nitrogen is commonly considered the
          nutrient which regulates the extent of plant growth within coastal waters. This
          means that, to a large extent, increases in nitrogen concentrations will result in
I       ~ ~~increases in algal and macrophyte (water weed) populations. While algae and
          macrophytes are important components of the coastal ecosystem, excessive growth
           can be detrimental. For example, the proliferation of epiphytic algae (those species
I         ~~~which grow on the surface of macrophytes) can disrupt the photosynthetic
           processes of eelgrass. Declines in eelgrass populations may lead to a loss of
           important habitat for finfish (such as winter flounder) and shellfish (such as bay
           scallop). Extreme conditions resulting from high nitrogen inputs can lead to
           anoxic (oxygen-depleted) aquatic conditions, noxious odors and fish kills.

I         ~~~The primary sources of nitrogen to the Stage Harbor system are land uses within
           the surface watershed and ground-water recharge area. Storm water drainage and
           inflowing ground water are the primary routes of nitrogen transport into the
           estuaries.
3         ~~~A nitrogen loading analysis was conducted to evaluate nitrogen impacts from
           development on Chatham's harbor resources. This analysis was used to
           determine historical, existing and potential nitrate-nitrogen inputs to ground
3         ~~~water, based on results of the buildout analysis (described previously). The study
           area used for the nitrogen loading analysis is the same as that used for the
           buildout, i.e. the ground water recharge areas and surface water drainage areas for
I        ~ ~~Oyster Pond/River and Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond subareas (Figure
           3). Nitrogen inputs may travel overland or in ground water, therefore both
           drainage routes are included in the study area. The nitrogen loading analysis,
           including assumptions, rationale, and parameters, is described in detail below.
           Nitrogen is present in surface and ground water environments in four primary
           forms, including organic nitrogen, ammonium-nitrogen, nitrite-nitrogen and
           nitrate-nitrogen. Organic nitrogen consists of a variety of soluble, colloidal and

I         ~~~particulate forms. Ammonium-nitrogen (NH4+) is characteristic of poorly
           Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.       .54
3         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








     Nitrogen as a Contaminant

      Although all forms of nitrogen are critical components of natural systems,
      nitrogen can cause water quality degradation if present in excessive quantities. In
      drinking water supplies, elevated nitrate-nitrogen levels can cause an illness in
      infants, variously known as infant cyanosis, methemoglobinemia or "blue-baby
      syndrome," caused by the alteration of hemoglobin and subsequent problems with
      oxygen transport. In addition, high nitrate-nitrogen levels have been linked to the
      formation of carcinogenic nitrosamines. To reduce potential health risks, both the
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Massachusetts Department of
      Environmental Protection (DEP) have established a drinking water standard of 10
      milligrams per liter (mg/l) nitrate-nitrogen. A statistical analysis of ground-water
      samples collected on Long Island, NY, demonstrated that when median nitrate-
      nitrogen concentrations were 6 mg/I, 10% of the samples exceeded the 10 mg/i
      drinking water standards (Porter, 1978). To account for this variability, the Cape
      Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission (CCPEDC) and numerous
      Towns across the commonwealth have established a more conservative
      concentration of 5 mg/1 as a planning guideline.

      In aquatic systems, elevated nitrogen levels may cause excessive plant growth and
      other symptoms of eutrophication. Nitrogen is generally considered to be the
      limiting nutrient for growth in most marine systems. The precise relationship
      between nitrogeni loading and marine productivity has not been well documented
      and varies widely, depending on the physical and biological characteristics of a
      given system (water depth, flushing rate, sediment type, extent of bordering
      wetlands, dominance of phytoplankton versus macroalgae, etc.). Despite this
      variability, several efforts have been made to establish critical nitrogen levels for
      aquatic systems.

      Wetzel (1975) identified a range of 0.5 to 1.1 mg/l as a total nitrogen concentration
      that may cause eutrophication (an increase in the productivity level of a
      waterbody) in freshwater ponds and lakes. Nielson (1981) also identified a range of
      critical nitrogen concentrations of 0.32 to 1.0 mg/I, based on data from a number of
      estuaries. Based on this range, the Town of Falmouth had selected a critical
      concentration of 0.75 mg/i as its initial planning guideline for coastal ponds and
      estuaries in 1988. A subsequent series of studies conducted on various saltwater
      coastal ponds throughout the Town of Falmouth has shown that ponds with
      nitrogen levels currently at or above the 0.75 mg/I level often show signs of
      cultural eutrophication. Based on this information and the Nielson publication,
      the Town of Falmouth has since revised its standards to reflect existing and
      potential uses of the Town's various ponds and estuaries. The new standards
      range from 0.32 mg/i for high quality coastal ponds, to 0.50 mg/i for intermediate
      areas, to 0.75 mg/i for heavily used, commercial areas.

      Sources of Nitrogen
I~~~~~~~~~

      Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        56
      Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Nitrogen originates from a variety of natural and anthropogenic (human-related)
sources, including sewage, fertilizers (residential and agricultural), road runoff,
precipitation, landfills, wildlife and sediments. A discussion of published loading
rates for these sources is provided below.

Sewage:

Sewage-derived nitrogen may be produced by a variety of sources, including
sewage treatment plants, septage lagoons, on-site sewage disposal systems,
exfiltration from leaking sewer mains and combined sewer overflows (CSOs). In
Chatham, on-site sewage disposal systems are the primary source of nitrogen to
most surface and ground-water resources, as is shown in the bar charts (Figures 5-
8) presented on pages 68 and 69 of this report.

The quantity of nitrogen produced by a given on-site sewage disposal system is a
function of the volume and concentration of the effluent discharged, which, in
turn, is dependent on the per capita water usage and the occupancy rate. Daily
rates of water use may range from 36 to 150 gallons per day (GPD) per person (EPA,
1980; Nelson et al., 1988) with average rates on the order of 50 to 75 GPD. In
estimating sewage flow rates, however, it is important to differentiate between the
amount of water actually used and the amount ultimately discharged to ground
water as sewage flow. Typically, 20% of the water used may be lost through
evaporation or transpiration during irrigation and other outside uses (Nelson et
al., 1988). For the purpose of this study, a ground water discharge rate of 55 GPD
per capita was used for sewage flow.

Average occupancy rates used for this study were, as described in the buildout
section: a) a rate of 3 people per unit and b) a rate of 1.86 people per unit.

A review of the literature indicates that nitrogen concentrations in raw sewage
may range from 20 to 100 mg/I. Once sewage enters a properly functioning septic
system however, some removal of this nitrogen occurs both within the septic tank
and within the soils below the leaching area. Several studies have indicated that
between 30 to 60% of the nitrogen may be removed in this way (Porter, 1978;
Andreoli et al., 1980). Thus, when estimating loading rates from on-site sewage
disposal systems it is important to use nitrogen concentrations in effluent
discharging from the leaching area. Data from the literature on total nitrogen
concentrations in effluent sampled either from the leaching area or from ground
water immediately below the leaching area are summarized in Table 11.








Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        57
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









     TABLE 11 TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS IN SEPTIC SYSTEM EFFLUENT


                    Source                                    Concentration

                    Bouma et al., 1972                        30mg/i
                    Walker et al., 1973                       40mg/i
                    Dudley and Stevenson, 1973                14 mg/i
                    Magdoff et al., 1974                      31 mg/i
                    Reneau, 1977                              23 mg/i
                    Brown and Assoc, 1980 (summary)           37mg/l
                    Ellis, 1982                               34 mg/l
                    Canter and Knox, 1986 (summary)           40 mg/l
                    Nelson et al.. 1988 (summary)             34me/1



A critical review of these reports, particularly the more recent ones, suggests that
an average effluent concentration of 40 mg/l is a conservative yet defensible value
to use in evaluating water quality impacts of on-site sewage disposal. This value
was used in our analyses.

Fertilizers:

Fertilizers applied to residential lawns, golf courses, and cranberry bogs all
contribute nitrogen to ground and surface waters. The pathway may be either
direct, via surface runoff, or indirect, via gradual leaching to ground water. The
amount of fertilizer that ultimately leaches into ground water is a function of the
type of ground cover, soil characteristics, climate, type of fertilizer used, application
rate, and the degree of irrigation/rainfall. Typical leaching rates for lawns and
other turf areas are summarized in Table 12.


         TABLE 12 LEACHING RATES FOR FERTILIZERS APPLIED TO TURF AREAS


                    Reference                          % Leached

                    Brown et al., 1977                 27%
                    Chichester, 1977                   8%
                    Dowdell and Webster, 1980          5%
                    Mancino, 1983                      4%
                    Nelson et al., 1980                43%
                    Starr and DeRoo, 1981              1%
                    Brown, 1982                        6%
                    Hesketh, 1986                      17%
                    Morton, 1988                       8%
                    Petrovic. 1988                     10%o


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.            58
Draft Report, 18 May 1990










Based on this review, an average leaching rate of 30% was selected as a
conservative value for residential lawns and golf courses. The typical lawn size
for a given lot will vary widely depending on overall lot size, residential character,
and individual preferences. Few quantitative studies have been conducted of
average lawn sizes. Long Island and Barnstable County studies have used an
average lawn area of 5000 square feet. More recently, a survey conducted as part of
the Yarmouth Water Resources Protection Plan documented an average lawn size
of 4350 square feet on half acre lots (Nelson et al., 1988). For this study, an average
lawn size of 6000 square feet was used for residences in both the R-20 and R-40
districts, based on discussion with the Town Planner. See Table 15 (page 62) for
lawn sizes used for the commercial portions of the study area (0-750 sq. ft.).

Fertilizer application rates are similarly difficult to quantify. The Cape Cod and
Long Island studies used an average annual application rate of 3 pounds per 1000
square feet (SF), whereas the Yarmouth survey documented a lower average
annual application rate for homeowners (2.8 lbs/1000 SF) and a higher annual
application rate for professional lawn maintenance companies (4.7 lbs/1000 SF).
For this study, an average annual application rate of 3 lbs/1000 SF was used.

Although golf courses tend to be intensively maintained, fertilizer applications are
carefully controlled and the use of slow-release fertilizers is commonplace. This
finding is supported by a preliminary review of data collected for four golf courses
on Cape Cod, as part of the CCPEDC golf course monitoring program. According to
this data, average nitrogen application rates at golf courses range from 2.2 lbs/1000
SI  for fairways and roughs to 4.0 lbs/1000 SF for greens. The Town has recently
negotiated to purchase the only golf course in the study area (associated with
Chatham Bars Inn). The course will be fertilized only in fairways, green and tee
areas, all at a rate of 3 lbs/1000 SF.

Fertilizer applications to cranberry bogs are carefully controlled by bog owners, as
cranberry plants are sensitive to high nitrogen levels. Excessive nitrogen levels
during the spring months induce leafy growth in cranberry plants, at the expense
of later fruit production. To avoid this, plants are not usually fertilized until after
the plants bloom, sometime in July. A recent, detailed study of a series of
cranberry bogs located north of Buttermilk Bay, in the Town of Bourne, suggests
that cranberry bogs contribute approximately 15.8 lbs of nitrogen/acre/year (Teal
and Howes, 1989). This loading rate is lower than previous estimates (10-40
lbs/year, Deubert, pers. comm., 1989), probably because bogs provide an ideal
environment for the process of denitrification and some of the nitrogen used in
berry production is removed from the system through harvesting. The study area
includes one managed cranberry bog located in the Oyster Pond/River sub-study
area.



Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.         59
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









Pavement and Roof Runoff:

Sources of nitrogen in pavement runoff include precipitation, soil erosion, leaf
litter, street dirt and litter, and animal waste. Nitrogen concentrations in road
runoff can vary by an order of magnitude, depending on spacing between storms,
the intensity and duration of a storm, and the timing of sample collection. The
highest nutrient concentrations are generally found in the "first flush". A
summary of typical road runoff values published in the literature is provided
below.



          TABLE 13 TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS IN ROAD RUNOFF


                                                   Total Nitrogen
             Reference                             Concentration

             Koppelman, 1982                       1.49 mg/i
             Howie and Waller, 1986                1.13-2.15 mg/i
             Lager et al., 1968                    3-10 mg/i
             Loehr, 1974                           3 mg/i
             Schmidt and Svencer. 1986             204 mZ/A



For the purposes of this analysis, a nitrogen concentration of 2.0 mg/l in road
runoff was used. For roof runoff, a nitrogen concentration of 0.75 mg/l was used
(Nelson et al, 1988). Roads in the study area were calculated as 15% of the upland
area, i.e. the total area as measured on the Town land-use map, minus open water
areas (also measured on the land-use map) and minus wetland areas (measured
on the DEM Wetland Restriction Program maps).

Precipitation:

Nitrogen concentrations in precipitation vary regionally. Published values for the
Massachusetts/New England area are summarized in Table 14.











Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        60
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









             TABLE 14 NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS IN PRECIPITATION


      Location           Reference                       Form*   Loading Rate
      Yarmouth, MA       Wright-Pierce, Inc., 1987       TN      0.74 mg/i
      Falmouth, MA       Valiela and Costa., 1978        TN      8.0 kg/hectare
      Truro, MA          Frimpter et al., 1988           NO      30.26 mg/1
      Quabbin Res.       Frimpter et al., 1988           N03-N  0.47-.56 mg/i
      Long Island, NY    Flipse et al., 1984             TN      0.87mg/i
      Long Island, NH    Koppelman, 1982                 TN      0.82 mg/1
      Lit Review         Loehr. 1974         TN                  0.73-1.27 me/1
      *TN = total nitrogen, N03-N = nitrate-nitrogen, NO = nitrous oxide



As precipitation falls on vegetated areas, much of the dissolved nitrogen is taken
up by vegetative cover and within the root zone, and thus does not leach into the
underlying aquifer. This theory is supported by ground water data produced by the
Barnstable County Health and Environmental Department. Of the 5,559 ground
water samples analyzed between 1980 and 1986, twenty-five percent contained less
than 0.05 mg/l nitrate-nitrogen. Many of these low-nitrogen samples were
collected from wells in undeveloped areas, suggesting that natural background
levels of nitrate-nitrogen in ground water on the Cape Cod area are approximately
0.05 mg/1 or less. This value was used in our analysis as being representative of
natural background conditions. Natural area in the study area, not included on
individual lots, was measured from the Town land-use map, and including land
designated as unbuildable and as open space. Cemetery areas were included with
natural land, since they are not fertilized in Chatham.

The following table (Table 15) shows lot sizes and assumptions that were used in
our analysis regarding percentages of the lot that were lawn, roof, driveway and
natural area. The first entry shows values used for residential portions of the
study area. The next two entries show the lot size and percentages taken as
average for existing commercial areas in both the Stage Harbor/Mill Pond and
Oyster Pond/River sub-study areas. The last entry shows the assumptions used as
limits for hypothetical expansion of commercial areas in the Oyster Pond/River
section of the study area. The numbers were selected based on Chatham's zoning
requirements, discussion with the Town Planner and Harbor Planning
Committee, and HWH experience.







Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        61
Draft Report, 18 May 1990










          TABLE 15 LOT SIZES AND PERCENTAGES USED FOR THE STUDY AREA


Land-use,            Average      % Lawn      % Roof    % Parking       % Natural Area
Location             Lot Size     (sq. ft.)    (sq. ft.)   (sq. ft.)        (sq. ft.)

Residential,
Oyster Pond/R.
and Stage Harbor/
Mitchell R./
Mill Pd.              30,000 sf     20%          6%          2%               72%
                                  (6000)     (1800)       (600)            (21600)
Commercial,
Oyster Pd./R.         15,000 sf      5%         20%         25%               50%
                                   (750)     (3000)       (3750)            (7500)

Commercial,
Stage Harbor/
Mitchell R./
Mill Pond              6,000 sf      5%         50%         35%               10%
                                   (300)     (3000)       (2100)            (600)

Commercial,
Oyster R./Pd.
Expansion
Limits                15,000 sf      0%         25%         35%               40%
                                   (0)       (3750)       (5250)            (6000)



Nitrogen Loading Analysis

The nitrogen loading rates used in our analyses were selected on the basis of the
literature review outlined above, and also to correspond with a recently calibrated
nitrogen loading model developed for the Town of Yarmouth (Nelson et al., 1988).
These loading rates are summarized in Table 16. Restaurants and motels in the
study area which are not on sewer are listed in Appendix 2, with their number of
seats and/or number of units.














Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.            62
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









                       TABLE 16 NITROGEN LOADING VALUES


Source       Concentration       Loading Rate              Flow/Recharge

Sewage       40 mg N/liter       (6.72 lbs N/Person-yr)     55 gallons/person-day
                                 Restaurants @35 GPD/seat
                                 Motels @ 110 GPD/ unit
                                 Churches @ 0.42 GPD/seat

Fertilizer (Lawns)               (0.9 lbs N/1000 sq ft-yr)  18 inches/year

Fertilizer (Cranberry Bogs)      (16 lbs N/acre)                  18 inches/year

Pavement Runoff 2.0 mg N/L       (0.42 lbs N/1000 sq ft-yr)  40 inches/year

Roof Runoff   0.75 mg N/L        (0.15 lbs N/1000 sq ft-yr)  40 inches/year

Natural Land (including
cemeteries)   0.05 meN/liter     (.005 lbs N/1000 so ft-vr)  18 inches/year



Once nitrogen has entered the ground water system, ultimate nitrate-nitrogen
concentrations can be calculated using a simple mass balance equation, in which
nitrogen levels are a function of the annual rate of nitrogen loading and the
annual rate of dilution through recharge. Sources of recharge to ground water
include precipitation, surface runoff from impervious areas and artificial recharge
from on-site sewage disposal. Recharge rates used in the nitrogen loading analysis
are summarized in Table 16.

The mass balance equation used to predict nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in
ground water is as follows:

Nitrate-nitrogen (mg/l)=

       (Annual nitrogen loading from all sources in lbs/vear)(454,000 mg/lb)
             (Annual recharge from all sources in liters)

Using this equation, nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in ground water within each
sub-study area and for the study area as a whole, were calculated. Loading was
calculated for existing conditions and several buildout scenarios, as follows:

I)   1974 approximate conditions.

II)  Existing conditions.

III) Residential buildout with no commercial expansion.

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.          63
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








          IV) Residential buildout conditions with some commercial expansion. The Main
 I            ~~~~Street area east of the rotary was assumed to be at saturation, due to parking,
               frontage, lot coverage, and setback requirements. Hence, in our analysis,
               commercial expansion was only allowed west of the rotary. This scenario
               estimates conditions if 50% of the commercial businesses west of the rotary
               were to expand to the maximum allowed by existing zoning.

          V)  Residential buildout conditions with expansion of 100% of the commercial
               businesses west of the rotary.

I         ~~VI) Commercial expansion as in V, residential expansion to meet the Chatham
               Board of Health 10 mg/i nitrate-nitrogen limit, back-calculated to give
               number of additional people provided bedroom space within this limit. This
 I           ~ ~~~back-calculation assumes no change in roof, lawn, natural area or pavement
               acreages. Thus, this scenario would represent house additions through
 I            ~~~~adding more stories.
          Each scenario was analyzed for nitrogen loading using the two occupancy rates
          discussed earlier--3 people per house and 1.86 people per house. In the nitrogen
I       ~ ~loading analysis, 1974 structure counts from the USGS topographic map were also
          used, to give an historical perspective. The 1974 data are not directly comparable to
          existing or buildout scenario loading estimates, due to differences in counting
I       ~ ~~methodology. Predicted nitrogen loading in the study area is summarized in Table
          17. The calculations are shown in Appendix 2. Figures 5-8 (shown on pages 68 and
          69) graphically show the percentages of nitrate-nitrogen supplied by the various
          sources, including sewage, lawns, pavement and roof runoff, natural area, the golf
          course and cranberry bogs. Under all scenarios, sewage is the primary source of
          nitrogen input, with roofs, natural areas, the golf course and cranberry bogs
          contributing the least nitrogen. The total nitrogen inputs are diluted by recharge.
          Using the equation shown earlier (page 63), nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in
          ground water are estimated. These concentrations are shown in Table 17.














           H-orsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc.       64
5         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








TABLE 17.  SUMMARIZED NITROGEN LOADING IN POUNDS/YEAR
             BY SOURCE AND SCENARIO

Oyster Pond/River, at 1.86 people per house
     Scenario    1974      Existing   Buildout  50% Comm. 100% Comm.  Res. Exp.
Source
Sewage           10161       17438      21809       23657        25310       90378
Lawns            5183        6650        8546        8446        8446        8446
Pavement         2598        3379        3468        3658        3753        3753
Roofs             279         394        489         530          554         554
Natural           153         257        242         243          244         244
Bogs                          155        155         155          155         155
Golf Course                   189        189         189          189         189
        Total   18374       28462       34898       36878        38651      103719   N lbs/yr

Oyster Pond/River, at 3 people per house
     Scenario    1974      Existing   Buildout  50% Comm. 100% Comm.  Res. Exp.
Source
Lawns            5183        6650        8546        8446        8446        8446
Pavement         2598        3379        3468        3658        3753        3753
Roofs             279         394        489         530          554         554
Natural           153         257        242         243          238         238
Bogs                          155        155         155          155         155
Golf Course                   189        189         189          189         189    N lbs/yr
        Total    8213       11024       13089       13221        13335       13335

Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond at 1.86 people per house
     Scenario    1974      Existing   Buildout  50% Comm. 100% Comm.  Res. Exp.
Source
Lawns            2422        2855        3584                                3584
Pavement         2404        2463        2497                                2497
Roofs             125         166        202                                  202
Natural           136         126        120                                  120
Golf Course                   119        119                                  119
        Total    5087        5729       6522                                 6522    N lbs/yr

Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond at 3 people per house
     Scenario    1974      Existing   Buildout  50% Comm. 100% Comm.  Res. Exp.
Source
Lawns            2422        2855        3584                                3584
Pavement         2404        2463        2497                                2497
Roofs             125         166        202                                  202
Natural           136         126        120                                  120
Golf Course                   119        119                                  119
        Total    5087        5729        6522                                6522    N lbs/yr

STUDY AREA TOTAL
     Scenario    1974      Existing   Buildout  50% Comm. 100% Comm.  Res. Exp.
   at 3/house   13300       16753       19611       13221       13335        19857
 at 1.86/house   23461       34191       41420       36878       38651       110241









             TABLE 18 ESTIMATED NITRATE-NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS IN
              GROUND WATER UNDER VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS

Scenario 1:                                                     Stage Harbor/
Occupancy Rate:                              Oyster Pond/       Mitchell RJ        Overall
1.86 people per unit                         Oyster River       Mill Pd.           Study Area

1974* approximate                                 3.44              2.40              2.98

Existing (1989)                                   3.47              3.31              3.41

Buildout/no commercial
expansion                                         4.15             4.07               4.12

Buildout/50% commercial
expansion west of rotary                          4.29              ---**             4.22

Buildout/100% commercial                          4.40            ---                 4.29
expansion west of rotary

Buildout/100% commercial
expansion west of rotary,
residential expansion to
accommodate                                      10.00             10.00             10.00
(#) more people                                 (9,747)          (4,855)            (14,602)

Scenario 2:
Occupancy Rate:
3 people per unit

1974* approximate                                 4.41             3.07               3.82

Existing (1989)                                   4.33              4.09              4.24

Buildout/no commercial
expansion                                         5.24              5.08              5.19

Buildout/50% commercial
expansion west of rotary                          5.35              ---               5.26

Buildout/100% commercial
expansion west of rotary                          5.44              ---               5.33

Buildout/100% commercial
expansion west of rotary,
residential expansion to
accommodate                                      10.00             10.00             10.00
(#) more people                                 (8,175)          (4,140)           (12,315)

*A ten- to fifteen-year flow time is estimated between the upper part of the watershed and Stage
Harbor. Therefore, the 1974 nitrogen loading estimates may be representative of current (1989) water
quality conditions within the receiving waters.
**No value because the Stage/Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond portion of the study area does not
include any commercial property west of the rotary on Main Street.

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.                 66
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









According to this analysis, past and existing nitrate-nitrogen levels in ground
water in the Oyster Pond/River and Stage Harbor/Mitchell River/Mill Pond sub-
study areas are below the federal 10 mg/1 drinking water limit as well as below the
CCPEDC 5 mg/i guideline. Even under buildout conditions, the 10 mg/i guideline
is not exceeded, and if the 1.86 people per unit occupancy rate is used, the 5 mg/1
concentration is not exceeded until existing residential units are expanded.

The increase in predicted nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in ground water between
1974 and existing (1989) conditions using either occupancy rates is approximately
0.4 mg/i or 13%. Between existing and buildout with 100% commercial expansion
west of the rotary, the increase in loading is 0.9-1.1 mg/I, or 26%. A much larger
increase, 136% to 193%, is expected if expansion of existing residences is
considered. The effect of expansion of commercial interests is minor: 100%
commercial expansion represents only a 3-4% nitrate-nitrogen increase in ground
water over residential buildout without commercial expansion.

Residential expansion is primarily limited by Chatham's Board of Health
regulations which limit loading to 10 mg/i nitrate-nitrogen per house. Other
Town regulations may also limit expansion, such as those requiring setback
distances from streets, abutting houses and wetlands, and the building height
maximum. Using the Board of Health limit of 10 mg/I, nitrogen loading
calculations were conducted in reverse to determine the additional number of
people that could be expected if this limit were met. These back-calculations,
shown in Appendix 2 and summarized in Table 18, show that bedrooms for 12,000-
15,000 more people could be added to the study area, depending on which
occupancy rate is used. This estimate is approximate, because only changes in
nitrogen loading due to sewage flow were considered. Changes in the amount of
lawn, pavement, or roof size were not considered.

An increase of 12,000-15,000 people may be an overestimate since it is based upon
applying the Board of Health limit of 10 mg/i of nitrogen loading to the entire
study area. In reality not all lots will be expanded since some lots will not meet
zoning size and setback considerations and cannot be expanded to a size which
generates this level of nitrogen loading.












Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        67
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








    FIGURE 5. NITROGEN SOURCES IN STAGE HARBOR/MITCHELL RIVER/MILL POND
                       SUB-STUDY AREA AT OCCUPANCY RATE 1.86

             45000 *
             40000 ï¿½
             35000 .
             30000 - 
             25000..
    N lbs/yr

             15000 '


                0                                  L    _
                         1974          Existing        Buildout        Res. Exp.
                     |    Sewage    1[ Lawns        *  Pavement  RooPfs
                     |    Natural    =  Golf Course


    FIGURE 6. NITROGEN SOURCES IN STAGE HARBOR/MITCHELL RIVER/MILL POND
                         SUB-STUDY AREA AT OCCUPANCY RATE 3


          45000 ..
          40000 ..
          35000                                                     p
          30000
          25000 .
 N lbs/yr
          20000
          15000..


           I0                               LI

                      1974           Existing        Buildout         Res. Exp.
                  |     Sewage    111 Lawns       *  Pavement    I  Roofs
                  Cl Natural      e  GolfCourse






Horsley Witten Hegerann, Inc.                 68
Draft Report, 18 May 1990





           FIGURE 7. NITROGEN SOURCES IN OYSTER POND/RIVER SUB-STUDY
                            AREA AT OCCUPANCY RATE 1.86


        100000.*
         90000                                                         g
         80000 -
         70000 *-
         60000 -
N lb/yr  50000. 
         40000.-
         30000 *

         20000.   L  ;L;
         ol0              ;                     L                     ,0_  L
                   1974     Existing   Buildout  50% Comm. 100%o Comm. Res. Exp.

                 II   Sewage     U  Lawns       U  Pavement    I Roofs

                0  Natural       e  Bogs         I  Golf Course



            FIGURE 8. NITROGEN SOURCES IN OYSTER POND/RIVER SUB-STUDY AREA
                                    AT OCCUPANCY RATE 3.0

         100000-
          90000-
          80000-
          70000-
          60000-,
N lbs/yr  50000-'
          40000 -
          30000-

          10000-  ; 

                    1974     Existing   Buildout  5090 Comm.   100%    Res. Exp.
                                                              Comm.

           |]  Sewage     U  Lawns        U  Pavement   [  Roofs

           |0  Natural    [  Bogs         m  Golf Course




Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.           69
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








          Under none of the nitrogen-loading scenarios is the federal drinking water limit
          exceeded. However, under all the scenarios, the recommended nitrogen limit for
          marine ecosystems (0.75 mg/i) is exceeded. The calculated loading estimates
          nitrate-nitrogen in ground water, which is likely to be greater than the
3        ~~~concentration in the Stage Harbor system waters since tidal flushing will dilute the
          nitrogen inputs. The extent of flushing will be determined in a later phase of this
          study. Attenuation and uptake of nitrogen inputs by vegetation within the study
I        ~~~area are also likely to occur, and may further decrease final nitrate-nitrogen
          concentrations in harbor water.

3        ~~~As was mentioned earlier, elevated nitrogen levels in estuaries can lead to
          increased productivity of algae, including species which attach to eelgrass and
          contribute to declines in eelgrass populations. Increases in phytoplankton
I       ~ ~populations can have other detrimental effects on the ecosystem, including
          reduced water clarity and shellfish population decreases. Exact links between
I        ~~elevated nitrogen levels and changes in marine ecosystems are not known.
          Since impacts to the Stage Harbor system waters, rather than water potability, are
          the focus of this study, the loading calculations suggest that nitrogen management
I       ~ ~may be necessary in the study area. Not only may nitrogen inputs to the harbor
          system increase beyond acceptable levels, but a large population increase is also
          possible. These additional people, along with current harbor users, will place
           increased demands on the estuarine resources for swimming, boating, shellfishing


I        ~~~The calculations predict loading of nitrate-nitrogen to ground water under various
          future development scenarios. Inputs of bacteria and viruses are also a concern for
           the swimminfg areas and valuable shellfish beds in the study area. Bacteria and
          viruses generally do not travel long distances in ground water, but are more likely
           to enter the estuaries via stormwater runoff or from shoreline septic systems.

I        ~~To summarize, nitrogen inputs to ground water are not problematic for drinking
           water supply, but may be for the harbor ecosystem.

N        ~~Impacts of Public Water Uses on Harbor Resources

I        ~~~Many of the uses of the Stage Harbor system (including its sheilfishing industry)
           generate negative environmental impacts. The following text and Table 19
           reviews each major water use and discusses its impacts to the harbor's water
I       ~ ~~quality and resources.
           Shellfishina and Finfishine

           Chatham fishermen depend on a highly productive shelifishery, while shellfish
3        ~~~productivity in the Stage Harbor system depends on the quality of the aquatic
           Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        70
3         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990







environment. Any uses which lessen the environmental quality of the Stage
Harbor system also lessen the harbor's ability to support a fishing industry.

Fishermen also depend on a variety of support facilities including public access,
boat mooring, boat repair and storage, and off-loading facilities. These facilities are
common sources of pollution, and have been documented by the Town's
Waterways Committee and water quality laboratory as potential sources of
pollution to the Stage Harbor system. The use of motorized boats by fishermen
contributes metals and hydrocarbons to the water, and as of 1990, marinas are
dosed to shellfishing. Ironically, shellfishing negatively impacts the shellfishery
through dependence upon these support industries and motors. This example
illustrates the complexity of use conflicts in the Stage Harbor system.

Recreational Boatinv

As with shellfishing and finfishing, recreational boaters depend on many services
including boat mooring, repair and storage, and fueling areas, which are all
potential sources of pollution.

The use of motorized boats and the lack of a pump-out station make boaters
themselves a potential source of pollution, since boaters may contribute to
bacterial and viral contamination through the release of sewage into the water. As
was mentioned earlier, Chatham is currently seeking ways to provide a pump-out
facilities at the Old Mill Boatyard.

Boaters demand open water and adequate navigation channels in and out of the
Harbor. Because of the highly variable nature of Chatham Harbor's sediments, the
harbor's channel must routinely be dredged to maintain navigable channels.
Dredging stirs up sediments, destroys aquatic vegetation and may kill aquatic life.
Therefore, at least in the short-term, dredging will lessen the environmental
quality of the harbor and the level of fish production.

Swimming

Swimming areas typically have high bacterial counts and should not be
shellfished. Parasitic outbreaks (such as swimmer's itch) result in swimming
closures. Swimming demands relatively good water quality for health reasons,
and aesthetic appeal.

Waterskiina and Tetskiin2

The opportunity to waterski and jetski is limited in the Stage Harbor system due to
speed restrictions imposed by the Town's waterways regulations (5 miles per
hour). Oyster Pond is the only area within the study area which allows the higher
speeds necessary for these uses. As is true for all motorized uses within the
Harbor, pollutants associated with boat and jetski motors are generated.

Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        71
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









                             TABLE 19 HMPAC17S OF USES ON HARBOR RESOURCES


           Water Use         Needs                     Impact on Marine Resources/Water Quality

I         ~~~Boating          Boat Repair              Potential source of water pollution

                              Fueling Stations         Release of metals and hydrocarbons to water

                              Motors                   Release of metals and hydrocarbons to water

                              Navigation Channels      Dredging resulting in sediment suspension and loss
           I                                         ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~of aquatic life

                              Sanitary Facilities      Release of sewage into water due to lack of
           I                                         ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~pump-out facility
           Swimming          Sanitary Water            Release of bacteria and viruses

                              Open Water               Weed control may disrupt ecosystem

           Waterskiing and    Motors                   Release of metals and hydrocarbons to water
I        ~ ~~Jetskiing
                              FuehinaStations          Release of metals and hydrocarbons to water



           Due to the lack of information about metals, hydrocarbons and nutrients in the
           harbor, the impact of these uses upon water quality is unknown. Stage Harbor
           currently experiences problems of congestion and safety due to the intense level of
           use. The Town must balance the type and intensity of uses with their impact on
           natural resources, aesthetics, and recreational quality.

I         ~~Sediment Transport and Tidal Flushing
           A beach and related tidal inlet may receive sand from a variety of sources, and
            lose sand through a number of mechanisms as well. Major sources of sand
            generally are longshore sand transport into a region, bluff or dune erosion,
            stream or river input, onshore sand transport, biogenous or hydrogenous
3         ~~~sediments (such as shells, corals, etc.), beach nourishment, and sometimes
            windborne sediments. Major sinks of sand can be longshore sand transport
            out of a region, offshore sand transport (including transport through
I         ~~~submarine canyons), sand mining, windblown transport into dunes, and loss
            into estuaries or lagoons (via tidal inlets). Some, but generally not all, of
            these processes are active along a particular stretch of beach. If a source of
I        ~ ~~sand is terminated abruptly, beach erosion may result. Similarly, if a new
            sink is introduced, the beach may erode.


            Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.           72
3          ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








The major source of sediment entering the Stage Harbor area comes from
longshore sand transport on Harding Beach. The net direction of sediment
transport along East Harding Beach is toward the west, or toward the entrance
to Stage Harbor. The source of sediments transported along this beach are the
coastal bluffs of Morris Island, which are continually being eroded by tidal
currents in Chatham Harbor. Erosion of the Morris Island bluffs can be
expected to increase as the new inlet migrates to the south, exposing Morris
Island to direct wave attack from the Atlantic Ocean. Sediments eroded from
the Morris Island bluffs are transported westward toward Stage Harbor, and
during flood dominated tidal cycles, these sediments may be carried into Stage
Harbor, however most of the littoral drift is deposited in the entrance channel
to Stage Harbor.

Tidal Circulation and Flushins

Studies of the ecology of tidally influenced estuaries are in part based on a
knowledge of the exchange of fresh and saltwater between the inlet/estuarine
system and the open ocean. The distributions of salinity and dissolved
oxygen are controlled by this tidal flushing. Additionally, the distribution of
planktonic organisms, eggs spawned within the estuary, and pollutants
introduced by nearby towns are also controlled by the exchange of fresh and
saltwater. In short, the distribution of any material which is dissolved or
suspended in the water column is determined by the circulation of fresh and
saltwater and by the exchanges between various parts of the estuary. These
exchanges, and the resulting distributions, are related in a regular way over
short periods of time to oscillations in the daily tide, and over longer periods
of time to fluctuations in river and stream flow.

To quantify the exchange of fresh and saltwater between an estuary and the
open ocean, one must determine the residence time of the estuary, or the
average time that a particular waterparcel spends in the estuarine system.
This residence time is commonly referred to as a flushing or turnover time
and can be defined by the following equation:


                        t  =V+P (T
                               P                                    (1)


where
        t = flushing time (hours)
       V = low tide volume of estuary (cubic feet)
        P = tidal prism of estuary (cubic feet)
        T = tidal period (hours)



Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        73
Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~~By multiplying by the tidal period in equation (1), the flushing rate is
          converted   frmthe         nmeoftdlcycles   tanhourly value. This flushing
          rate method assumes that the estuary is completely mixed and that there is no
          vertical stratification within the water column. Because of this assumption,
          the flushing times calculated in this manner are somewhat lower than those
          calculated using other methods, since the tidal volume introduced during the
          incoming tide is in general not completely mixed with the low tide volume.

3        ~~Equation (1) was used to provide a preliminary estimate for the flushing rate
          of the Stage Harbor/Oyster Pond/Mill Pond system. The low tide volume of
          the estuary was determined by multiplying the total surface area of the
U       ~ ~estuary at low tide by an average water depth at low tide. The tidal prism was
          calculated by multiplying the total surface area of the estuary at mean tide by
          the average tidal range. The period of tidal oscillation at Stage Harbor is 12.42
I       ~ ~hours. These calculations for Stage Harbor indicate a flushing rate which
          ranges from 2 to 4 days (4 to 8 tidal cycles). It should be noted that this is only
          a preliminary estimate of flushing within the system, and that contributions
U       ~ ~of freshwater from local streams or drainage ditches have not been included.
          Additionally, considerations of channel geometry and distance from the
          harbor mouth have not been incorporated. These factors can more easily and
          accurately be included through the use of numerical computer models.
          As mentioned above, the distribution of dissolved or suspended material in
I       ~ ~~the water column is determined by the circulation of fresh and saltwater' and
          by the exchanges between various parts of the estuary. The distribution of
          bottom sediments however, are related more to the development of
          asymmetries in the daily estuarine tide. These asymmetries take the form of
          unequal duration and/or unequal magnitude of ebb and flood tidal flows.
          For example, some inlet/estuarine systems are characterized by longer ebb
          tides than flood tides. However, the volume of water flowing during the ebb
          and flood tides is approximately equal. Consequently, there is a tendency for
          higher current velocities during flood tide than during ebb tide (since the
          same volume of water is flowing but for a shorter duration); such systems are
          termed flood-dominant. Other systems show the opposite duration
I        ~~~asymmetry; the flood tides are of longer duration than the ebb tides.
          Therefore, these is a tendency for stronger ebb currents (ebb-dominant).
          These different senses of asymmetry have important implications for
3        ~~~estuarine sediment transport, and long-term estuarine/tidal inlet stability.

          Estimates of tidal asymmetries (duration and magnitude) for the Stage Harbor
I       ~ ~complex cannot be made with the available data. These calculations require
          measurements of tidal elevation and current velocity for approximately one
          15-day period inside the Stage Harbor area. No data of this type has been
          collected at the study site.


          Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.       74
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







 U           ~~~Analysis of Land-use Regulations which pertain to Water Quality

         The Stage Harbor area currently experiences seasonal problems of poor water
          quality for the purpose of shelifishing due to high bacterial levels in Oyster Pond
          and the Champlain Flat area of Stage Harbor. Due to insufficient information
I       ~ ~about the Stage Harbor system's water circulation, the impact of future land
          development on the Stage Harbor environment cannot be fully evaluated.
         However, the impact of known sources of pollution can be minimized through
          land-use regulations.
          Several regulatory, non-regulatory and legislative options to protect water quality
I       ~ ~are available to the Town of Chatham. Regulatory strategies include tools which
          are adopted through zoning bylaws, subdivision rules and regulations, health
          regulations and wetlands protection regulations. The following is an analysis of
          existing regulations in Chatham which relate to protection of water quality.
          Zoning Bylaw

          The maximum permissible intensity of development is dictated through
          Chatham's zoning bylaw. The intensity and type of land development has direct
I       ~ ~bearing upon the level of pollutants which will be generated. The nitrogen
          loading analysis indicates that the level of nitrate-nitrogen in the ground water of
          the Stage Harbor contributing area will increase over time. Depending upon the
I       ~ ~extent of water flushing in the harbor, nitrogen levels may exceed recommended
          levels for estuarine systems in the future. Excessive nitrogen concentrations could
          lead to a decline in eelgrass beds and associated shellfisheries.

          The Town's water quality laboratory has identified additional sources of pollution
          such as marinas and boatyards, gasoline stations, and animal wastes. The Town of
          Chatham currently allows marinas, boatyards and dog kennels in most zoning
          districts, either by right or with a special permit, within the Stage Harbor
          contributing area. Gasoline stations are allowed in the General Business district
          with a special permit. Due to the potential threat to water quality which these uses
          signify, Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc. (HWH) recommends that marinas,
I       ~ ~boatyards and dog kennels be permitted only with a special permit throughout the
          contributing area. Performance standards for these potentially threatening uses
          should be adopted to regulate their impacts.

          In addition to typical use and intensity regulations, Chatham has adopted many
          innovative regulations geared toward ensuring better environmental protection.
I       ~ ~~Construction-related soil erosion can be a significant source of water pollution.
          Chatham is one of few towns in Massachusetts which attempts to control erosion
          levels during construction. According to the Town's zoning bylaw, the building
I       ~ ~~inspector can require erosion controls on any land within 300 feet of a conservancy
          district. Conservancy districts include features such as wetlands, water bodies and
          water courses. Due to the importance of controlling erosion and sedimentation of

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        75
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~Chatham's waters, HWH recommends that clear criteria be adopted indicating
          under                    wacicmtnecotossolbeimposed, and what type of control
          measures are necessary.

          Chatham regulates development in its Flood Plain District. Due to sea-level rise,
          lands located within the Flood Plain District are expected to change over time. The
          Town may wish to amend its zoning bylaw to require that the effects of sea-level
          rise be considered before issuing any development permits for structures lying
          within the sea-level rise zone.

          The Town's zoning bylaw requires site plan review for most proposed
U       ~ ~commercial, industrial and multi-family residential developments to facilitate
          better site design, and to minimize negative impacts associated with development.
          Although the procedures established for site plan review are helpful, to aid in the
I       ~ ~decision-making process HWH recommends that the Town require an
          environmental and community impact assessment to be submitted with all
          applications. Specific criteria should be established for approval. To minimize
I       ~ ~water quality impacts, HWH further recommends the Town require that: 1) all
          stormwater drainage be retained on-site through natural infiltration wherever
          possible; 2) erosion and sedimentation measures be used during construction; and
I       ~ ~~3) no negative impact occur to water supply, water quality or resources designated
          as conservancy district.

I        ~~Subdivision Rules and Regulations

          Subdivision regulations "fine-tune" zoning bylaws since they focus less on land-
          use and more on engineering concerns such as street construction, utility
          placement and traffic patterns within individual subdivisions.

I        ~~~Subdivision rules and regulations typically provide guidelines for drainage9
          control. The release of stormwater into the Stage Harbor system has been
          documented as a major source of water pollution. Most storm water generated in
          the downtown commercial district is piped directly into the Stage Harbor system
          waters. Changes in subdivision regulations cannot amend the current situation,
          however, they can lessen the impacts of future potential development. Therefore,
          HWH recommends that no newly developed areas be served by a town
          stormwater collection system which discharges to the Stage Harbor system.
          Chatham's subdivision rules and regulations currently do not encourage on-site
          retention of storm water drainage or the use of natural infiltration to treat
I       ~ ~stormwater flow. H-WH recommends that Chatham require that all stormwater
          generated by proposed development be retained on-site by natural infiltration
          wherever possible, to ensure that the amount of storm water entering directly into
I       ~ ~~the Stage Harbor system waters (either directly or through the Town's storm water
          collection system) does not increase.

          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        76
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







H        ~~Board of Health Regulations

         Sewage disposal is an important issue in the Town of Chatham. The DEQE (now
         the DEP) has determined that an increased level of use of the Town's public
         sewage treatment facility would threaten the quality of Chatham's public water
         supply. Consequently, no additional sewer expansion or hook-ups were to be
          allowed. Therefore, the Town is currently under a sewer moratorium and septic
          systems must be installed to treat any new developments or expansions.

          Chatham has adopted several innovative health regulations to reduce the impact
          of sewage on water quality. The Town has adopted health regulations which are
I       ~ ~more stringent than Title 5 to guide septic system location and impact on water
          quality. Chatham's Board of Health requires that for all subsurface disposal
          systems designed to dispose of sewage flows equal to or greater than 2,000 gallons
I       ~ ~per day (gpd), it must be demonstrated that a conservative drinking water quality
          standard of 5 mg/l nitrogen will be met downgradient of the property limit, and
          that surface water standards will be met for ponds (.05 mg/l phosphorus), and
          estuaries and salt ponds (0.5 mg/i nitrogen). These nitrogen and phosphorus
          loading restrictions pertain to any applicable development in the Stage Harbor
          contributing area, but exempt single family development, since single family
I       ~ ~homes typically do not generate 2000 gpd of sewage flow. The buildout analysis
          demonstrates that under existing conditions nitrogen concentrations in ground
          water may be approximately 3-4 mg/liter (see Table 17). The resulting
          concentrations within the Stage Harbor estuarine system depend upon the
          flushing rate and are currently unknown.

          The impact of sewage generated by single family and multi-family development is
          controlled through a separate nitrogen loading regulation which requires that
*        ~~sewage generated as a result of development may not result in average
          concentrations of nitrogen exceeding a limit of 10 mg/l on the property as a whole.
          Two-bedroom, single-family homes are exempt from this regulation. The
          buildout scenario indicates that given this loading limit, considerable'expansion of
          residential development is still possible. As a result of residential expansions
          being limited to a ground water loading limit of 10 mg/i nitrogen, the level of
          nitrogen in ground water within the Stage Harbor contributing areas and the
          Harbor is expected to rise in the future.

          The maintenance of septic systems is frequently overlooked. The result is typically
          an overloading of solids moving to the leaching facility and subsequent clogging
          and sewage failure. Such failures may result in the surface break-out of sewage
I       ~ ~~and more direct transport of sewage derivatives to the coastal waters. Chatham is
          one of few communities in Massachusetts which require open inspection of
          existing on-site sewage treatment systems upon real estate transfer. In general, any
I       ~ ~systems found to be inadequate must be upgraded or repaired before property may
          be transferred.


          Horsley Witten Hegenmann, Inc.       77
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







I        ~~Wetlands Regulations

          As described in the natural resource inventory, wetlands serve an important role
          in maintaining Stage Harbor's water quality and in supporting its fisheries. The
          Wetlands Protection Act protects wetlands for eight statutory interests including:
          1) protection of public and private water supply; 2) protection of ground water
          supply; 3) flood control; 4) storm damage prevention; 5) prevention of pollution;
          6) protection of land containing shellfish; 7) protection of fisheries; and 8)
          protection of wildlife habitat.
          Many Massachusetts communities have enacted non-zoning wetlands bylaws.
          This practice has been upheld by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The
          Court has recognized that the State Zoning Act and Wetlands Protection Act serve
          as the minimum level of wetlands protection. The Town of Chatham has adopted
I       ~ ~~a wetland bylaw and regulation which set forth a public review and decision-
          making process to oversee activities having an impact on the Town's wetlands.
          These regulations expand the interests protected by the Wetlands Protection Act to
             speif  calyinclude water quality in the numerous ponds of the Town, and erosion
          and sedimentation control. Additional provisions to further strengthen the
          regulations could include a requirement to account for sea level rise in delineating
          the upland boundaries of coastal wetlands.

I        ~~Waterways Regulations
          Chatham's Waterways Commission oversees use of the harbor system waters.
          Water uses are restricted by the Commission through its bylaws and
          regulations to maintain harbor safety and navigation. For example, no wake
          zones are posted throughout most of the Stage Harbor system waters. The
          location of moorings is also overseen through procedures specified in the
          bylaws. Given current problems with water congestion, it is recommended
          that these bylaws be amended to include specific procedures for determining
I        ~~~the location and intensity of uses allowed.
          Implications of Future Development

          Through its zoning bylaw, the Town of Chatham has established a development
          program which dictates the level of future development in the Stage Harbor
I       ~ ~system contributing area. As the Town's seasonal and year-round populations
          grow, residents will probably place increased demand on the Town to provide
          water-related recreation, as well as harbor-oriented services such as parking,
          boating and pedestrian access, and boat docks and moorings.
          The buildout analysis conducted for the Stage Harbor reveals that the majority of
I       ~ ~~development possible in the Stage Harbor contributing area has already taken
          place. However, further residential and commercial development is still possible.
*        ~~~This increase in growth will translate into considerable demand for public access to

          Horsley Witten Hegernann, Inc.       78
U         ~~~Draft Report, IS May 1990







N        ~~~the harbor's waters. Current water use conflicts suggest that the harbor's use is
          near or at capacity. Therefore, Town officials must weigh the impacts of providing
I        ~~~greater access with impacts to water quality, recreational quality/congestion, and
          shellfishing.
          The key question facing Chatham's officials is the harbor's carrying capacity. Uses
          such as marinas and motor-boating significantly decrease the potential for other
          uses such as shellfishing. Activities such as recreational boating and mooring
          increase congestion and decrease potential use of open water for swimming.
          Chatham must resolve the dilemma of how to ensure that each competing use
          may continue within the harbor complex. In order to resolve use conflicts in the
I       ~ ~Stage Harbor system's waters, Town officials and residents must dearly define
          what they want the harbor to be.















~~~HrlyWteHeennIn.7
I~~~~rf eot 8My19



I
I
a
I
I
I                           Goals and Policies for
     I ~~~~~Resolving Harbor Issues

I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I









u          ~~GOALS AND POLICIES FOR RESOLVING HARBOR ISSUES

                               Public Access to the Waterfront

         ISSUE:

1        ~~There is tremendous demand for access to the shoreline and water. The
         majority of shoreline in the Stage Harbor system is privately owned and is in
         residential use. As a result, there is little shorefront property available for
I       ~ ~water-dependent uses such as marinas, fishing piers and swimming areas.
          Although the town owns nine landings, the use of these areas is limited by
          parking constraints. Mooring space is limited in portions of the Stage Harbor
          waters.

I        ~~GOAL:   Maintain and improve public access to the harbor area.
          POLICIES:

  1               ~~~~~1.    Maintain an adequate number of access points located

    u                    ~~~~~~throughout the Stage Harbor/Oyster Pond/Mill Pond area.
                   2.    Acquire available properties which are suitable for expansion
                          of existing Town landings.
                   3.    Carefully design access and parking so as to minimize
                          negative impacts on vegetation, natural landforms and water
                          quality.
                   4.    Preserve and protect water-dependent uses and facilities in
                          shoreline areas.
                   5.    Balance the demand for greater access to the waterfront with
                          its impact upon environmental quality and marine


  1               ~~~~~6.    Develop and improve the facilities at Old Mill Boatyard and
                          selected Town landings to serve the public's water access
    3                    ~~~~~~needs.

                    7.    Maintain the outer harbor as an open anchorage.




          Horsley Witten Hegermann, Inc.  so
3        ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990









     I                        ~~~~~~Navigation and Harbor Safety

          ISSUE:

I        ~~The Chatham Harbormaster, Harbor Patrol (Chatham Police) and United
          States Coast Guard are responsible for navigation and harbor safety.
          However, assistance is only provided to boaters in life threatening situations,
I       ~ ~~and boaters generally have to rely on other members of the fleet for assistance
          as there are few commercial operations on the Cape which can tow large
I        ~~~boats.

          The entrance to Stage Harbor must be routinely dredged to maintain
          navigation. Changing shoreline processes influence the demand for
I       ~ ~dredging. For example, shoaling at the channel entrance to Stage Harbor has
          increased with the formation of the North Beach inlet .

I        ~~~The Stage Harbor system supports a wide variety of activities including
          swimming, sailing, windsurfing, waterskiing, jet skiing, pleasure boating, and
          both commercial and recreational fishing and shelifishing. There is a need to
I       ~ ~~coordinate the location and timing of activities to lessen congestion and
          maintain harbor safety. Harbor users must be educated about safe
*        ~~~navigational practices.

          A. GOAL:        Maintain and enhance the navigability of the Stage
                          Harbor/Oyster Pond/Mill Pond complex.

          POLICIES:

                    1.    Work with State and Federal officials to ensure continuous
                           maintenance dredging of the Stage Harbor channel entrance
    3                    ~~~~~~~and the entrance to the Municipal Fish Pier.

                    2.    Carefully control the location of moorings and piers so as to
                           provide an efficient use of space as well as to minimize
                           encroachment on navigational channels and open water
    *                    ~~~~~~~recreation areas.

          B. GOAL:        Ensure harbor safety and encourage a balance of different
    *                    ~~~~~~~uses.

                    1.    Continue to coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard to ensure
                           effective placement of aids to navigation, and timely
                           response to emergency situations.


          Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        81
          Draft Report, 18 May 1990







  1                ~~~~~2.    Encourage a balance of uses within the harbor area which
                           combines commercial and recreational uses with a sensitivity
   5                     ~~~~~~~~to fragile ecological areas.
                    3.    Promote safe navigational practices through public education
    3                     ~~~~~~~and enforcement of safety regulations.
                    4.    Mitigate potential conflicts of use, segregating incompatible
                           activities where necessary.















~~~HoseWitnHgmnIn.8
I~~~~rf eot 8My19









                 Commercial Fishing and Shellfishing

ISSUE:

Fishing and shellfishing are an important element of Chatham's economy,
and are a source of recreation. The fishing industry requires support facilities
(marinas and packing facilities) and high levels of water quality. Problems
with the use of Fish Pier have resulting in greater demand for fishing
facilities in Stage Harbor, however there is little land to accommodate this
need. The Stage Harbor system experiences pollution problems and is dosed
periodically to shellfishing. The Shellfish Department aids local shellfish
production through the cultivation, propagation and transplanting of
hatchery, natural and contaminated shellstock.

GOAL: Protect the viability of the commercial fishing and shellfishing
         industries, recognizing these activities as an essential part of
         Chatham's economy and character.

POLICIES:

         1.    Recognize the interdependence of Chatham Harbor and Stage
                Harbor and ensure adequate navigability of both harbors.

         2.    Provide adequate mooring space for the commercial fishing
                fleet in the future, recognizing that the size of the fleet may
                fluctuate from year to year.

         3.    Protect shellfish beds from incompatible activities and/or
                development.

         4.    Correct existing problems with stormwater, septic systems
                and related pollution which have led to shellfish closures.

         5.    Provide the necessary support services for the fishing
                community.

         6.    Continue the cultivation, propagation and transplanting of
                shellfish to ensure a healthy shellfish resource in the future.

         7.    Work with the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
                and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to improve
                testing methods for shellfishing areas.




Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        83
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








    I                     ~~~~~Water Quality and Natural Resources

          ISSUE:

3        ~~Chatham's local economy depends upon water-related recreation, tourism
          and fishing. All of these activities depend upon maintaining the quality of
          the town's waters. This report has identified several sources of pollution
I       ~ ~which must be minimized, including: septic systems, stormwater runoff,
          fertilizers and pesticides, animal wastes, chemical contamination, oil and
          gasoline spills, and the dumping of sewage into the water.
          GOAL: Protect the quality of the Stage Harbor system for the purposes of
  3                ~~~~~fishing, shelifishing, wildlife habitat, recreation and related uses.

          POLICIES:

  1                ~~~~~1.    Identify and correct existing sources of water pollution.

  3                ~~~~~2.    Establish a long-term water quality monitoring program.

                    3.    Balance the need for water access with its impact on water
                           quality, wetlands, wildlife habitats and fisheries and
                           minimize disturbance to these resources.
                    4.    Educate the general public about the impacts which land and
    I                   ~ ~~~~~~water uses and activities have upon water quality.

  3                ~~~~~5.    Update Town bylaws and regulations to better protect
                           waterways from further incompatible development.

  3                ~~~~~6.    Coordinate with State and local officials to ensure adequate
                           drainage design for road improvements.
  1                ~~~~~7.    Develop performance standards to minimize pollution from
                           boat fueling and maintenance operations.










           Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        84
           Draft Report, 18 May 1990









                    Recreational Use of Waterways

ISSUE:

The demand for recreational use of the water is growing. This demand for
recreational facilities has to be balanced with natural resource protection.
Virtually all the boatyards have waiting lists for available slips and moorings,
and there is a long waiting list for town-designated moorings in Stage Harbor.
There is currently no procedure for determining the capacity of the harbor for
moorings, as well as other water uses. Dockominiums have been established
in other areas of Cape Cod, and there is concern that the extremely high land
values along the shore could force the conversion of marina services to
dockominiums. Water transportation is limited.

GOAL: Encourage a broad range of recreational uses in the harbor while
         ensuring safety and environmental protection.

POLICIES:

         1.    Maintain and enhance the private marina operations in the
                harbor.

         2.    Support expansion of existing marinas where plans are safe
                and environmentally sound including considerations such as
                parking, drainage, fueling and so forth.

         3.    Guide the location of different recreational uses so as to
                prevent conflicts.

         4.    Discourage dockominiums and live-aboard vessels in the
                harbor.

          5.    Maintain a limited number of Town moorings for use by
                transient vessels.











Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.       85
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








                               Land Use and Visual Character

N        ~~ISSUE:

3        ~~~Nearly all of the shorefront property in the Stage Harbor system is
          residentially zoned. According to the buildout analysis conducted as a part of
          this study, approximately 78% of the study area is built out. As shoreline
I       ~ ~conditions and the level of water usage change, demand for water-dependent
          uses in the Stage Harbor complex may increase. Chatham's zoning
          regulations currently allow the construction of seasonal private piers. Newly
I       ~ ~~constructed piers must meet standards to lessen their impact on shellfish
          beds, shoreline access and navigation. However, many pre-existing piers
I        ~~remain.

          Chatham's views and vistas serve to define its character. Views and vistas
          are provided both from the land and water in the Stage Harbor system.
I       ~ ~~Publicly accessible views of the water are possible from several roads and the
          Oyster Pond Beach. Once on the water, boaters and swimmers view the land.
          The character of shorefront property is an important element in defining land
          vistas.
          The Town owns nine public landings and several tracts of conservation land.
          These lands provide access to the water, and environmental protection.
          However, pedestrian access along the inner portion of the Stage Harbor
          system is limited. The Stage Harbor system contains a variety of natural
          resources which offer important wildlife habitat. As the harbor area is
           developed, it must be conducted in a way which maintains these important
I        ~~~resources.

          Concern over global warning and the impacts of sea level rise is growing. As
I        ~~~sea level rises, wetlands will move inland or will be lost. Property once
           thought to be safe from coastal storms may be at risk.

*        ~~GOAL:   Encourage a mixture of water dependent and water related uses
                    along the shorefront, preserving both public access and
                    environmental quality as well as the economic viability of water-
                    related industries.
3        ~~POLICIES:

                    1.    Determine the environmental carrying capacity of the Stage
                           Harbor system and regulate land uses in the contributary area
                           to a level which the environment can support.


           Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        86
3         ~~~Draft Report, 18 May 1990








        2.    Maintain and protect the Town's open space resources
               around the harbor; Hardings Beach, the conservation lands
               off Morris Island Road, Oyster Pond Beach, etc.

         3.    Carefully control the number, design and location of private
               piers within the harbor.

         4.    Provide adequate area for the storage of marine-related
               equipment: boats, lobster pots, nets, buoys, etc.

         5.    Maintain and protect existing fishing and shellfishing
               facilities in the Stage Harbor system.

         6.    Encourage and support the activities of the local yacht dubs.
































Horsley Witten Hegemnann, Inc. 87
Draft Report, IS May 1990



I
I
I
I
I
      I ~~~~~~~~Action Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I







ACTION PLAN

The success of a plan is ultimately measured by its implementation. To achieve the
goals and objectives set forth, specific actions must be taken. This section of the report
outlines a series of recommended actions designed to carry out the plan.

ZONING  BYLAW (Public hearing and two-thirds vote required at Town Meeting).

   Stage Harbor Watersheet Overlay Zoning Districts - Divide the Stage Harbor system
   into the following overlay districts. Where two or more districts overlap, the
   strictest provisions shall apply.

                      Area Covered                                 Restrictions
1. Shellfishing       Entire Stage Harbor system con-        Priority Areas:
                      taining shellfish                     - prohibit boats with through-hull heads
                                                            - prohibit use of boat motors made
                                                            prior to 1972 in non-commercial vessels*
                                                            Secondary Areas:
                                                            - prohibit boats with through-hull heads

2. Swimming           Oyster Pond Public Beach,              - prohibit boating and jetskiing
                      Harding's Beach

3. Waterskiing &      Oyster Pond                            - limit to deeper areas to avoid
    Jetskiing                                                resuspension of sediments
                                                            - no moorings

4. Boat Mooring       Stage Harbor System Waters             - prohibit boats with through-hull heads
                                                            - restrict mooring density based upon
                                                            size constraints and estimated fecal
                                                            coliform concentrations
                                                            - prohibit use of Tributyltin (TBTs) as
                                                            biocides in anti-fouling paints

5. Marine Industry   Existing marina and commercial          - spill contingency plan/equipment
                      fishing facilities                    required
                                                            - require pump-out facilities
                                                            - storage of toxic and hazardous
                                                            materials to be registered and
                                                            approved by the Board of Health
                                                            - evaluate demand for increased
                                                            marina services and its impact on
                                                            shellfishing prior to issuing devel-
                                                            opment permits

6. Navigation         Existing channels                      - setback moorings from navigational
                                                            channels

7. Sailing Races      Stage Harbor System waters             - schedule location and times with
    & Lessons                                                Harbormaster


*  Outboard motors manufactured prior to 1972 are less efficient than newer models at recycling
    uncombusted fuels and, therefore, result in greater hydrocarbon discharge to waters.






         *Stage Harbor Overlay Watershed Protection District - The ground-water
~~~~ring/ufc watershed map should be adopted as an overlay district. The
                folowig rstrctinsshall apply to new uses and change of uses within the district.

          Note: Existing lots and structures are grandfathered from zoning amendments
          (MGL, Chapter 40A, ï¿½6).

          Density shall be limited to no more than 330 gallons/day of design sewage flow per
          acre of upland (this standard may be modified by the Board of Health when a more
          definitive analysis of critical nutrient loading rates and harbor flushing has been
          completed).

          Structures with water views of the Stage Harbor System shall be regulated by
           architectural standards as promulgated by the Town of Chatham. Examples of
3        ~~standards which might be applied are the King's Highway Historic District (Route
           6A) and the Town of Nantucket.

3      ~SUBDIVISION RULES AND REGULATIONS (Planning Board public hearing and vote
       required.) (These regulations could apply town-wide.)

3       *~~ Require new subdivisions, where possible, to infiltrate drainage on-site, preceded,
           wherever possible, by a vegetated swale.

I      ~~* Where new subdivisions will result in increased stormwater runoff off-site (to
           existing stormwater drainage systems), an impact fee will be assessed for upgrading
           of the existing (and receiving) stormwater system to indlude vegetated detention
           basins, vegetated swales and, where possible, infiltrating catch basins.
        * Require new subdivisions of a specified size (for example five lots or greater) and all
           non-residential uses to prepare an Environmental Impact Assessment. Sensitive
           environmental receptors on and adjacent to the site should be identified. Sensitive
           receptors may include the following resources: ground water, surface waters,
           wetlands, coastal banks and dunes, shellfishing beds, endangered and threatened
           species habitat. The existing condition of these sensitive receptors should be
3        ~~~described and impacts to sensitive receptors should be assessed and mitigation
           measures should be proposed.

3      * ~~Improve water quality protection and maintain the Harbor's aesthetics through
           regulating certain aspects of'site design by requiring vegetated buffer zones, natural
           landscaping, and reduction of impervious areas.

        HEALTH REGULATIONS (Board of Health vote required, public hearing
3 ~~recommended.) Many of these regulations could be accepted town-wide.)

         *Toxic and Hazardous Materials Handling Regulations - All businesses shall register
           any products containing toxic and hazardous materials in quantities greater than 50
I       ~ ~~gallons or 25 pounds (dry weight) with the Board of Health. The Board shall then
           inspect businesses to ensure proper storage, handling and disposal of these






          materials. Secondary containment (bermed impervious floors) and/or holding
I       ~~tanks will be required for chemical storage and usage areas. This regulation will be
          particularly useful in minimizing the risks of spills at marinas along the Stage
          Harbor system and businesses located in the downtown area serviced by the
          stormwater systems.
         ï¿½Septic System Setbacks - Septic systems (new or expanded-design flow) shall be set
          back 300 feet from coastal wetlands (defined as the resource areas noted in 310 CMR
          10.00 except "lands subject to coastal storm flowage"). A variance process will allow
          petitioners to conduct on-site ground water flow testing (slug test and water table
          gradient) to meet a performance standard of 120 days travel time to coastal waters.
          This standard is based upon the ability of viruses to migrate from septic systems
          through ground water toward coastal waters.

       ï¿½ Upland Lot Area Requirements - Applications for new septic systems and
*        ~~expansions in design flow for existing septic systems shall be approved to a
          maximum flow of 330 gallons/day of design sewage flow per acre of upland lot area.
           (This standard may be modified by the Board of Health when a more definitive
I       ~ ~~analysis of critical nutrient loading rates and harbor flushing has been completed.
           Exemption: Lots held in single ownership at the effective date of this regulation,
           provided that other provisions of 310 CM4R 15.00 and other Town of Chatham
           Health Regulations are met.
        ï¿½ Septic System Maintenance - To prevent septic system failures, surface breakouts
I       ~ ~~and the use of acids/solvents to unclog leaching facilities, septic systems shall be
           inspected on a tri-annual schedule, and pumped and/or repaired if necessary.
           Inspections and pumping shall be performed by Town staff and/or contractors.
           Fees for this service shall be charged by the Town to owners of septic systems
           (approximately $50/ year).

I     ~WETLANDS REGULATIONS (Notice and public hearing, followed by Conservation
       Commission vote required)

U ~     ~ A n  ~additional wetland resource area called "reserve area" shall be added to the
           existing regulations. These "reserve areas" shall be defined as those land areas
I       ~ ~where existing wetland resource areas can be expected to migrate based upon a 5-foot
           sea level rise. The "interests, values and performance standards" for these reserve
           areas shall be the same as those attributed to the existing wetland resource areas
           located directly seaward of the reserve areas.
*       *~~ Prohibit the direct discharge of surface runoff from roads and other impervious
           areas to wetlands and watercourses.

        ï¿½ Encourage applicants to limit the extent of paving within 100-foot buffer zones to
           wetland resource areas and to use permeable paving materials wherever possible.

         ï¿½Specify strict erosion and sedimentation controls for construction activities
I       ~ ~proposed within the 100-foot wetland resource buffer zone.






* Restrict/prohibit the extent of lawn area allowed within buffer zones to coastal
   wetlands and waterways.

WATERWAYS REGULATIONS

* Limit the number/density of moorings based upon anticipated bacterial levels and
   the presence of priority shellfishing beds. Applications for commercial fishing
   vessels should be given the highest priority.

a Require marinas to provide pump-out facilities (based upon the Edgartown Marine,
   Inc. (Martha's Vineyard) example). Multiple marinas may pool resources to
   maintain one pump-out facility.

* Incorporate the expense of providing a pump-out facility at the Old Mill Boatyard
   into the fee schedule of mooring permits.

ï¿½ Require permits for sailing school and sailing races to be coordinated safely with
   other boating activities.

NON-REGULATORY STRATEGIES

   Stormwater Drainage - Existing stormwater drainage which discharges directly to
   coastal wetlands should be upgraded to minimize pollutant loading to the Stage
   Harbor system. Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc. recommends that the Town explore
   the feasibility of modifying direct discharges to include constructed wetlands and/or
   wet detention basins. Where limited land is available, wet detention basins can be
   designed and constructed on small parcels of land by targeting their design on
   treating the first flush, during which the majority of pollutants are discharged.

* Pump-out Facilities - The current plans for marine sanitation pump-out facilities
   should be implemented. The Town may wish to consider a free-of-charge collection
   service by utilizing a launch service-type vessel. Edgartown Marine, Inc. provides
   this service and is an example of success.

* Impact Fees - Under the authority of the Cape Cod Commission (CCC) legislation,
   the Town of Chatham has the ability to assess impact fees for new development. To
   exercise this authority, a Regional Plan must be prepared by CCC and the Town of
   Chatham must develop a plan consistent with the regional plan. Impact fees could
   then be applied to development (both new structures and expansions) to provide
   the necessary funding for upgrades to the stormwater drainage system and water
   quality monitoring.

* District of Critical Planning Concern (DCPC) - HWH recommends that the Town of
   Chatham petition the Cape Cod Commission to designate the Stage Harbor system
   protection area (based upon the ground-water/surface watershed drainage areas) as a
   District of Critical Planning Concern. This designation would require that only
   development that does not adversely affect the DCPC may proceed. Single-family
   homes will normally be exempt. The Cape Cod Commission will be accepting DCPC
   nominations in September 1990.







I. ~~Public Parking Facilities - HWH recommends that the Town of Chatham evaluate
          the feasibility of expanding parking facilities, where overflow parking is impacting
          private lands, through acquiring lands located adjacent to public access locations.

          Oyster Pond Harborfront Park - To imnprove public access and to more directly
          connect Chatham's downtown business district with the waterfront, the Town may
          wish to evaluate options for re-development of the Oyster Pond municipal facilities.
          For example, a portion of the existing parking areas could be replaced with
          additional buildings to possibly include a visitors' /public education facility oriented
          toward the preservation of coastal zone resources and the Stage Harbor System.
          Pedestrian and parking access could be improved by gaining rights-of-way to connect
          Main Street to the harborfront. Boat, bicycle, and walking tours could originate
          from this facility. A waterfront restaurant and specified shops could also be leased as
          an additional option.

       0 Commercial Fishing Facilities - Due to the impacts of the North Beach breach and its
          impact upon the Chatham Harbor commercial fishing facilities, HWH recommends
I      ~ ~that the Town of Chatham further evaluate the feasibility of developing seasonal
          (winter) facilities within Stage Harbor. A pier at the Old M~ill Boat Yard should be
          considered in this evaluation.

       o Land Acquisitions For Public Access - Wherever possible, the Town of Chatham
          should purchase shorefront property for conservation, recreation and public fishing
I      ~ ~~access. The Town should explore the feasibility of acquiring land (fee sale and less-
          than-fee sale) for the development of a public shorefront walking trail along the
          Stage Harbor System. The existing beach area on Oyster Pond may provide a
          primary point of access to the waterfront from downtown Chatham.
       * Education - The Town should implement a public education program for users of
          the Stage Harbor System. Topics should include navigation and public safety,
          chemicals and hazardous materials storage, handling and disposal; pollution control
          (i.e. septic system maintenance, animal wastes, fertilizers and pesticides, pump-out
          facilities, prop dredging, etc.); and the importance of public access.
       * Assistant Harbormaster - I-ire an Assistant Harbormaster to maintain navigational
          buoys, oversee installation of moorings, supervise activities at the Old Mill Board
          Yard property, and assist in coordinating the location and timing of water uses and
I       ~ ~~educational Harbor safety classes.
        * Water Quality Monitoring - Conduct seasonal water-quality monitoring of Stage
I       ~ ~Harbor System water to document long-term water quality trends. Nitrogen, metals,
           and petroleum hydrocarbons should be added to the analytical parameters tested.

I      ~* Chatham Lighthouse - Work with U.S. Coast Guard to maintain Chatham Station
           and Lighthouse.






I ~IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

          Establishment of a Stage Harbor Management Commission - The Town may wish to
          establish a Stage Harbor Management Commission to: 1) oversee implementation of
I      ~~the Harbor Plan; 2) oversee the review and update of the Harbor Plan, 3) review all
          proposed development within the Stage Harbor Study Area to assure consistency
          with the Harbor Plan and distribute advisory recommendations to appropriate
          Town Boards and Commissions; 4) develop and administer educational programs;
          5) assist the Waterways Commission in preparing mooring plans and dredging
          plans; and 6) oversee water quality monitoring of Stage Harbor System waters.










                             REFERENCES


Andreoli, A., et al.. 1979. Nitrogen removal in subsurface disposal system. J.
   WPCF 51(4).S

Bouma, J., W.A. Ziebell, W.G. Walker, P.G. Olcott, E. McCoy, and F.D. Hole.
   1972. Soil absorption of septic tank effluent. Univ. Wis.-Ext. Geol. Nat.
   Hist. Surv. Info. Circ. No. 20.

Brady, P. and Buchsbaum, R. 1989. Buffer zones, the environment's last
   defense. Massachusetts Audubon Society.

Brown, K.W., R.L. Duble, and J.C. Thomas. 1977. Influence of management
   and season on fate of N applied to golf greens. Agron. J. 69:667-671.

Brown, KW., J.C. Thomas, and R.L. Duble. 1982. Nitrogen source effect on
   nitrate and ammonium leaching and runoff losses from greens. Agron. J.
   74:947-950.

Brown and Associates. 1980.

Canter and Knox. 1986. Septic system effects on ground water quality.

Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission. 1978. Draft
   water quality management plan/environmental impact statement.

Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission. 1978. Final
   water quality management plan for Cape Cod/EIS Volumes I & II.

Chichester. 1977. Effects of increased fertilizer rates on N content of run-off
   and percolate from monolith lysimeters. J. Env. Qual. 6:211-217.

Deubert, K.H. 1974. Impact of the cranberry industry on the quality of ground
   water in the Cape Cod area. Water Research Center, University of
   Massachusetts, Amherst, Publ. No. 42.

Dowdell and Webster. 1980. A lysimeter study using nitrogen-15 on the
   uptake of fertilizer nitrogen by perennial ryegrass swards and losses by
   leaching. J. of Soil Science 31:65-75.





Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        89
Draft Report, 18 May 1990









Duncanson and Sherwood. 1989a. Sanitary Survey Report of Mitchell River,
   Mill Pond and Little Mill Pond in the Town of Chatham. SC-51.
   Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries Shellfish Classification and
   Management Program.

Duncanson and Sherwood. 1989b. Sanitary Survey Report of Stage Harbor in
   the Town of Chatham. SC-48. Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
   Shellfish Classification and Management Program.

Duncanson and Sherwood. 1990a. Sanitary Survey Report of Oyster Pond in
   the Town of Chatham. SC-50. Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
   Shellfish Classification and Management Program.

Duncanson and Sherwood. 1990b. Sanitary Survey Report of Oyster Pond
   River in the Town of Chatham. SC-49. Massachusetts Division of Marine
   Fisheries Shellfish Classification and Management Program.

Dudley, J.G., and D.A. Stephenson. 1973. Nutrient enrichment of ground
   water from septic tank disposal systems. Inland Lake Renewal and
   Shoreline Mgmt. Demo. Proj. Report. Univ. Wis., Madison.

Ellis, B.G., and K.E. Childs. 1973. Nutrient movement from septic tanks and
   lawn fertilization water quality protection project, Houghton Lake,
   Michigan. Michigan Dept. Nat. Res. Tech. Bull. No. 73-5.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1984. Flood insurance study, Town
   of Chatham, Massachusetts, Barnstable County, 17 pp & app.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1985. FIRM, Flood insurance rate
   map, Town of Chatham, Massachusetts, Barnstable County Ponds 1-9.

Flipse, W.J., et al. 1984. Sources of nitrate in ground water in a sewered
   housing development, Central Long Island, New York. Ground Water
   22:418.

Freeze, A. and Cherry, J. 1979. Ground Water, Prentice Hall, Inc.

Frimpter, M. H., S.J. Douglas, and M.V. Rapacz. 1988. A mass-balance nitrate
   model for predicting the effects of land use on groundwater quality in
   municipal wellhead protection areas. Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Harlin, M. and B. Thorne-Miller. 1981. Nutrient enrichment of seagrass beds
   in a Rhode Island coastal lagoon. Mar. Biol. 65:221-229.



Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.       90
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Hesketh, E.S. 1986. The efficiency of nitrogen use by Kentucky bluegrass turf
   as influenced by nitrogen rate, fertilizer ratio and nitrification inhibitors.
   M.S. Thesis, Univ. Rhode Island, Kingston, RI.

Heufelder, G.R. 1988. Bacteriological monitoring in Buttermilk Bay,
   Barnstable County Health & Environmental Department, BBP-88-03.

Howie, B. and B.G. Waller. 1986. Chemical effects of highway runoff on the
   surficial aquifer, Broward County, Florida, USGS WRIR 86-4200.

Koppelman, L.E. 1982. Long Island segment of the nationwide urban runoff
   program, Long Island Regional Planning Board, Hauppauge, N.Y.

Lager, et al. 1968. Urban stormwater management and technology: update
   and users' guide. USEPA, 68-03-2228.

LeBlanc, D.R., J.H. Guswa, M.H. Frimpter, and C.J. Londquist. 1986. Ground
   water resources of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USGS Hydrologic
   Investigations Atlas #692.

Lee, V. and S. Olsen. 1985. Eutrophication and management initiatives for
   the control of nutrient inputs to Rhode Island coastal lagoons. Estuaries
   8:191-202.

Loehr, R.C. 1974. Characteristics and comparative magnitude of non-point
   sources. J. WPCF 46(8).

Magdoff, F.R., D.R. Keeney, J. Bouma, and W.A. Ziebell. 1974. Columns
   representing mound-type disposal systems for septic tank effluent: II.
   Nutrient transformations and bacterial populations. J. Environ. Qual.
   3(3):228-234.

Mancino, C.F. 1983. Studies of the fate of NO3- and NH4+ nitrogen from
   various fertilizers on turfgrasses grown on three different soil types. M.S.
   Thesis, UMASS-Amherst.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management Wetland
   Restriction Program. 1978.

Moog, P.L. 1987. The hydrogeology and freshwater influx of Buttermilk Bay,
   Massachusetts, with regard to the circulation of coliforms and pollutants: a
   model study and development of methods for general application. M.S.
   thesis, Boston University, Boston, MA, 166 pp.




Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        91
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Morton, T.G., A.J. Gold, and W.M. Sullivan. 1988. Influence of overwatering
   and fertilization on nitrogen losses from home lawns. J. Env. Qual.
   17(1):124-130.

NADP. 1988.

Nelson, K.L., A.J. Turgeon, and J.R. Street. 1980. Thatch influence on
   mobility and transformation of nitrogen carriers applied to turf.
   Agronomy J. 2:487-492.

Nelson, M. E., S. W. Horsley, T. Cambareri, M. Giggey and J. Pinette. 1988.
   Predicting nitrogen concentrations in ground water -- an analytical model.
   Proc. Nat. Water Well Assoc.

Nielson, B. 1981. The consequences of nutrient enrichment in estuaries.
   Eutrophication Program Report, U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, Grant
   No. R-806-189-010.

Persky, J.H. 1986. The relation of ground-water quality to housing density,
   Cape Cod, Massachusetts. USGS Water Resources Investigations Report
   864093, 28 pp.

Petrovic, A.M. 1988. Late fall fertilizing and groundwater quality. Landscape
   Mgmt. 1988:64.

Porter, K.S. 1978. Nitrates in the Long Island comprehensive waste treatment
   management plan: VII summary documentation. Long Island Regional
   Planning Board, Hauppauge, New York.

Pulawski and Kantowitz. 1964.

Reneau, Jr., R.B. 1977. Changes in inorganic nitrogenous compounds from
   septic tank effluent in a soil with a fluctuating water table. J. Environ.
   Qual. 6(2):173-178.

Schmidt, S.D. and Spencer, D.R. 1986. The magnitude of improper waste
   discharges in an urban stormwater system. Journal WPCF 58(7).

Starr, J.L. and H.C. DeRoo. 1981. The fate of nitrogen fertilizer applied to turf.
   Crop Science 21:531-536.

Teal, J. and B. Howes. 1989. Nitrogen balance in Massachusetts cranberry bog.
   Draft report for US EPA Project CX-813548-01-2.

Tierney, et al. 1977.


Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        92
Draft Report, 18 May 1990








Town of Falmouth. 1988.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1983. Erosion and
   sediment control in site development. Massachusetts Conservation Guide
   Vol. I.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Vegetative
   practices in site development. Massachusetts Conservation Guide Vol. II.

U.S. Department of Interior Geological Survey. 1974. Chatham quadrangle,
   Massachusetts, Barnstable County, 79 Minute Series (Topographic).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. On-site wastewater treatment
   and disposal systems design manual.

Valiela, I., J.M. Teal, S. Volkmann, D. Shafer, and E.J. Carpenter. 1978.
   Nutrient and particulate fluxes in a salt marsh ecosystem: tidal exchanges
   and inputs by precipitation and groundwater. Limnology and
   Oceanography 23:798-812.

Valiela, I. and Costa, J. 1988. Eutrophication of Buttermilk Bay, a Cape Cod
   coastal embayment: concentrations of nutrients and watershed nutrient
   budgets. Env. Mgmt. 12(4): 539-553.

Walker, W.G., J. Bouma, D.R., Keeney, and P.G. Olcott. 1973. Nitrogen
   transformations during subsurface disposal of septic tank effluents in
   sands: II. Ground water quality. J. Environ. Qual. 2:521-525.

Weiskel, P.K. and G.R. Heufelder. 1989. The impact of septic effluent on
   groundwater quality, Buttermilk Bay drainage basin, Massachusetts I:
   Indicator bacteria.

Weiskel, R.K. and Howes, B.L. 1989. The impact of septic effluent on ground
   water quality, Buttermilk Bay drainage basin, MA. Draft Report.

Wetzel, R.G. 1983. Limnology. Saunders Co., USA, 767 pp.

Wright-Pierce, Inc. 1987. Septage characterization and pilot plant study.









Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.        93
Draft Report, 18 May 1990