Comprehensive harbor management plan, Chatham, Massachusetts draft report

[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
�Impacts of Public Water Uses on Harbor Resources
*Sediment Transport and Tidal Flushing
D. Water Quality
�Sources 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
�Zoning 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 *etS�Ss~o'S *e .� 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~�te~ ~ 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 �yarn ~ .& ~ . ;, .-~ 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. " � ' , . 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

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

51a� -I-. -~ .4'A

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

0R5 ~~ ~ /~ -- Yitk.
�. 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/

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

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

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 �
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, �6).

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.
�Septic 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.

� 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.
� 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.

� 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.

�Specify 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.

� 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