Design, costs and benefits of Francis Street pilot: consultants outline multi-million-dollar estimates and grant paths

Design consultants presented the 30% schematic package for the Francis Street waterfront project, explained stormwater and resilience elements, and reviewed preliminary cost ranges and likely grant funding pathways.

Design features described include a restored dune, an elevated boardwalk approximately 4 feet above Washington Street elevation, accessible ramps, a small landscape wall to retain sand, rain gardens and upsized stormwater piping with backflow prevention at Meter Street and Francis Street. The project team said these elements were intended to improve access, enhance water quality and provide resilience against storm events.

On costs, presenters stressed the estimates are preliminary because the work is at a 30% design level. The presenters provided base estimates and broad ranges: the Francis Street beachfront (dune, boardwalk, ramps, nourishment and outfall) had a base construction estimate of about $4.9 million in today’s dollars with a low bound of $3.47 million and a high bound of $7.43 million; Land Bank rain garden parcels were estimated at $922,000 (range $650,000–$1.38 million); Salt Marsh Center green infrastructure was estimated at $691,000 (range $480,000–$1.0 million). The team said Hazen & Sawyer will return a revised estimate that adds design, engineering and permitting soft costs.

Megan Sheehan, a senior associate and economist at Industrial Economics, summarized a benefit-cost analysis: the Francis Street pilot could generate $1.1 million to $1.8 million in present-value benefits over 2030–2049 (monetized benefits included avoided transportation delays, increased recreation and ecosystem-service values). For a full Washington Street build, using modeling by Woods Hole Group, consultants estimated $12 million to $24 million in additional avoided flood and transportation damages between 2040 and 2049. Sheehan noted other likely non-monetized benefits — including ecosystem services, increased property values and reduced business interruptions — that were not included in the numeric totals.

On funding and grants, the team identified possible sources and constraints: state programs such as CZM coastal resilience grants and the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) action grant, federal sources including FEMA BRIC (which is resubmitting awards) and NOAA grants, and philanthropic opportunities such as National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF). The group also discussed a pending "Mass Ready Act" proposal that has been described as containing a possible $200 million coastal-resilience pool if passed. Speakers emphasized that grant rules vary (some allow stacking of funds and some do not), that match requirements differ by program and that documenting a cash match (for example, via a town meeting warrant) strengthens an application.

Adrian (permitting lead) outlined the permitting pathway: MEPA (Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs) submissions including an Environmental Notification Form and environmental impact review, an environmental-justice protocol that requires outreach, and parallel filings with the Nantucket Conservation Commission and U.S. Army Corps (general permit notification). Adrian said the MEPA process can take "a minimum of a year and up to two or three years" depending on design maturity and agency comments.

Project staff also discussed operations-and-maintenance responsibilities and noted the MOU between the town and Land Bank (which currently covers 30% design) will likely need revision if the project advances to construction. The team recommended sequencing work where appropriate and coordinating with broader stormwater master planning so short-lived stormwater measures are not counterproductive to longer-term infrastructure investments.

The consultants and staff urged prompt movement on grant cycles, noting that some state and federal programs favor projects that are farther along in design and are shovel-ready.

Next steps identified in the meeting: finalize and circulate the revised cost estimates and deliverables, continue staff-level coordination on the MOU, pursue identified grant opportunities, and advance the project to full design and permitting.