SWAMPSCOTT — McAllister Marine Engineering presented the preliminary design concepts for a new Swampscott pier to the Harbor & Waterfront Advisory Committee on Thursday in order to start the conversation about the priorities and preferences of the community.
“We are looking to hear your preferences for the type of structure people would like to see,” said Jay Borkland, a consultant working with McAllister Marine Engineering, addressing the committee and the public.
A new Swampscott pier at Fisherman’s Beach was one of the projects included in the Harbor and Waterfront Plan, which was adopted by the Select Board in May 2020. The town received a grant from the Seaport Advisory Council in the amount of $80,000 for partial funding of the project.
The Town Meeting also allocated $100,000 for general work related to the Harbor and Waterfront Plan, said Marzie Galazka, director of community & economic development. The town has contracted McAllister Marine Engineering to conduct the study for the pier and do the design work.
John McAllister presented seven different conceptual layouts to the committee and the public in attendance on Thursday. In these concepts, the length of the pier ranged from 441 to 695 feet and the width varied from 12 to 44 feet.
All of the layouts presented showed a linear pier going either perpendicular to the beach or at an angle to the end point of the current pier, although Borkland said that they could incorporate a curve into the design. McAllister suggested a new pier could be built in several possible locations: immediately next to the old one, which would allow usage of the old pier during construction; in the middle point of the beach; or on the west end of it.
“Because some people have expressed that the Fish House is a historical building and it did not have a pier in the beginning right in front of it,” McAllister explained.
All layouts also included a new extended ramp and took into account the required compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act.
A wider pier would provide for a more multi-use design, said Borkland. Vehicles could drive onto the pier in case of emergencies, and if the pier is moved away from the Fish House, fishermen could drive up their vehicles to load and unload their boats. A wider pier would also have a dedicated pedestrian path.
“We want it to be as utilitarian as possible,” said Borkland.
Some designs showcased bumpouts that could be used for kiosks or pull-up space or for various activities.
Because of the rising sea levels and the need for resiliency, the pier will need to be elevated at least by 5 feet above its current height, McAllister said. His concern was that an elevated pier would look out of place in front of the Fish House; this is why other options showed the pier moved to the west.
According to McAllister, at this time it was too early to decide on specific materials for the pier, which would correlate with the design life of the project. The community would have to decide whether they are looking to build a pier that will last for 30, 50 or 70 years before it will require some substantial and expensive maintenance.
Different members of the Harbor & Waterfront Advisory Committee had different favorite layouts, but most agreed that it was crucial to hear from the fishermen.
“Of course, I have concerns over the change. It will affect my livelihood,” said Paul Whitten, a fisherman.
The Fishermen Alliance sent a letter to the committee that was read aloud at the meeting by one of the fishermen. The letter said that fishermen were mostly concerned about the depth of the harbor.
“Dredging is absolutely necessary,” said the letter. And a breakwater is on the wishlist, too.
There are currently six full-time commercial fishermen left in Swampscott that work off of Fisherman’s Beach.
The only dredging possible, said Borkland, would be deepening a channel. The whole harbor dredging, which was studied, cannot be done because Swampscott has one of the best eelgrass beds and the regulators would not allow the destruction of eelgrass without replanting, which is not financially feasible for the town.
McAllister Marine Engineering did say a living reef is possible so the boats can be moved into deeper waters.
Among the next steps McAllister mentioned was a group meeting with regulators such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act Office (MEPA), Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) and others on Jan. 11 and exploratory drilling for geological investigation on Jan. 17 and 18. A feasibility study could be completed by May, said McAllister.
In June, McAllister plans to complete the whole package for the project.
