S T A K E H O L D E R M E E T I N G 2 : J a n u a r y B u z z a r d s B a y. N O A A C o a s t a l R e s i l i e n c y G r a n t

Transcription

1 S T A K E H O L D E R M E E T I N G 2 : J a n u a r y B u z z a r d s B a y THE RESILIENT CAPE COD PROJECT N O A A C o a s t a l R e s i l i e n c y G r a n t

2 Welcome, project and stakeholder process overview Tonna-Marie Rogers, Coastal Training Program Coordinator, Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Erin Perry, Special Projects Manager, Cape Cod Commission

3 About the NOAA Grant NOAA Coastal Resiliency Grant Program Competitive grants for 3-year projects that advance coastal resilience through: Land/ocean use planning Disaster preparedness projects Environmental restoration Hazard mitigation planning Other regional/state/ community planning efforts

4 Project Overview Three-year, $780,000 grant awarded to the Cape Cod Commission and partners Investigate environmental and socio-economic effects of local and regional coastal resiliency strategies Town of Barnstable pilot program GRANT PARTNERS SUPPORTING AGENCIES

5 Committee Structure A D V I S O R Y B O A R D S C I E N C E C O M M I T T E E ADAPTATION STRATEGIES COMMITTEE R E G U L A T O R Y + L E G A L C O M M I T T E E Provide advice on the overall approach and key decisions Review draft work product Provide access to data on natural hazards Interpret climate, weather and coastal geology data Review and comment on strategies database Advise team on how to apply strategies across the Cape Ensure the implementation of appropriate strategies across the region

6 Project Phases PHASE 1 Data Collection and Adaptation Strategies Database PHASE 2 Public Engagement and Socio-Economic Analysis PHASE 3 Communication and Decision-Support Tool

7 Engagement Process S U B R E G I O N A L S T A K E H O L D E R S Engage participants across the region based on their connection to the waters that surround the Cape. Present information and solicit feedback that will inform the process TOOL BETA TESTER GROUP Will provide feedback on the decision support tool as is developed Help shape development and ultimate functionality

8 Engagement Process S U B R E G I O N A L S T A K E H O L D E R S Engage participants across the region based on their connection to the waters that surround the Cape. Present information and solicit feedback that will inform the process Buzzards Bay Cape Cod Bay Nantucket Sound Outer Cape

9 Stakeholder Meetings Meeting 1 Understanding Coastal Vulnerability MEETING 2 Adaptation Strategies and Community Values Meeting 3 Actions D E C JA N F E B

10 RESILIENCY DECISION SUPPORT TOOL Framework Adaptation Strategies Database Feeds the options for strategy selection Users select a strategy to address coastal hazards. The database also informs tool outputs, with factors such as benefits provided, disadvantages, etc. GIS Map Layers Serve as planning layers to model current and future conditions TOOL Socio-Economic Analysis Informs the impacts of the selected strategies Informs tool outputs. Two part study conducted by the research team at URI to value ecosystem services on Cape Cod.

11 RESILIENCY DECISION SUPPORT TOOL Why Are We Creating One? M a p - b a s e d D e c i s i o n S u p p o r t T o o l Illustrates Cape Cod specific strategies and actions Makes financial and value trade-offs explicit Helps decision-makers to take action with informed decisions GIS based map environment Adaptation strategies database Compare costs and benefits Beta test stakeholder group Refine with focus groups

12 RESILIENCY DECISION SUPPORT TOOL Existing Tool Review EDUCATIONAL TOOLS MAPPING TOOLS NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE: JETSTREAM CAPE COD COMMISSION: SEA LEVEL RISE VIEWER

13 RESILIENCY DECISION SUPPORT TOOL A Path For ward STEP 1: Identify the vulnerabilities. STEP 2: Investigate options. STEP 3: Evaluate risks & costs. STEP 4: Take action.

14 RESILIENCY DECISION SUPPORT TOOL A Path For ward Mapped resources Vulnerability Ribbon Adaptation Strategies Scenario Comparison

15 Engagement Process VULNERABILITY ADAPTATION STRATEGIES ACTION INPUT ON DECISION SUPPORT TOOL

16 Stakeholder Representation Concerned Citizens Service Organizations Non-Profits Scientists/Educators Chamber of Commerce/Business Community Local Elected Officials Town Staff Town Committee Members Regional Interests Other Interests Buzzards Bay Cape Cod Bay Nantucket Sound Outer Cape

17 Expectations for Stakeholder Participation 1. Capacity to represent and articulate the diverse range of interests and concerns of the constituencies you would represent, seek input from constituents, and keep them informed about the discussions and proceedings of the group. 2. Willingness and interest in attending all meetings and participating actively in discussions. 3. Willingness to engage in respectful and constructive dialog with other participants.

18 Buzzards Bay: Meeting Schedule Stakeholder Group: Buzzards Bay Meeting Location: Pocasset Community Center (314 Barlow s Landing Road, Pocasset, MA 02559) Meeting Schedule: Meeting 1: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 from 2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Meeting 2: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 from 2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Meeting 3: Wednesday, February 7, 2018 from 2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.

19 Goals and meeting agenda

20 Meeting 2: Adaptation Strategies and Community Values Introduction to the Adaptation Strategies Matrix present the matrix, discuss its development and refinement, and review the strategies identified for inclusion in the tool in more depth through the web interface. Socio-Economic Study introduce the economics study and the concept of trade-offs, facilitate discussion that would help identify community values regarding ecosystem services and cost.

21 Meeting 2: Adaptation Strategies and Community Values MEETING GOALS: Enhance understanding of the Adaptation Strategies Database format and content Discuss and identify adaptation strategies that have stakeholder/community interest Enhance understanding of the economic study portion of the project and the ecosystem services provided by different strategy selection Using a selected list of strategies from the matrix, facilitate discussion about the tradeoffs associated with each strategy

22 Storymap updates Danielle Donahue, Special Projects Coordinator, Cape Cod Commission Bit.ly/NOAAstorymap

23 Storymap Updates Updated terminology Added more detail to Outer Cape case studies Recorded additional feedback for future additions: Additional functionality Additional case studies Additional community response details Photos for the Local Stories section

24 Bit.ly/NOAAstorymap

25 Socio-Economic Analysis Jennifer Clinton, Special Projects Coordinator, Cape Cod Commission Tonna-Marie Rogers, Coastal Training Program Coordinator, Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve

26 Goals for Socio-Economic Analysis 1. Understanding how Cape Cod values coastal ecosystems 2. Understanding how these values might be impacted by climate change, erosion, sea level rise, and adaptation to these forces 3. Integrating this research into a GIS-based decision support tool

27 Cape Cod Ecosystems ECOSYSTEMS Land Under the Ocean Coastal Beaches Coastal Dunes Barrier Beaches Coastal Banks Rocky Intertidal Shores Salt Marshes

28 Discussion Question What do Cape Codders value about the built and natural coastal environment?

29 eco sys tem ser vic es direct and indirect contribution from ecosystems to human well-being The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB)

30 Cape Cod Ecosystem Services ECOSYSTEMS Land Under the Ocean Coastal Beaches Coastal Dunes Barrier Beaches Coastal Banks Rocky Intertidal Shores Salt Marshes SERVICES Storm Damage Protection Flood Control Protection of Wildlife Habitat Protection of Marine Fisheries Sediment Supply Groundwater Pollution Prevention

31 How do we value our ecosystems? Estimating the economic value of ecosystem services KEY PRINCIPLES 1. From an economic perspective, the environment is an asset providing multiple services 2. Economic analysis gives us the (relative) value of these ecosystem services using different valuation tools, or research methods 3. Values may be directly observable (prices) or calculated (using surveys or models)

32 Why do we value our ecosystems? - Policy choices often come down to cost - Without understanding the cost of the environment, it s not properly factored into decisions - Short-term benefits would outweigh long-term ones

33 University of Rhode Island Research Team James J. Opaluch Ph.D. Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Economics Research Department Focus: Decision Research and Policy Simulation Using technology-based tools to help communities make better decisions regarding their futures by helping them to better visualize the consequences of alternative policy actions (including inaction) on ecosystems, environmental quality, town finances and the character of their community.

34 Two Components of Socio-Economic Analysis BENEFIT TRANSFER STUDY Using existing data or information in settings other than for what it was originally intended. HEDONIC MODEL Estimates the value of an environmental amenity by looking at differences in the values of property exposed to different levels of the amenity

35 Benefit Transfer Study Original research on valuation time-consuming, expensive PROCESS 1. Conduct a literature review on the values of key ecosystem services 2. Estimate Cape Cod-appropriate values by adapting estimates of values from other contexts

36 Benefit Transfer Study Interested in 1. Ecosystem service values 2. How these services (and their values) may be impacted by adaptation strategies MA Office of Tourism

37 Benefit Transfer Study Adapting without Retreating: Responses to Shoreline Change on an Inlet-Associated Coastal Beach Fallon et. al the value of the average Plum Island residence increases by 34% for properties on the oceanfront where protection comprises a publicly constructed soft structure. Transfer this calculation to Cape Cod to estimate how much property values would increase with the construction of soft structures

38 Hedonic Model Tease out environmental values using prices in the real estate market PROCESS 1. Collect data on house prices and property characteristics, including: a. Dwelling characteristics (number of bedrooms, lot size) b. Neighborhood characteristic (crime rate, school quality) c. Environmental characteristics (access to open space, nearby water quality) 2. Relate property values to property characteristics in the hedonic model 3. Estimate values for specific environmental amenities

39 amenities amenities Hedonic Model built 2015 built 2015 $400,000 two identical houses, in the same neighborhood are now both for sale

40 amenities Hedonic Model built 2015 $400,000 $425,000 what happens when one house adds a swimming pool?

41 hedonic modeling lets us estimate the value of environmental amenities in a similar way. Hedonic Model $450,000 $400,000

42 amenities hedonic modeling lets us estimate the value of environmental amenities in a similar way. Hedonic Model built 2015 $400,000 $4,250,000

43 Understanding Tradeoffs How do we value our environment? Dollar values don t matter as much as relative values Goal of GIS tool: Make tradeoffs explicit between adaptation strategies and changes in ecosystem values

44 Adaptation Strategies Heather McElroy, Natural Resource Specialist, Cape Cod Commission Tonna-Marie Rogers, Coastal Training Program Coordinator, Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve

45 WHAT STRATEGIES INCREASE COASTAL RESILIENCY ON CAPE COD?

46 Resilience Word Association FROM ALL STAKEHOLDER GROUPS

47 adaptation strategy an action that can be taken to protect an area from coastal hazards.

48 COLLECTING COASTAL RESILIENCY DATA Spectrum of Adaptation Strategies DO NOTHING? BEACH NOURISHMENT? OFFSHORE REEFS? COASTAL ARMORING?

49 COLLECTING COASTAL RESILIENCY DATA WHY DO WE NEED A STRATEGIES DATABASE? GOAL: Collect and organize information on the spectrum of resiliency strategies available, including where they may be used and the advantages or disadvantages of each. Identify available options Inform decision-support tool Improve coastal management decision-making

50 COLLECTING COASTAL RESILIENCY DATA DATA ON RESILIENCE STRATEGIES CREATE DATABASE LINK TO GIS, NEW TOOL APCC, MA CZM, partners responsible for data collection: site requirements, costs, life span, advantages and disadvantages Information will live at the Commission; shareable & exportable for use by policy makers, stakeholders Geo-referenced data and tool allow users to test resiliency scenarios riskfree

51 Adaptation Strategies Database Development Acquisition of data and identification of adaptation strategies for region-wide database Strategy types include: Policy strategies Hard (or engineered) strategies Soft (or green) strategies Based on literature review with input from local and regional partners and experts Add picture

52 Adaptation Strategies Committee Mission: To review and comment on the structure and content of the adaptation strategies database, suggest strategies to include, and provide advice on considerations for applying strategies across the region. Members: Paul Kirshen, UMASS Boston Lisa Auermuller, Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve Greg Berman, WHOI SeaGrant/Cape Cod Cooperative Extension John Ramsey, Applied Coastal Julia Knisel, MA Coastal Zone Management Seth Wilkinson, Wilkinson Ecological Jim O'Connell, Coastal Advisory Services

53 Adaptation Strategies Database Strategy identification includes: Physical characteristics Benefits and limitations Co benefits The value these co benefits accrue to Cape Cod Cost of implementation and maintenance And others Categorized by type of strategy: Protect an area from coastal hazards, Accommodate the coastal hazard within the area through some modification of infrastructure or the natural system, or Retreat from an area by removing buildings or structures.

54 ADAPTATION STRATEGIES DATABASE Define each: Protect Accommodate Retreat P R O T E C T A C C O M M O D AT E R E T R E AT

55 Adaptation Strategies Database 47 STRATEGIES 26 Non-Coastal Engineering Structures 18 Coastal Engineering Structures 3 Other approaches

56 ADAPTATION STRATEGIES DATABASE

57 MANAGED RELOCATION TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ROLLING CONSERVATION EASEMENTS BANK STABILIZATION WITH COIR ROLL AND VEGETATION LIVING SHORELINE: VEGETATION AND STRUCTURAL SAND BYPASS SYSTEM BEACH NOURISHMENT GROIN DUNE CREATION REVETMENT TIDAL WETLAND/SALT MARSH CREATION >

58 < DESCRIPTION: Gradually moving development and infrastructure away from the coastline and areas of projected loss due to flooding and sea level rise.

59 < ADVANTAGES: Spares existing development from the effects of erosion and flooding. Protects future development from flooding. Allows for the maintenance or restoration of intertidal habitat. DISADVANTAGES: Cost of moving development. Acquisition of land for new development. Loss of coastal property values.

60 < DESCRIPTION: land use mechanism that encourages the permanent removal of development rights in defined sending districts, and allows those rights to be transferred to defined receiving districts.

61 < ADVANTAGES: Conserves undisturbed areas that may serve as habitat or flood buffers. Prevents development in areas likely to become inundated or hazard areas. Allows for the same development potential in a community, redirecting development to revitalize urban and mixed-use centers. DISADVANTAGES: TDR may be difficult to set up and administer so it functions as intended. May encourage the development of previously undeveloped inland lands. Limits development along coastline where higher returns on investment are possible.

62 < DESCRIPTION: Private property owners sell or otherwise transfer rights in these portions of their land abutting an eroding coastline. Rolling easements allow for limited development of upland areas of the property, and restrict development and/or the construction of erosion control structures along the shoreline.

63 < ADVANTAGES: Conserves undisturbed areas that may serve as habitat or flood buffers. Prevents development in areas likely to become inundated or hazard areas. Allows for the same development potential in a community, redirecting development to revitalize urban and mixed-use centers. DISADVANTAGES: The environmental benefits only apply to the parcel that the rolling conservation easement is on Perpetual conservation of the land may cause issues regarding development scenarios in the future. Limits ability of property owner to make changes on land.

64 < DESCRIPTION: The process of adding sediment to an eroding beach to widen the beach and advance the shoreline seaward. Sources for sediment include inland mining, nearshore dredging including for navigation projects, and offshore mining.

65 < ADVANTAGES: Little post-construction disruption to the surrounding natural environment. Lower environmental impact than structural measures. Can be redesigned with relative ease. Create, restore or bolster habitat for some shorebirds, sea turtles and other flora/fauna. Preserve beaches for recreational use. In Barnstable County, the County Dredge program provides dredging of municipal waterways at a reduced cost, providing a source of beach compatible sand. DISADVANTAGES: Requires continual sand resources for renourishment. No high water protection. Can have negative impacts on marine life, beach life, and endangered species (piping plover) during construction and due to higher erosion rates (changing habitat). Expensive (several million dollars depending on the scale). Sediment sources, whether from inland mining, nearshore dredging, or offshore mining, may have adverse environmental effects.

66 < DESCRIPTION: Creating additional or new dunes to protect the shoreline against erosion and flooding.

67 < ADVANTAGES: Dunes can provide additional habitats, sediment sources, and prevent flooding. DISADVANTAGES: Can result in changes in habitat type. May have limited recreational value due to limited access.

68 < DESCRIPTION: Protecting, restoring, and creating coastal habitats within the floodplain as a buffer to storm surges and sea level rise to provide natural flood protection.

69 < ADVANTAGES: Serve as buffers for coastal areas against storm and wave damage. Wave attenuation and/or dissipation. Stabilize coastal shorelines to reduce or prevent erosion. Reduces or eliminates the need for hard engineered structures. Improve water quality through filtering, storing, and breaking down pollutants. Reduce flooding of upland areas and nearby infrastructure by reducing duration and extent of floodwater. DISADVANTAGES: Potential for increased mosquito populations. Potential of increased salt marsh smell impacting neighboring properties. Loss of upland as the marsh expands with restored tidal flow. At minimum, short term loss of plants at site immediately after tidal restoration. Potential impacts on coastal public access to water. Potentially higher cost than hard engineering structures.

70 < DESCRIPTION: Cylindrical rolls, inches in diameter & feet long, made of coir (coconut) fiber held together by a fiber mesh, covered with sand, and are planted with salttolerant vegetation with extensive root systems. These reinforced banks act as physical barriers to waves, tides, and currents. They typically disintegrate over 5-7 years to allow plants time to grow their root systems to keep sand and soil in place.

71 < ADVANTAGES: Direct physical protection from erosion, but allows continued natural erosion to supply downdrift beaches. Made of biodegradable materials and planted with vegetation, allowing for increased wave energy absorption and preservation of natural habitat value. If planted with a variety of native species, rolls can provide valuable habitat. DISADVANTAGES: Use of wire and synthetic mesh rolls can be harmful to coastal/marine environments. Potential end scour within 10-feet of the terminus of a fiber roll array should be managed on subject property. Reduces available sediment source for down-drift beaches.

72 < DESCRIPTION: A living shoreline has a footprint that is made up mostly of native material. It incorporates vegetation or other living, natural soft elements alone or in combination with some other type of harder shoreline structure (e.g. oyster reefs or rock sills) for added stability. A combined approach integrates living components, such as plantings, with strategically placed structural elements, such as sills, revetments, and breakwaters.

73 < ADVANTAGES: Provides habitat, ecosystem services and recreational uses. Recreation and tourism benefits through increased fish habitat and shellfish productivity Dissipates wave energy thus reducing storm surge, erosion and flooding. Slows inland water transfer. Toe protection by structural measure helps prevent wetland edge loss. Becomes more stable over time as plants, roots, and reefs grow. DISADVANTAGES: No high water protection. Often includes installation of structural elements, which may have negative impacts on sediment supply, boating, recreation, etc. May reduce the commercial/recreational viability of the beach. May be more difficult to permit than more conventional strategies.

74 < DESCRIPTION: Where a jetty or groin has interrupted the flow of sediment along the beach, sand may be moved hydraulically or mechanically from the accreting updrift side of an inlet to the eroding down-drift side.

75 < ADVANTAGES: Mitigates the harmful effects of jetties and groins on longshore sediment transport by enabling sand to bypass these structures in order to nourish downdrift beaches. Restores sediment supply to coastal resources. DISADVANTAGES: Cost of constructing system. impacts to existing habitat resources associated with beach nourishment. Long term annual costs to construct and maintain system.

76 < DESCRIPTION: A hard structure projecting perpendicular from the shoreline. Designed to intercept water flow and sand moving parallel to the shoreline to prevent beach erosion, retain beach sand, and break waves.

77 < ADVANTAGES: Protection from wave forces. Can be combined with beach nourishment projects to extend their lifespan. Can be useful to the updrift side of the beach by providing extra sediment through the blockage of longshore sediment transport. DISADVANTAGES: Erosion of adjacent downdrift beaches. Can be detrimental to existing shoreline ecosystem (replaces native substrate with rock and reduces natural habitat availability). No high water protection. Reduces sediment and nutrient input into estuary.

78 < DESCRIPTION: Sloped piles of boulders constructed along eroding coastal banks designed to intercept wave energy and decrease erosion.

79 < ADVANTAGES: Mitigates wave action. Low maintenance. Longterm lifespan. Creates hard structure for nonmobile marine life. DISADVANTAGES: Loss and fragmentation of intertidal habitat. Erosion of adjacent unreinforced sites. No high water protection. Aesthetic impacts. Reduces longshore sediment transport. Can eliminate dry beach over time if beach nourishment is not required.

80 < MANAGED RELOCATION TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ROLLING CONSERVATION EASEMENTS BANK STABILIZATION WITH COIR ROLL AND VEGETATION LIVING SHORELINE: VEGETATION AND STRUCTURAL SAND BYPASS SYSTEM BEACH NOURISHMENT GROIN DUNE CREATION REVETMENT TIDAL WETLAND/SALT MARSH CREATION

81 P R O J E C T W E B S I T E capecodcommission.org/resiliency THE RESILIENT CAPE COD PROJECT