| Recommendation |
Lead Agency |
Funds Required |
| Hazards Information |
| 1 |
Assist FEMA financially and technically to update and maintain FIRMs for the coastal zone of Massachusetts. (Priority) |
DCR |
Yes |
| 2 |
Compile Coastal Hazards Characterization Atlases for the North Shore, South Coast, Cape Cod and Islands, and Boston Harbor regions. |
CZM |
Yes |
| 3 |
Develop an RVAM for each coastal community using a standardized GIS methodology. |
MEMA and DCR |
Yes |
| 4 |
Map and model climate change and sea-level rise data related to coastal hazards in Massachusetts. |
USGS |
Yes |
| 5 |
Develop a process to capture coastal conditions immediately after major storm events. |
CZM and MEMA |
No |
| 6 |
Model potential storm damage based on historical event data to educate decision makers and the public to the magnitude of risk in the coastal zone. |
MEMA, DCR, CZM, FEMA, USACE, and NOAA |
Yes |
| 7 |
Create and maintain an online portal to resources, websites, and data-sharing systems that distribute coastal hazards information including data and tools. |
NOAA, CZM, and MassGIS |
Yes |
| 8 |
Evaluate the distribution of coastal hazards and emergency management information to coastal communities before and during major storm events. |
MEMA and CZM |
Yes |
| Policy |
| 9 |
Establish a storm-resilient communities program to provide case studies for effective coastal smart growth planning and implementation. (Priority) |
EOEEA |
Yes |
| 10 |
Finalize guidance document for state and local agencies on the implementation of Executive Orders 149 and 181 relative to publicly funded infrastructure projects, and develop guidance for the remaining sections of Executive Order 149. |
CZM and MassDEP |
No |
| 11 |
Provide additional outreach to coastal homeowners with insurance policies to ensure that they have appropriate wind and flood coverage, and to uninsured coastal homeowners to explain the importance of homeowners and flood insurance. |
DOI |
No |
| 12 |
Provide incentives, such as reduced insurance premiums, for retrofitting homes in coastal areas to lessen the potential risk due to storms. |
DOI |
No |
| 13 |
Raise the maximum coverage of the Guaranty Fund above its $300,000 limit to lessen the impact of coastal disasters. |
DOI and Legislature |
No |
| 14 |
Conserve coastal land and minimize loss through acquisition of storm-prone properties from willing sellers in fee or through conservation restrictions and easements. |
DFG and DCR |
Yes |
| 15 |
Encourage coastal communities to adopt the CPA and use the Community Preservation Fund to acquire storm-prone properties. |
Community Preservation Coalition |
No |
| Planning and Regulations |
| 16 |
Develop, update, and implement hazard mitigation plans for coastal communities. (Priority) |
MEMA, DCR, and CZM |
Yes |
| 17 |
Update the State Building Code requirements for coastal construction, and encourage collaboration between building inspectors and Conservation Commissions. |
MassDEP |
No |
| 18 |
Develop informal local coordination processes or modify bylaws to provide for the coordination of permitting and approval by local departments. |
Municipal Officials |
No |
| 19 |
Evaluate the feasibility of a guidance document or revisions to the Wetland Protection Act regulations to develop best management practices or performance standards for LSCSF. |
MassDEP |
No |
| 20 |
Create a biannual coastal conference to provide coastal managers and members of the public with a forum for the exchange of knowledge, ideas, and experiences to prevent and address coastal hazards. |
Sea Grant and CZM |
Yes |
| 21 |
Identify existing culverts and tide gates associated with transportation crossings of coastal wetlands that are priorities for replacement due to flood hazards or environmental resource concerns, and address flooding, wetlands hydrology, and maintenance in the early stages of the design and implementation of new or replacement transportation projects that cross coastal wetlands and waterways. |
EOT, CZM, MassDEP, and USACE |
Yes |
| Protection |
| 22 |
Implement a program of regional sand management through policies, regulations, and activities that promote nourishment as the preferred alternative for coastal hazard protection. (Priority) |
See #23-26 |
|
| 23 |
Develop a process using existing or newly enacted policies and/or regulations, which (1) improves coordination between the USACE, state agencies, and municipalities, (2) identifies cost-share funds, and (3) achieves permit requirements in a timely manner, so as to ensure that all dredged material suitable for beach nourishment will be placed on adjacent or nearby eroding public beaches. |
CZM |
No |
| 24 |
Conduct a regional sand management study that identifies (1) critically eroding public beaches where access is open to the public, (2) areas most vulnerable to coastal hazards, and (3) potential regional nourishment methodology and costs. |
CZM |
Yes |
| 25 |
Identify and map potential offshore and inland sources of suitable nourishment sediment. |
USGS |
Yes |
| 26 |
Update and finalize existing draft document entitled Assessing Potential Environmental Impacts of Offshore Sand and Gravel Mining for the Purposes of Beach Nourishment to include contemporary state of knowledge regarding the potential short and long-term physical and biological impacts associated with offshore sediment removal. |
EOEEA |
No |
| 27 |
Establish a Technical Advisory Committee, consisting of a broad range of qualified professionals, to evaluate and develop construction and monitoring guidance, and recommend appropriate approval conditions for those protection approaches determined to be new and innovative. |
EOEEA |
No |
| 28 |
Build upon an ongoing study by WHOI Sea Grant and the Cape Cod Cooperative Extension to quantify the inherent values of Cape Cod coastal beaches for storm damage protection, recreation, and wildlife habitat to develop similar values for all Massachusetts beaches. |
WHOI Sea Grant and Cape Cod Cooperative Extension |
Yes |
| 29 |
Develop a standardized benefit-cost analysis model using an approach adapted from that used by the USACE to justify projects that fully compares the capital, societal, and natural resource benefits and costs of proposed shoreline protection projects and appropriate alternatives. |
EOEEA |
Yes |
Boston, MA 02114