CLICK HERE FOR HARBOR MANAGEMENT MAYORS WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE MINUTES

CLICK HERE FOR HARBOR MANAGEMENT APPLICATION REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES

OCTOBER 22, 2003

Dr. Pinto stated that the meeting was very worthwhile; he said as well as receiving additional information they were given the chance to make statements also. He commented that he did give a speech in favor of the project and added that they planned to submit a formal letter. Dr. Pinto said in the interests of Norwalk that perhaps other agencies could also submit a letter in favor of this; he suggested they write a letter on behalf of the Mayor and he also asked Mr. Casagrande if the Norwalk Shellfish Commission would submit something in writing indicating that they agree with the science and having the site remain open.

b. Annual meeting of Connecticut Harbor Management Association

Dr. Pinto stated that he and other members of the Commission had attended the meeting and they had had an enjoyable and informative time.

Mr. Callahan pointed out that Dr. Pinto has now been made a member of the Board of Directors and congratulated him.

Regarding general business, Dr. Pinto stated that they had meet with Peter Francis of the DEP with regard to previous letters send out requesting information on Calf Pasture Island and also on the bulkheading at Water Street. He said they would be sending a letter to him as he had agreed to review letters and respond to them. He also stated that they had sent a request to Art Rock to make sure that the NHMC receives all applications, not just COP’s, in a timely manner for review. He explained that this was an agreement that Mr. Rock had agreed with a few years ago and has not followed through on that; he hoped by sending the letter they would be able to re-visit the matter.

COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS

a. State of Harbor Annual Meeting

Dr. Pinto went through the list of invited guests that had attended last year’s meeting; they included Marcy Balint, Pete Lepack, Chief Verda, Fred Trefeisen, Mike Moccaie, Mike Greene, Adam Baldwin (US Coastguards) and the Mayor.

Dr. Pinto asked Mr. Casagrande if a representative from the Shellfish Commission wished to be present. He replied that he would speak to Mr. John Frank about the subject. Dr. Pinto asked Mr. Griffin if he would contact the US Coastguards to invite a representative and that he would invite Mayor Knopp.

There was a general discussion about topics/issues, dates etc. Dr. Pinto concluded by saying that unless any Commissioners wanted any change, they would keep to the same format as last year.

b. Status of Harbor Management Plan

Mr. Steadman stated that they were still waiting for comments from the committees. He said the DEP does have a copy of the plan but they have not requested a formal review at this time.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

a. Web Page/Newsletter – Mr. Mobilia

Mr. Mobilia stated that the newsletter is out and a copy of it can be found on their website. He explained that he is making some small changes on the website and distributed copies.

Dr. Pinto commented that this is one of the best harbor management websites that he had seen and commended Mr. Mobilia.

Dr. Pinto noted that he had received a telephone call from Jessica Kaplan (Norwalk River Watershed Initiative) as she would like to put a website together; Dr. Pinto had suggested that they dovetail the two sites so it would work well for both of them.

b. Finance – Mr. Dunavan

Dr. Pinto stated that a recording secretary would only attend the Application Review Committee meetings if specifically requested; he also noted that they had two outstanding bills from Application Review.

c. Application Review – Ms. Clark

1. 2003-24: NRG Norwalk Harbor Operations, Inc. Manressa Island Ave (Mr. Leslie Ross, Manager) CT DEP Application for COP. Maintenance work at the marine terminal to maintain structural integrity of steel sheet piling bulkheads on the west side of the barge unloading canal.

Ms. Clark stated that this work would entail building a platform that will be fitted to the existing bulkhead that will be kept in place in order to collect any of the debris that is shaken loose during the cleaning process. Pressurized water will be used to clean it and after cleaning a protective coat would be added above the waterline. She said there would be no change to the bulkhead or no new construction, it is maintenance work only.

Ms. Clark explained that the work involved would mean replacing approximately 157 linear feet of timber bulkhead that will be located water ward of 18 inches. The new bulkhead will be anchored by eight steel tie rods, twenty five timber pilings and three timber whalers. She continued to say that there is an existing timber pier and this will be reduced in size to 10 ft x 12 ft and landward by 2 ½ ft.

Dr. Pinto confirmed that there were bulkheads on either side of the Gardellas. Ms. Clark said there is a situation where the outer limit of the floating dock and ramp of the proposed work will not encroach waterward into Charles Creek. She said they will have a 1 ½ ft waterward creep of the main bulkhead and what they are saying is this does not create a problem yet as the set backs are wide enough. Ms. Clark said they are trying to maintain the consistency in trying to avoid waterward creep of bulkheads at all and so that is the nature of the comment.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

Ms. Clark stated that they had received a letter from the Norwalk Zoning Commission regarding the proposed village districts and the proposed changes refer to two items. The first is that no adult use establishments shall be permitted in the Rowayton and East Avenue Village Districts by variance where they are prohibited and the second has to do with signage (height and size) in the East Avenue Village District.

Ms. Clark said that there was nothing in either of these provisions that had any direct impact on the harbor. The sense of the Application Review Committee was that they would ask the Commission for approval to send a letter to the Zoning Commission to indicate that they were aware of the changes and they find them consistent with the plan

Dr. Pinto said based on their original statement regarding visual access to the harbor and keeping the signs at a reasonable sign agrees with their premise.

Ms. Clark stated that she wished to suspend the rules to add a new item to the agenda. There were no objections.

Ms. Clark stated that this was forwarded to them from CT DEP and has to do with a change in the permit; she reported the following: King Industries is permitted to currently discharge waters to the City of Norwalk Water Pollution Control Facility; this application seeks to modify the permit now in force. Presently, 43,000 gallons/day of laboratory and processes operations wastewaters from eight processes in their organic chemical manufacturing are treated by two carbon filers; some also receive neutralization. All are then combined in an equalization tank prior to discharge into the Norwalk sanitary sewer. Additionally, up to 72,000 gallons/day of treated groundwater is filtered to remove solids, then three carbon units are used in series to remove various volatile and semi-volatile organics prior to discharge into the Norwalk sanitary sewer. The proposed permit modification specifies a monthly frequency for monitoring and reporting of naphthalene (not currently required). The permit modification also adjusted the lower end of the PH range from 6.0 s.u. to 5.0 s.u.

Ms. Clark stated that there is a permit in effect for the whole process and there would be no change to the activities, the only difference would be that the monitoring and reporting of naphthalene would now be a monthly occurrence.

Mr. Palau posed the question that King Industries would be asking to establish a standard that does not currently exist.

Mr. Callahan asked if this was part of their jurisdiction. Mr. Steadman agreed with Mr. Callahan’s comment but said there are a number of items in the Plan about improving water quality.

Dr. Pinto said he could not see why this was not a problem before. Ms. Clark said she did not know if this was ever a problem; she suggested that they are just brining this into compliance.

Mr. Griffin suggested that if there was a problem in the handling of the naphthalene, what would be the length of time before it was noticed. He further suggested that maybe the inspections needed to be done more than monthly and if the previous permit had called for a weekly or even a daily inspection.

There was a discussion about the previous permit and the timing.

Ms. Clark added that no actual discharge goes into the waters of the harbor; it goes through the processing plant and many different treatments.

Dr. Pinto said they could certainly see the importance of doing the monitoring. Mr. Palau also stated that he could see no objections to the monthly monitoring.

Mr. Griffin commented that there is not enough information on why this action is being implemented.

Dr. Pinto then suggested that they make a couple of enquiries as to why this action is being changed and if it was a problem beforehand.

Ms. Leonard suggested that the Commission respond with a letter to the Bureau of Water Management, just like any other application.

Finally, Ms. Clark noted that they had received a copy of the letter from the DEP regarding the grounded house boat belonging to Mr. Robert Griffith in that he had been given a notice of violation. She said Mr. Griffith had requested an additional thirty days to comply with the violation and the DEP, on September 26, 2003 sent a letter saying there would be an extension of thirty days at which time the entire structure must be completely removed to a location that is landward of the high tide line and outside the tidal wetlands.

d. Boating and Harbor Safety – Mr. Farrow

1. Re-installment fee for permit applications

Mr. Farrow stated that the committee had discussed the re-installment fee and said this would have to go before the Common Council. He explained that on December 31^st of each year Mr. Griffin sends out a permit reminder stated that the applicant has until the end of January to apply, there is also a grace period of one month where a $10 late fee is incurred. Mr. Farrow explained that after the end of February there is a gray area, when people still have their tackle in the water and they have not renewed their permit; he noted that according to state statute, a $90 dollar a day find could be imposed. In order to clarify the situation and as an incentive to renew the permit Mr. Farrow said they intend to enforce a re-installment fee.

Mr. Griffin distributed the current language and the proposed language for the renewal of a mooring permit and late fees. He said the $90 a day is a threshold for the violation.

Mr. Griffin mentioned that in other towns, where there is a long waiting list, if a person did not renew their mooring permit, their spot would be given to the next man on the list. He said Norwalk does not currently have a waiting list. Mr. Griffin stated that in the packet he sends out the rules and regulations are clearly stated; after February 28^th an individual no longer has renewal rights.

Mr. Steadman referred to the city code, regarding the adoption of rules and quoted "The Harbor Management Commission may, from time to time, adopt such rules and regulations as is deemed necessary." He continued to say that the Commission would first have to go to a public hearing and that notice has to be published in a local newspaper.

Mr. Palau referred to the current language of the statute reiterating the fact that Mr. Griffin is able to collect $90 a day; by doing this he would be limiting it by only be able to collect the one time $90. He said this is also assuming the mooring is in the water

There was a discussion about renewal rights.

Mr. Palau stated that he had a problem with the fact that the renewal would cost more than initial application itself. Mr. Griffin reiterated that they were trying to create an incentive for people to renew in that sixty day window instead of taking a more relaxed attitude with only a $10 differential (late fee).

Mr. Mobilia said there are a lot of people in the harbor who do not remove their tackle, and that is an issue.

Ms. Clark noted that she was uncomfortable with the proposed language "if a waiting list does not exist, to any new applicant" – she asked if there was no waiting list would that person reapplying become the new applicant. There was a discussion about the language used and who would be considered the new applicant.

Mr. Griffin said they are trying to head off future difficulties and what they have prevailing now are people with mooring and ground tackle in the water and there is no real system implemented to pursue this person. Mr. Griffin gave examples of this, noting that he did not have the budget etc. to remove it.

Ms. Clark confirmed that the $90 is really a punitive action. Mr. Griffin said he has brought this up in past years as he had always considered it inappropriate to raise the application fee because then the new applicant suffers. He said this is a fresh category of fees.

Ms. Leonard suggested that they look at other towns to see how this is handled.

Dr. Pinto suggested that this could be a topic at the State of the Harbor Meeting.

Mr. Griffin said this puts another tool in the harbormaster’s tool box and gave an example of when he had tried to lift ground tackle out of the water in the past. He said if they start to slap people with a $90 fee then there will be a lot of unhappy boaters in the harbor.

Dr. Pinto suggested that the word "another" be used in place of "new" applicant.

Mr. Callahan said that this item would to go through the ordinance committee, then the common council. He said by the time this has occurred it would be too late to get the language incorporated in time for Mr. Griffin to send out the new language in the permit reminders (December 31^st). Ms. Clark added that they should not rush a subject like this if they did not need to.

Dr. Pinto asked how many new applications was there this year. Mr. Griffin replied that there were forty eight and of those about half were people who did not renew on time.

Mr. Palau said he was uncomfortable with the entire concept; he said they are creating a problem to one that does not exist. Mr. Griffin said the problem is with the individual who doesn’t renew on time. Mr. Palau said there is a $90 a day fee; existing language is in the code that is not be used.

** MS. CLARK SECONDED.

The Commissioners agreed that this item would get referred back to committee for further discussion.

2. Transient anchorage and residence time

This item was tabled until the next meeting.

3. Fairway designation on either side of the navigation channel

This item was tabled until the next meeting.

e. Dredging

Mr. Steadman stated that he had talked with representative from Congressman Shay's office and there was still no word on the appropriation bill. He said the final bill could be none, it could be some part of the million dollars or the entire million dollars but they are hopeful that they will know by November 7, 2003.

Mr. Steadman reported that the ACOE have provided the information, which the EPA had asked for about the CAD cell, to the DEP for final approval. The DEP has decided that it does not need to go out for a thirty public notice since the original notice was somewhat general. What the DEP is waiting for now is the final recommendations to do with when the dredging can take place to protect the fisheries resources. Mr. Steadman stated that the National Fisheries Service has proposed that the dredging should be able to start August 1^st because there is no indication that there is any valuable spawning fish up stream of the bridges. He noted that Mr. Harris’ group has collected data to support this so he has provided that to the National Fisheries Service and this has to be coordinated to the DEP’s fishery group and the Bureau of Aquaculture.

Mr. Steadman explained that when he had called the Berea of Aquaculture and they had some concerns that even if the dredging was to begin August 1^st it was limited to above the bridges.

Dr. Pinto said they would need some assistance from the Shellfish Commission and from Bloom Brothers. Mr. Steadman suggested they see what comes from the meeting next week of the National Fisheries Services to find out what they come up with.

Mr. Steadman stated that there is a possibility that this project could start August 1^st, assuming the money is available. He said he spoke with Sue Jacobson from the DEP and she had informed Mr. Steadman that all she was waiting for was the approval regarding the fisheries. He said assuming they can do the work and they have the funds they should also assume that the dump site is still active. The other thing they need to work on is the final cost sharing between the city and the ACOE.

Dr. Pinto commented that these are all positive statements.

Mr. Griffin said when they had the dredging committee meeting and discussed the possibility of extending the window of dredging and they were told that extending it on the early end would not be a possibility; they might consider it on the late end. He said now they have us believing that the dredging might take place in August.

Mr. Steadman said this would just be for the upper part of the harbor.

Mr. Griffin said they had driven to Massachusetts for this meeting and at that time they had asked if there was any reality of this going into a two part project. It was confirmed at that time that it was absolutely possible to be done; however Mr. Griffin said they did not hear any more.

Mr. Griffin said he wanted to know, when would they be able to start to do it all in one dredging process and if they could start in August does that mean it would be done in one season. He said it feels like they are asking the same questions over and over again.

f. Mayor’s Water Quality

Dr. Pinto stated that he had received a call from a Tia Sidey and she is interested in the restoration of Farm Creek and is putting together a committee on her own to look into this. Dr. Pinto said that he had suggested for her to apply for a couple of programs to get some funding.

1. Final Water Quality report

There was no report this evening.

2. Ascension Beach debris below mean low water (status)

There was no report this evening.

g. Plans and Recommendations – Mr. Callahan

Mr. Callahan stated that he wished to address the bulkhead maintenance programs; he said right now there is no clarification on high or mean low of where the pilings are especially at 68 Water Street. He said they were proposing a meeting to look at this further.

Mr. Callahan said he had also spoken with Mr. Moccaie (Park and Recreations) about the lights at Calf Pasture Beach. He said this is an area where there is a safety hazard for boaters coming in and this was addressed back in 1993. There is a process that in three or four years to get this on their budget to replace all of the lighting however it is estimated to cost $600,000.

Mr. Callahan said as a Commission, they need to find out if they have a problem with lighting. He said Mr. Moccaie is going to need some written recommendations or letters from people to put into a file that will grow and grow.

Mr. Palau said this might be a subject to raise at the State of the Harbor meeting in order to get some comments.

h. Waterfront Facilities Advisory – Mr. Griffin

Mr. Griffin said they have a new clean vessel act program in Veteran’s Park. The boating infrastructure grant program was not acted upon this year because of the anticipation of the dredging; he said they will have to extend the contract now for another year.

Regarding the Steering Committee, Mr. Griffin said they have a date set of November 18, 2003 for the next meeting. Also, he had been in touch with a company in Virginia that is acting as a an agent for distribution of grant monies for computer software; he said they discussed the possibility of pursuing that grant and it is on hold until the end of the year.

NEW BUSINESS

There was no new business this evening.

STAFF REPORTS

a. Planning and Zoning – Ms. Leonard

There was no report this evening.

b. Harbormaster’s Report

Mr. Griffin issued a copy of the harbormaster’s deposit to the Chairman. He said they are on budget for the year end. He distributed a copy of his signed report dated October 22, 2003 to Commissioners and briefly discussed each item.

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page