 |
 |  |
|
| |
| NORWALK HARBOR MANAGEMENT COMMISSION MINUTES |
CLICK HERE FOR HARBOR MANAGEMENT MAYORS WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE MINUTES
CLICK HERE FOR HARBOR MANAGEMENT APPLICATION REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES
HARBOR MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 29, 2006
ATTENDANCE: Tony Mobilia, Chairman; Patricia Clark, Jason Farrow, Tony
D’Andrea, Jose Cebrian, John Pinto, John Callahan
STAFF: Frank Strauch, Planning and Zoning
OTHERS: Michael Griffin, Harbor Master; John Frank, Shellfish
Commissioner; Geoff Steadman, Pat Harter
CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Mobilia called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. There was a quorum present.
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
Mr. Mobilia introduced Mr. Strauch to the group as the new staff member. Mr. Strauch gave a brief overview of his background.
Administrative Business
Summary of State of the Harbor
Ms. Clark stated that she felt the meeting went well in the room and that there was good interaction. Mr. Mobilia said that he had noticed that there was interaction between the public and those who were seated at the head table. Mr. Farrow asked if the same number of people attended this year as last. Mr. Mobilia replied that he believed it to be about the same as last year. Mr. Farrow said that he felt the meeting went well, also. Mr. Callahan agreed. Mr. Mobilia commented that some people had been unable to attend because it was the same night as a Council Meeting. Mr. Mobilia said that it was good to see Chris Perone and Bob Duff at the meeting. Mr. D’Andrea thanked the Harbor Master for mentioning the morning odor in East Norwalk. Mr. D’Andrea said that the residence in his area heard about this and came to thank him for mentioning it. Mr. Mobilia informed the Commission that he had sent out thank you notes to the speakers seated at the head table.
There will be a meeting with the DOT about Interstate 95 at the Mayor’s request. The Committee members will be attending this on December 13th at eleven o’clock.
Mr. Mobilia reminded everyone about the party scheduled for December 8 at Casa de Mobilia from 7 to 9 p.m.
Mr. Mobilia thanked Mr. Cebrian for the excellent job that he did with the budget. It will be hand delivered tomorrow morning. The budget meeting is scheduled for January18th.
Correspondence
Mr. Mobilia distributed copies of a FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Committee) CD to the Commission members.
Mr. Mobilia said an application or notice came through on this. Mr. Frank stated that comments have to be submitted by January 23rd, but there is a special form that needs to be filled out. Mr. Frank informed the Commission that FERC has already rejected comments from the CT DEP because they were not filed properly on the correct form.
Mr. Clark asked what subject areas the Commission should address. Ms. Clark agreed, saying it is out of Norwalk’s jurisdiction. Ms. Clark said that she would put this on the December agenda.
Mr. Mobilia reported that the only letter sent out this month was in regards to the Rowayton Yacht Club application with the Commission’s comments.
Dr. Pinto said that he had received a call from the Norwalk News following the State of the Harbor meeting. The newspaper is interested in putting a story in the paper. Mr. Mobilia said that he had been contacted also.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Application Reviews
Ms. Clark stated that there was one application from Arthur and Katherine Draper, doing business as 9 Gregory Court, LLC. The Drapers are currently living at 9 Nathan Hale Drive in Norwalk, but the proposed work would be at 9 Gregory Court. The Committee met and reviewed the application. An abutting neighbor, Mrs. Pat Harter, contacted the Committee and is present at the meeting. The proposed structure is a 118 foot long pile supported timber pier with access stairs to the pier and a pile supported float with float stops on the piling. This would be located just south of the Marvin Beach Association property. One factor was the distance from the property line that is joined next to Ms. Harter’s property and in respect to where the dock would be located in relationship to the property line.
In order to accommodate public access along the area below the seawall, there will be access stairs that would allow people to go up and over the raised portion of the pier. There would be a privacy gate for the pier and on the property. The applicants were trying to minimize the visual impact of the pier by using steel cables. There is a plank spacing of 1 inch between planks to allow sunlight to reach the vegetative area that does exist.
** MS. CLARK MOVED TO STATE THAT THE APPLICATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THE HARBOR MANAGEMENT COMMISSION FIND THE APPLICATION TO CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS BY ARTHUR AND KATHERINE DRAPER DOING BUSINESS AS 9 GREGORY COURT, LLC AND RESIDING AT 9 NATHAN HALE DRIVE, NORWALK, FOR THE WORK AT 9 GREGORY COURT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
THE NORWALK HARBOR MANAGEMENT COMMISSION (NHMC) FINDS THE PLAN OR PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTEN WITH THE HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN DUE TO THE PROXIMITY OF THE PROPOSED PIER AND FLOAT TO THE APPLICANT’S NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE AND MOVES TO TRANSMIT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS TO THE CT DEP OLISP AT THIS TIME:
1. THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO CONSIDER REDESIGN OF THE PROPOSAL TO PLACE THE PROPOSED DOCK IN THE CENTER OF THE APPLICANT’S PROPERTY.
2. THE SHELLFISH COMMISSION IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL AS DESIGNED ON SHELLFISH RESOURCES. THEY HAVE RECOMMENDED THAT THE RAMP BE EXENTDED SLIGHTLY SO THAT THE FLOAT WILL NOT REST ON THE BOTTOM.
3. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER TO THE NORTH HAS EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED DOCK O HER FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACCESS TO NAVIGABLE WATER.
4. THE NHMC REMAINS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROLIFERATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL DOCKS IN THIS AREA OF THE HARBOR AND THE EFFECT OF THOSE DOCKS ON THE PUBLIC’S USE OF NAVIGABLE WATER.
5. THE NHMC RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE APPLICATION AT SUCH TIME AS IT MAY BE REVISED OR GO TO PUBLIC NOTICE.
** DR. PINTO SECONDED.
Ms. Clark opened the discussion up to questions. Mr. D’Andrea asked if any part of a vessel or the dock touch the bottom during any cycle of the tide. Ms. Clark said that the configuration that was proposed shows the median water line. The original proposal included four pilings, with float stops to keep the floating dock off the bottom. Ms. Clark pointed out that the Shellfish Commission recommended that the ramp be extended to insure that the float does not rest on the bottom. Mr. D’Andrea said that a vessel tied to the dock would rest on the bottom and commented that during low water, the area was not navigable.
Mr. Callahan asked if the pier was a hazard to kayaks. Ms. Clark replied that this area was used for small boat sailing and non-motorized vessels.
Ms. Harter, who resides on Gregory Court, said that she had written a letter to the appropriate committee expressing her concerns regarding the proximity of the dock to her property line, the length of the pier and the use of the cove. This is one of the few remaining areas for young children to be learning boating skills. Ms. Harter said that she was concerned about the length of 118 feet and knows that the Shellfish Commission has recommended that it be longer. Ms. Harter pointed out that this dock has been denied twice before, once with a length of 140 feet in January 1987. Later on there was a second application made by Mr. Pierce. One of the serious reasons no one wanted long docks in the area was because the area is used for young children learning to sail.
Ms. Harter said that she had spoken with Mr. Frank. He explained the problem of the floating dock killing the shellfish. Ms. Harter said that the solution did not appear to be building larger and longer docks. If long docks are built, then commercial shellfish won’t be able to be done in the winter time. She requested that a redesign that would not affect the shellfish, but that would allow access to the water. Ms. Clark thanked Ms. Harter for her time.
Mr. Steadman made several comments about the first application, which was denied. He reminded everyone that this was before the Norwalk Harbor Management Plan was developed. Whatever denial took place in 1987 would have been under the DEP or the Army Corp. Mr. Steadman said that the Committee had not even looked at that because the dock was located too close to the property line. Mr. Callahan asked how close the dock was to the channel. Ms. Clark said that it was 700 feet to the channel.
Harbor Master Griffin commented he was looking at that area last year and noticed that there were the first signs of new oysters sets regenerating. He said that there was language in the existing plan, if not in the amendments to the plan that is being added, about the harvesting and cultivation of the shellfish in the future. Not only the resources themselves being protected by a dock or a boat not resting on the bottom, but the ability of the shell fishermen to be able to come into that area and harvest shellfish. With closer examination, a dock that extends that far or further will only aggravate the situation by preventing shell fishermen from harvesting a come back area.
Mr. Frank commented that two docks had just been approved nearby. Ms. Harter pointed out that those docks were close to Shore and Country. Ms. Clark reported that one dock was 112 feet and the second was 120 feet. Ms. Harter commented that those two docks have more immediate access to deep water whereas her area is considered mud flats.
Mr. Cebrian said that he would prefer to state that the oyster beds were coming back and make it clearly known. Mr. Frank explained that the oyster sets are further down on the harder bottom. The mud flat area has many clam beds. There is some commercial transplanting that goes on in the area. There was a discussion about area and what kind of dock would be appropriate. Ms. Clark stated that the agent for the applicants would be coming back with some kind revised proposal.
There was a discussion about the reason why the Shellfish Commission was recommending a longer dock.
Ms. Clark then re-read the Committee’s comments. Dr. Pinto suggested adding a comment about the number of proliferating unauthorized docks in the area. Mr. Steadman asked if a note should be added regarding the fact that this is an area that is used for commercial shell fishing. Harbor Master Griffin said that there was no tangible language to deal with many of the issues raised because no one has established the carrying capacity for the area. The location of the dock is a problem along with the shellfish resources in the area. If the applicant returns and says they will extend the dock, that would satisfy all the concerns expressed.
Mr. Steadman said that the Commission might not see the application again until it goes out to public notice. He suggested that Number 5 should be amended to end after the word revised. There was also a discussion about Comment #2 being amended to read “and on commercial harvesting and cultivation of shellfish resources.” There was a discussion on the wording of the reasons.
**MS. CLARK MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO:
THE HARBOR MANAGEMENT COMMISSION FIND THE APPLICATION TO CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS BY ARTHUR AND KATHERINE DRAPER DOING BUSINESS AS 9 GREGORY COURT, LLC AND RESIDING AT 9 NATHAN HALE DRIVE, NORWALK, FOR THE WORK AT 9 GREGORY COURT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
THE NORWALK HARBOR MANAGEMENT COMMISSION (NHMC) FINDS THE PLAN OR PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTEN WITH THE HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN DUE TO THE PROXIMITY OF THE PROPOSED PIER AND FLOAT TO THE APPLICANT’S NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE AND MOVES TO TRANSMIT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS TO THE CT DEP OLISP AT THIS TIME:
1. THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO CONSIDER REDESIGN OF THE PROPOSAL TO PLACE THE PROPOSED DOCK IN THE CENTER OF THE APPLICANT’S PROPERTY.
2. THE SHELLFISH COMMISSION IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE
PROPOSAL AS DESIGNED ON SHELLFISH RESOURCES AND ON COMEMERICAL HARVESTING AND
CULTIVATION OF SHELLFISH RESOURCES.
3. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER TO THE NORTH HAS EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE
EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED DOCK O HER FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACCESS TO NAVIGABLE
WATER.
4. THE NHMC REMAINS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROLIFERATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL DOCKS IN THIS AREA OF THE HARBOR AND THE EFFECT OF THOSE DOCKS ON THE PUBLIC’S USE OF NAVIGABLE WATER.
5. THE NHMC RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE APPLICATION AT SUCH TIME AS IT MAY BE REVISED.
** MR. D’ANDREA SECONDED.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
b. Finances
Mr. Cebrian said the budget is completed and will be mailed tomorrow for a presentation on January 18th.
Harbor Master Griffin informed the Commission that Norman Bloom had contacted him & Son regarding a $2,500 donation check for water quality.
Mr. Mobilia commented that the City was not getting its fair share of licensing and regulation fees. Mr. D’Andrea suggested perhaps it would be good to ask Bob Duff to look into the situation. Mr. Mobilia agreed. A discussion about the licensing fees in the past followed.
c. Webpage/Newsletter
There was no report this month.
d. Boating and Harbor Safety
There was no report.
e. Water Quality Committee
Mr. D’Andrea distributed copies of his report to the Commission.
Mr. D’Andrea reviewed the highlights of his report for the Commission.
f. Watershed Initiative Advisory Committee
The next Watershed Initiative Advisory Committee meeting will be at 5:30 p.m. on November 30th. Mr. D’Andrea reviewed the information on the Water Quality Inshore Station chart with the Commission members. There was a discussion about the water temperatures and the impact of the Broadwater Liquid Gas facility changing the water temperature.
g. Plans and Recommendations
There was no report.
h. Dredging
Dr. Pinto reported that he was in the process of scheduling a date to meet with the Army Corp of Engineers. Mr. Mobilia asked Mr. Steadman for the date when the funding letters are due. Mr. Steadman said he believe it was in January.
i. Waterfront Facilities Advisory
There was no Waterfront Facility Advisory report.
Harbor Master Griffin asked if he could comment about the dredging. Originally the project was broken up into two pieces, but at this point in time, the second stage looks like it is significantly threatened and with the shelf life of the permit and difficulties with the funding, Harbor Master Griffin recommended that the Commission have a meeting or two with the Dredging Task Force to get out some of the Corps drawings in order to focus on the East Basin and the East Basin approach. He said that he believed that it was important to bring a proposal to them. If that could be done soon at an affordable level, even if the main channel had to be done later, the Harbor would be in better shape. Mr. Mobilia said that if the moorings in the East Basin were blocked, the City would lose revenue. Harbor Master Griffin said that the channel was about eight feet and that the Basin needs to be cleaned out.
STAFF REPORTS
a. Harbor Master Griffin
Harbor Master Griffin distributed copies of his report to the members of the Commission.
Harbor Master Griffin then reviewed his report with the Commission members. Mr. Mobilia then read a letter from the New Canaan High School Regatta on November 5th. They mentioned two issues; one regarding in having barges arrived during the regatta. This poses a safety hazard. The school contacted Devine Brothers and O&G about this in advance. The Coast Guard also issued the group a permit for the event.
The second issue had to do with a safety issue onshore. Harbor Master Griffin said that he had spoken to Mr. Mocciae about the number of spectators and volunteers milling around the area while other boaters were bringing in boats on trailers. Mr. Mobilia said that the group would have to start earlier with their event planning and recognize that they are sharing a navigational channel with commercial vessels.
Harbor Master Griffin distributed copies twenty pages of the110 page FERC report.
Harbor Master Griffin stated that he had attended the Long Island Sound Council and Assembly meeting on behalf of the Mayor. There were representatives from the Broadwater Energy Group in attendance. The topic was the safety and security aspects of the project. There will need to be increase security. Harbor Master Griffin reviewed the possible scenarios if Broadwater is issued a permit. If Broadwater does get a permit from FERC and the Coast Guard choses not to reallocate their resources towards additional security for Broadwater, a federal budget add on may be necessary. However, Harbor Master Griffin did not feel that the additional funds would be granted. There was a lengthy discussion about the technical aspects of the Liquid Gas facility and the ambient temperature of the water.
Harbor Master Griffin stated that before the Connecticut Harbor Management Association Dinner meeting, it came to his attention that the Connecticut Department of Transportation was working on legislation. The DOT backed away from their proposals after hearing from numerous people. The DEP stated that they wanted to be held harmless because they were not really in concert with this effort and they were not supporting DOT’s efforts. The DEP is now involved in drafting their own legislation initiative. Harbor Master Griffin is now the chairman of the Harbor Master’s Focus Group to examine the DEP’s proposed legislation and share it with the other Harbor Masters through out the state. The DEP claims that their legislation is focused on strengthening the laws dealing with derelict vessels and removal of abandoned boats. But Harbor Master Griffin pointed out that a number of other issues are addressed, such as dredging regulations and the placement of fill in navigable waters; sunken or grounded vessels and permits for dredging or erecting structures. Harbor Master Griffin distributed copies of this document and asked the members of the Commission to email him with their comments.
In May, preliminary reports were issued to the various yacht clubs and the permit list, which is available to the general public, is given to Planning and Zoning. Harbor Master Griffin then distributed copies of the final report for 2006. Harbor Master Griffin presented it to Mr. Mobilia and stated that the report needed to be forwarded to Mike Green.
Mr. Mobilia said that there were some issues with the filing. He said that there needed to be some system installed so that when a member of the public goes to Planning and Zoning for a document, there is a hard copy rather than a copy on someone’s computer. Mr. Mobilia said there were gaps in the files and the letters that the Chairman writes regarding the applications.
Mr. Strauch said that for purposes of Freedom of Information, or litigation, he needs copies of the applications to the DEP, the applicant and other important reports that need to be part of the official record. Mr. Strauch requested that any document that comes from the chair should be given to him to put in the file. Mr. Mobilia said that he believes that there should be hard copies in a file.
b. Consultant
Mr. Steadman reported that he had visited the DEP regarding the amendments to the Harbor Management Plan. A copy was delivered to Marcie last week and she needs seven more copies for the various department review boards. A copy has also been given to the City’s Commission for Conservation and Development.
There was also a discussion of a notification procedure that applicants are supposed to follow in order to notify the Harbor Commission directly if they apply to the DEP. This is somewhat problematic, as Mr. Steadman explained.
c. Planning and Zoning
Mr. Strauch said that the filing issue is a matter of Freedom of Information Act availability. He recommended that the full agenda be used all the time rather than adjusting the agenda each time. There was a discussion about the procedure for adding items to the agenda.
NEW BUSINESS/OLD BUSINESS
Mr. D’Andrea reported that Dr. Pinto, Mr. Mobilia, and Harbor Master Griffin
should be expecting a call to discuss the Ambro Amendment. He stated that he
had received about a dozen phone calls or faxes about this and passed this along.
Mr. D’Andrea said that he thought there might be an end run to the Mayor, but
that the Commission members needed to do their due diligence. Harbor Master
Griffin stated that he had given the Chairman the statement and that the Commission
had an opportunity to do their homework and make their comparisons. Harbor Master
Griffin stated that Norwalk was not going to make a statement. Mr. D’Andrea
reiterated Harbor Master Griffin statement.
The CMHA has already issued a white paper on this issue and a copy went to Robert
Armstrong of Soundings. Mr. Steadman pointed out that the author of the Amendment
to the Federal legislation was told that if he wished to discuss this matter
with the Harbor Commission, he would need to put something in writing to the
Commission as to what he wants the Commission to do. He has chosen not to do
this and has chosen an alternative route by approaching the Mayor.
APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 25, 2006 MINUTES
Please note the following corrections:
Page 1, paragraph 5, line 1: please change “about the Ambrose Amendment” to “about the Ambro Amendment”
Page 2, paragraph 1, line 2: please change “ Col. Thankin was there, as was Ryan Thompson” to “Col. Thanken was there, as was Brian Thompson”
Page 3, paragraph 5, line 2: please change “Mr. Griffin said that in the spring he was contacted by the agent of the owner of The Boatworks in Rowayton, who was looking for a mooring.” To “Mr. Griffin said that in the spring he was contacted by the agent of The Boatworks in Rowayton, who was looking for a mooring on behalf of a boat owner in Norwalk.”
Page 5, Under APPLICATION REVIEW; please change “ OLISP BY THE TORWYATON YACHT CLUB” to “ OLISP BY THE ROWAYTON YACHT CLUB”
** MR. CALLAHAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 25, 2006 AS AMENDED.
** MR. FARROW SECONDED.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT
** MR. CALLAHAN MOVED TO ADJOURN.
** MR. D’ANDREA SECONDED.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
Sharon L. Soltes
Telesco Secretarial Services
 |
 |