Densely Developed Areas; and

c. 100 feet away for new agricultural and aquacultural activities. Measured horizontally means that the riverfront area extends at a right angle to the mean annual high-water line rather than along the surface of the land. 10.58: continued Where a river runs through a culvert more than 200 feet in length, the riverfront area stops at a perpendicular line at the upstream end of the culvert and resumes at the downstream end. When a river contains islands, the riverfront area extends landward into the island from and parallel to the mean annual high-water line. (b) The physical characteristics of a Riverfront Area as described in 310 CMR 10.58(2)(a) are critical to the protection of the interests specified in 310 CMR 10.58(1). (c) The boundary of the Riverfront Area is a line parallel to the mean annual high-water line, located at the outside edge of the riverfront area. At the point where a stream becomes perennial, the riverfront area begins at a line drawn as a semicircle with a 200 foot (25 foot in densely developed areas; 100 foot for new agriculture) radius around the point and connects to the parallel line perpendicular to the mean annual high-water line which forms the outer boundary. When a river flows into coastal waters or an embayment, the river shall end at the mouth of coastal river line as delineated on the current mouth of coastal river map series maintained by the Department, subject to revisions after public notice and referred to as the Massachusetts Mouth of Coastal River Maps. If a mouth of coastal river line is not delineated on the current map series, the issuing authority shall determine the mouth of coastal river line in accordance with the Department’s most current Mouth of Coastal River Policy. A mouth of coastal river line shown on the Department’s mouth of coastal river map series is not evidence that a stream is perennial; such a determination shall only be made pursuant to 310 CMR 10.58(2)(a)1. (3) Presumption. Where a proposed activity involves work within the riverfront area, the issuing authority shall presume that the area is significant to protect the private or public water supply; to protect the groundwater; to provide flood control; to prevent storm damage; to prevent pollution; to protect land containing shellfish; to protect wildlife habitat; and to protect fisheries. The presumption is rebuttable and may be overcome by a clear showing that the riverfront area does not play a role in the protection of one or more of these interests. In the event that the presumption is deemed to have been overcome as to the protection of all the interests, the issuing authority shall make a written determination to this effect, setting forth its grounds on Form 6. Where the applicant provides information that the riverfront area at the site of the activity does not play a role in the protection of an interest, the issuing authority may determine that the presumption for that interest has been rebutted and the presumption of significance is partially overcome. (4) General Performance Standard. Where the presumption set forth in 310 CMR 10.58(3) is not overcome, the applicant shall prove by a preponderance of the evidence that there are no practicable and substantially equivalent economic alternatives to the proposed project with less adverse effects on the interests identified in M.G.L. c.131 § 40 and that the work, including proposed mitigation, will have no significant adverse impact on the riverfront area to protect the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131 § 40. In the event that the presumption is partially overcome, the issuing authority shall make a written determination setting forth its grounds in the Order of Conditions and the partial rebuttal shall be taken into account in the application of 310 CMR 10.58 (4)(d)1.a. and c.; the issuing authority shall impose conditions in the Order that contribute to the protection of interests for which the riverfront area is significant. (a) Protection of Other Resource Areas. The work shall meet the performance standards for all other resource areas within the riverfront area, as identified in 310 CMR 10.30 (Coastal Bank), 10.32 (Salt Marsh), 10.55 (Bordering Vegetated Wetland), and 10.57 (Land Subject to Flooding). When work in the riverfront area is also within the buffer zone to another resource area, the performance standards for the riverfront area shall contribute to the protection of the interests of M.G.L. c. 131, § 40 in lieu of any additional requirements that might otherwise be imposed on work in the buffer zone within the riverfront area. (b) Protection of Rare Species. No project may be permitted within the riverfront area which will have any adverse effect on specified habitat sites of rare wetland or upland, vertebrate or invertebrate species, as identified by the procedures established under 310 CMR 10.59 or 10.37, or which will have any adverse effect on vernal pool habitat certified prior to the filing of the Notice of Intent. (c) Practicable and Substantially Equivalent Economic Alternatives. There must be no practicable and substantially equivalent economic alternative to the proposed project with less adverse effects on the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131 § 40. 10.58: continued 1. Definition of Practicable. As set forth in 310 CMR 10.04, an alternative is practicable and substantially equivalent economically if it is available and capable of being done after taking into consideration costs, existing technology, proposed use, and logistics, in light of overall project purposes. Available and capable of being done means the alternative is obtainable and feasible. Project purposes shall be defined generally (e.g., single family home, residential subdivision, expansion of a commercial development). The alternatives analysis may reduce the scale of the activity or the number of lots available for development, consistent with the project purpose and proposed use. The alternatives analysis shall not include interior design specifications (i.e., neither the proposed use or project purpose in the Notice of Intent nor the Order of Conditions should specify the number of rooms, bedrooms, etc. within a building). Transactions shall not be arranged to circumvent the intent of alternatives analysis review. The four factors to be considered are: a. Costs, and whether such costs are reasonable or prohibitive to the owner. The owner means the individual or entity which owns the area where the activity will occur or which will implement the project purpose. Cost includes expenditures for a project within the riverfront area, such as land acquisition, site preparation, design, construction, landscaping, and transaction expenses. Cost does not include anticipated profits after the project purpose is achieved or expenditures to achieve the project purpose prior to receiving an Order with the exception of land acquisition costs incurred prior to August 7, 1996. In taking costs into account, the issuing authority shall be guided by these principles: i. The cost of an alternative must be reasonable for the project purpose, and cannot be prohibitive. ii. Higher or lower costs taken alone will not determine whether an alternative is practicable. An alternative for proposed work in the riverfront area must be a practicable and substantially equivalent economic alternative (i.e., will achieve the proposed use and project purpose from an economic perspective). iii. In considering the costs to the owner, the evaluation should focus on the financial capability reasonably expected from the type of owner (e.g., individual homeowner, residential developer, small business owner, large commercial or industrial developer) rather than the personal or corporate financial status of that particular owner. Applicants should not submit, nor should issuing authorities request, financial information of a confidential nature, such as income tax records or bank statements. iv. Issuing authorities may require documentation of costs, but may also base their determinations on descriptions of alternatives, knowledge of alternative sites, information provided by qualified professionals, comparisons to costs normally associated with similar projects, or other evidence. Any documentation of costs should be limited to that required for a determination of whether the costs are reasonable or prohibitive. b. Existing technology, which includes best available measures (i.e., the most up-to­ date technology or the best designs, measures, or engineering practices that have been developed and are commercially available); c. The Proposed Use. This term is related to the concept of project purpose. In the context of typical single family homes, the project purpose (construction of a single family house) and proposed use (family home) are virtually identical. In the context of projects where the purpose implies a business component, such as residential subdivision, commercial, and industrial projects, the proposed use typically requires economic viability. Practicable and substantially equivalent economic alternatives include alternatives which are economically viable for the proposed use from the perspective of site location, project configuration within a site, and the scope of the project. In the context of publically financed projects, the proposed use includes consideration of legitimate governmental purposes (e.g., protection of health and safety, providing economic development opportunities, or similar public purposes); and 10.58: continued d. Logistics. Logistics refers to the presence or absence of physical or legal constraints. Physical characteristics of a site may influence its development. Legal barriers include circumstances where a project cannot meet other applicable requirements to obtain the necessary permits at an alternative site. An alternative site is not practicable if special legislation or changes to municipal zoning would be required to achieve the proposed use or project purpose. An alternative is not practicable if the applicant is unable to obtain the consent of the owner of an alternative site for access for the purpose of obtaining the information required by the Notice of Intent or of allowing the issuing authority to conduct a site visit. 2. Scope of Alternatives. The scope of alternatives under consideration shall be commensurate with the type and size of the project. The issuing authority shall presume that alternatives beyond the scope described below are not practicable and therefore need not be considered. The issuing authority or another party may overcome the presumption by demonstrating the practicability of a wider range of alternatives, based on cost, and whether the cost is reasonable or prohibitive to the owner; existing technology; proposed use; and logistics in light of the overall project purpose. a. The area under consideration for practicable alternatives is limited to the lot for activities associated with the construction or expansion of a single family house on a lot recorded on or before August 1, 1996. b. The area under consideration for practicable alternatives is limited to the lot, the subdivided lots and any adjacent lots formerly or presently owned by the same owner for: i. activities associated with the construction or expansion of a single family house on a lot recorded after August 1, 1996; ii. any expansion of an existing structure, including enlargement of the footprint of any structure or the addition of associated structures for single family homes (e.g., a garage) on lots recorded after August 1, 1996; iii. any activity other than the construction or expansion of a single family house where the applicant owned the lot before August 7, 1996, including the creation of a real estate subdivision but excluding public projects, and the applicant will implement the project purpose; iv. new agriculture or aquaculture projects; v. any activity by a public entity when funds for the purchase of the site for the project purpose have been appropriated through action of the appropriate municipal board or state agency prior to the August 7, 1996; or vi. any lot shown on a definitive subdivision plan approved under M.G.L. c. 41, §§ 81K to 81GG, provided there is a recorded deed restriction limiting the total alteration to 5000 square feet or 10%, whichever is greater, of the riverfront area allocated to the lots within the entire subdivision. c. Except as allowed under 310 CMR 10.58(4)(c)2.b., the area under consideration for practicable alternatives extends to the original parcel and the subdivided parcels, any adjacent parcels, and any other land which can reasonably be obtained within the municipality for: i. activities associated with residential subdivision or housing complexes, institutional, industrial, or commercial projects; or ii. activities conducted by municipal government. For adjacent lots, reasonably be obtained means to purchase at market prices if otherwise practicable, as documented by offers (and any responses). For other land, reasonably be obtained means adequate in size to accommodate the project purpose and listed for sale within appropriately zoned areas, at the time of filing a Request for Determination or Notice of Intent, within the municipality. d. Alternatives extend to any sites which can reasonably be obtained within the appropriate region of the state for: i. residential, institutional, commercial, or industrial activities required to evaluate off-site alternatives in more than one municipality in an Environmental Impact Report under M.G.L. c. 30, §§ 61 through 62H, or an alternatives analysis conducted by the Corps of Engineers for a Section 404 permit under the federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., and used for 401 Water Quality Certification under 314 CMR 9.00: 401 Water Quality Certification for Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material, Dredging, and Dredged Material Disposal in Waters of the United States Within the Commonwealth; or 10.58: continued ii. activities conducted by district, county, state or federal government entities. The area to be considered is the service area within the governmental unit boundary or jurisdictional authority, or the municipality if there is no defined service area, consistent with the project purpose. 3. Evaluation of Alternatives. The applicant shall demonstrate that there are no practicable and substantially equivalent economic alternatives as defined in 310 CMR 10.58(4)(c)1., within the scope of alternatives as set forth in 310 CMR 10.58(4)(c)2., with less adverse effects on the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131 § 40. The applicant shall submit information to describe sites and the work both for the proposed location and alternative site locations and configurations sufficient for a determination by the issuing authority under 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d). The level of detail of information shall be commensurate with the scope of the project and the practicability of alternatives. Where an applicant identifies an alternative which can be summarily demonstrated to be not practicable, an evaluation is not required. The purpose of evaluating project alternatives is to locate activities so that impacts to the riverfront area are avoided to the extent practicable. Projects within the scope of alternatives must be evaluated to determine whether any are practicable. As much of a project as feasible shall be sited outside the riverfront area. If siting of a project entirely outside the riverfront area is not practicable, the alternatives shall be evaluated to locate the project as far as possible from the river. The issuing authority shall not require alternatives which result in greater or substantially equivalent adverse impacts. If an alternative would result in no identifiable difference in impact, the issuing authority shall eliminate the alternative. If there would be no less adverse effects on the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131, § 40, the proposed project rather than a practicable alternative shall be allowed, but the criteria in 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d) for determining no significant adverse impact must still be met. If there is a practicable and substantially equivalent economic alternative with less adverse effects, the proposed work shall be denied and the applicant may either withdraw the Notice of Intent or receive an Order of Conditions for the alternative, provided the applicant submitted sufficient information on the alternative in the Notice of Intent. (d) No Significant Adverse Impact. The work, including proposed mitigation measures, must have no significant adverse impact on the riverfront area to protect the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131, § 40. 1. Within 200 foot riverfront areas, the issuing authority may allow the alteration of up to 5000 square feet or 10% of the riverfront area within the lot, whichever is greater, on a lot recorded on or before October 6, 1997 or lots recorded after October 6, 1997 subject to the restrictions of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(c)2.b.vi., or up to 10% of the riverfront area within a lot recorded after October 6, 1997, provided that: a. At a minimum, a 100 foot wide area of undisturbed vegetation is provided. This area shall extend from mean annual high-water along the river unless another location would better protect the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131 § 40. If there is not a 100 foot wide area of undisturbed vegetation within the riverfront area, existing vegetative cover shall be preserved or extended to the maximum extent feasible to approximate a 100 foot wide corridor of natural vegetation. Replication and compensatory storage required to meet other resource area performance standards are allowed within this area; structural stormwater management measures may be allowed only when there is no practicable alternative. Temporary impacts where necessary for installation of linear site-related utilities are allowed, provided the area is restored to its natural conditions. Proposed work which does not meet the requirement of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d)1.a. may be allowed only if an applicant demonstrates by a preponderance of evidence from a competent source that an area of undisturbed vegetation with an overall average width of 100 feet will provide equivalent protection of the riverfront area, or that a partial rebuttal of the presumptions of significance is sufficient to justify a lesser area of undisturbed vegetation; b. Stormwater is managed according to standards established by the Department in its Stormwater Policy. 10.58: continued c. Proposed work does not impair the capacity of the riverfront area to provide important wildlife habitat functions. Work shall not result in an impairment of the capacity to provide vernal pool habitat identified by evidence from a competent source, but not yet certified. For work within an undeveloped riverfront area which exceeds 5,000 square feet, the issuing authority may require a wildlife habitat evaluation study under 310 CMR 10.60. d. Proposed work shall not impair groundwater or surface water quality by incorporating erosion and sedimentation controls and other measures to attenuate nonpoint source pollution. The calculation of square footage of alteration shall exclude areas of replication or compensatory flood storage required to meet performance standards for other resource areas, or any area of restoration within the riverfront area. The calculation also shall exclude areas used for structural stormwater management measures, provided there is no practicable alternative to siting these structures within the riverfront area and provided a wildlife corridor is maintained (e.g. detention basins shall not be fenced). 2. Within 25 foot riverfront areas, any proposed work shall cause no significant adverse impact by: a. Limiting alteration to the maximum extent feasible, and at a minimum, preserving or establishing a corridor of undisturbed vegetation of a maximum feasible width. Replication and compensatory storage required to meet other resource area performance standards are allowed within this area; structural stormwater management measures shall be allowed only when there is no practicable alternative; b. Providing stormwater management according to standards established by the Department; c. Preserving the capacity of the riverfront area to provide important wildlife habitat functions. Work shall not result in an impairment of the capacity to provide vernal pool habitat when identified by evidence from a competent source but not yet certified; and d. Proposed work shall not impair groundwater or surface water quality by incorporating erosion and sedimentation controls and other measures to attenuate nonpoint source pollution. 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR10.58(4)(d)1. or 2., the issuing authority shall allow the construction of a single family house, a septic system if no sewer is available, and a driveway, on a lot recorded before August 7, 1996 where the size or shape of the lot within the riverfront area prevents the construction from meeting the requirements of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d)1. or 2., provided that: a. The lot can be developed for such purposes under the applicable provisions of other municipal and state law; and b. The performance standards of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d) are met to the maximum extent feasible. In difficult siting situations, the maximum extent of yards around houses should be limited to the area necessary for construction. Except where the lot contains vernal pool habitat or specified habitat sites of rare species, a wildlife habitat evaluation study shall not be required. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d)1. or 2., the issuing authority may allow the construction of a commercial structure of minimum feasible dimension, on a lot recorded before August 7, 1996 where the size or shape of the lot within the riverfront area prevents the construction from meeting the requirements of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d)1. or 2., only if: a. The lot can be developed for such purposes and cannot be developed for any other purposes under the applicable provisions of other municipal and state law; b. The work is not eligible for 310 CMR 10.58(5); and c. The performance standards of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(d)1. or 2. are met to the maximum extent feasible. 10.58: continued (5) Redevelopment Within Previously Developed Riverfront Areas; Restoration and Mitigation. Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.58(4)(c) and (d), the issuing authority may allow work to redevelop a previously developed riverfront area, provided the proposed work improves existing conditions. Redevelopment means replacement, rehabilitation or expansion of existing structures, improvement of existing roads, or reuse of degraded or previously developed areas. A previously developed riverfront area contains areas degraded prior to August 7, 1996 by impervious surfaces from existing structures or pavement, absence of topsoil, junkyards, or abandoned dumping grounds. Work to redevelop previously developed riverfront areas shall conform to the following criteria: (a) At a minimum, proposed work shall result in an improvement over existing conditions of the capacity of the riverfront area to protect the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131 § 40. When a lot is previously developed but no portion of the riverfront area is degraded, the requirements of 310 CMR 10.58(4) shall be met. (b) Stormwater management is provided according to standards established by the Department. (c) Within 200 foot riverfront areas, proposed work shall not be located closer to the river than existing conditions or 100 feet, whichever is less, or not closer than existing conditions within 25 foot riverfront areas, except in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58(5)(f) or (g). (d) Proposed work, including expansion of existing structures, shall be located outside the riverfront area or toward the riverfront area boundary and away from the river, except in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58(5)(f) or (g). (e) The area of proposed work shall not exceed the amount of degraded area, provided that the proposed work may alter up to 10% if the degraded area is less than 10% of the riverfront area, except in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58(5)(f) or (g). (f) When an applicant proposes restoration on-site of degraded riverfront area, alteration may be allowed notwithstanding the criteria of 310 CMR 10.58(5)(c), (d), and (e) at a ratio in square feet of at least 1:1 of restored area to area of alteration not conforming to the criteria. Areas immediately along the river shall be selected for restoration. Alteration not conforming to the criteria shall begin at the riverfront area boundary. Restoration shall include: 1. removal of all debris, but retaining any trees or other mature vegetation; 2. grading to a topography which reduces runoff and increases infiltration; 3. coverage by topsoil at a depth consistent with natural conditions at the site; and 4. seeding and planting with an erosion control seed mixture, followed by plantings of herbaceous and woody species appropriate to the site; (g) When an applicant proposes mitigation either on-site or in the riverfront area within the same general area of the river basin, alteration may be allowed notwithstanding the criteria of 310 CMR 10.58(5)(c), (d), or (e) at a ratio in square feet of at least 2:1 of mitigation area to area of alteration not conforming to the criteria or an equivalent level of environmental protection where square footage is not a relevant measure. Alteration not conforming to the criteria shall begin at the riverfront area boundary. Mitigation may include off-site restoration of riverfront areas, conservation restrictions under M.G.L. c. 184, §§ 31 through 33 to preserve undisturbed riverfront areas that could be otherwise altered under 310 CMR 10.00, the purchase of development rights within the riverfront area, the restoration of bordering vegetated wetland, projects to remedy an existing adverse impact on the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131, § 40 for which the applicant is not legally responsible, or similar activities undertaken voluntarily by the applicant which will support a determination by the issuing authority of no significant adverse impact. Preference shall be given to potential mitigation projects, if any, identified in a River Basin Plan approved by the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. (h) The issuing authority shall include a continuing condition in the Certificate of Compliance for projects under 310 CMR 10.58(5)(f) or (g) prohibiting further alteration within the restoration or mitigation area, except as may be required to maintain the area in its restored or mitigated condition. Prior to requesting the issuance of the Certificate of Compliance, the applicant shall demonstrate the restoration or mitigation has been successfully completed for at least two growing seasons. 10.58: continued (6) Notwithstanding the Provisions of 310 CMR 10.58(1) through (5), Certain Activities or Areas Are Grandfathered or Exempted from Requirements for the Riverfront Area: (a) Any excavation, structure, road, clearing, driveway, landscaping, utility line, rail line, airport owned by a political subdivision, marine cargo terminal owned by a political subdivision, bridge over two miles long, septic system, or parking lot within the riverfront area in existence on August 7, 1996. Maintenance of such structures or areas is allowed (including any activity which maintains a structure, roads (limited to repairs, resurfacing, repaving, but not enlargement), clearing, landscaping, etc. in its existing condition) without the filing of a Notice of Intent for work within the riverfront area, but not when such work is within other resource areas or their buffer zones except as provided in 310 CMR 10.58(6)(b). Changes in existing conditions which will remove, fill, dredge or alter the riverfront area are subject to 310 CMR 10.58, except that the replacement within the same footprint of structures destroyed by fire or other casualty is not subject to 310 CMR 10.58. (b) Certain minor activities as identified in 310 CMR 10.02(2)(b)1. (c) On-site sewage disposal systems in existence on August 7, 1996 and the repair or upgrade of existing systems in compliance with 310 CMR 15.000: The State Environmental Code, Title 5: Standard Requirements for the Siting, Construction, Inspection, Upgrade and Expansion of On-site Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems and for the Transport and Disposal of Septage. New construction of a system under 310 CMR 15.000 must comply with 310 CMR 10.58, subject to the presumption for the siting of systems in 310 CMR 10.03. (d) The expansion of structures, airports, and marine cargo terminals, provided they are owned by a political subdivision and the expansion activity was physically begun on or before November 1, 1996. (e) Projects for which a draft environmental impact report was prepared and submitted pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30, § 62B, on or before November 1, 1996, or as extended by the Department for just cause but no later than December 31, 1996. (f) Projects for which a building permit conforming to local requirements was filed on or before October 1, 1996 and granted on or before April 1, 1997, or as extended by the conservation commission for just cause by no more than 60 days. (g) The road and infrastructure shown on a definitive subdivision plan approved or endorsed under M.G.L. c. 41, § 81U, on or before August 1, 1996. Activities on the subdivided lots are subject to 310 CMR 10.58 unless they received a building permit under 310 CMR 10.58(6)(f). (h) Construction, expansion, repair, restoration, alteration, replacement, operation and maintenance of public or private local or regional wastewater treatment plants and their related structures, conveyance systems, and facilities, including utility lines. (i) Structures and activities subject to a M.G.L. c. 91 waterways license or permit, or authorized prior to 1973 by a special act, are exempt, provided the structure or activity is subject to jurisdiction and obtains a license, permit, or authorization under 310 CMR 9.00: Waterways. (j) Activities within riverfront areas subject to a protective order under M.G.L. c. 21, § 17B, the Scenic Rivers Act. (k) Activities within an Historic Mill Complex.