NEWBURY — They expect big storms to do big damage on Plum Island, where beach erosion has long threatened oceanfront homes. They just weren’t expecting this storm to be that bad; ultimately, it was the most damaging to hit the island in recent memory.
As high tide arrived Friday morning, an $800,000 house was ripped from its foundation by the crashing surf and toppled onto the beach. Two others were so damaged that they were expected to be a total loss. And another two could end up condemned. All told, 12 homes are in jeopardy on this small barrier island, according to Newbury building inspector Sam Joslin.
Comments
Tarr is an idiot. Any home on the beach on a barrier island is in danger the minute it is built. They were foolish, selfish purchases.
not sure I would be so harsh, but the reality of climate change will increase the destructiveness of coastal storms...a million dollar seawall is at best a temporary (expensive) solution...and not something taxpayers should fund
“Back in 2007 and 2008, there was hundreds of feet of beach and hundreds of feet of dunes”--if all that could disappear in just five years, what hope is there for rebuilding? Why throw good money after bad?
Too bad that the state or Newburyport or the feds didn't buy up Plum Island years ago and turn it into a nature/bird preserve. It's a crime that anyone was allowed to build there at all. And Tarr is wrong that this doesn't hurt the public. Everytime an insurance company pays out $800K plus it hurts the rest of us in the form of higher rates. And public safety officers have to rush out there every storm (and on Hull, and on the Marshfield coast, etc. etc.) and deal with the cleanup and mess, and sometimes rescue people. It's a public safety and environmental problem for all of us, that so many people were allowed to build homes so close to the sea, chockablock, blocking views and access for the rest of society. And then they moan about those mean environmentalists and the nasty feds/state govt that has to protect them from themselves. Thank goodness for the weak environmental rules we do have! Here's hoping we make them stronger, and do more to remove people from these homes and the coast, because these sorts of catastophic coastal storms that bring flooding and etc. are now commonplace and are becoming more frequent. One question, how did that guy, complaining from his home in Florida, expect to get approval for something and get it built, in the dead of winter, in only 2-3 months? He can't even be bothered to live in the house in the winter and he expects to have this all magically done? I read somewhere else that that is the second home in that location that has gone down due to the sea --if he is allowed to build their again it will be a travesty.
Have you been to Plum Island? Most of it IS owned by the federal government for a nature preserve- the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge. It's only the northernmost mile or so that has houses on it, and g=for generations the houses were modest fishing shacks or summer getaways. It's only been in the past 20 years that people have been tearing down the shacks and putting up million dollar homes.
I cant agree more with Entropic..plus this is all about precedent-especially in terms of manipulation of the ocean front as well as assumption of risk. Private funded or not, the notion of a moratorium on regulation premised on “high risk” real estate placement, is fraught with peril. Can you imagine what the Massachusetts coastline , especially on the Cape & Islands, would look like if all ocean front homeowners were permitted to construct their own privately funded tidal/storm defense structures? I don't want to see anyone’s home (summer or perm)- tumble into the sea, but those with regulatory oversight have an obligation to protecting the natural assets of the state for the entire populace-not just those hat have chosen to perch themselves on the dunes of barrier island.
I have absolutely no sympathy for people who built their homes their and expect the state to shell out money to help them. It's a barrier island stupid! Nature will take its toll Don't expect taxpayers to help foolish people.
You can't expect to build in a place like Plum Island without expecting nature is going to affect things. We've known about global warming and rising tides for years...and yet nothing has been done because of the idiot naysayers.
Plum Island was always a summer place, with cottages, not $8 million homes. It was a place to get close to nature - now nature is getting too close for comfort and folks who shoved out the average summertime cottage-dwellers want the government to bail them out (interesting considering it's rich folks with multiple homes who are always on the take when it comes to tax cuts).
But the fact is, if you want to build where nature might interfere, then regulations must be made to ensure proper building. In North Crolaina's Outer Banks, homes must be on stilts, with the living space far above high tide level. The same should be done in places like Plum Island.
Let nature have her way. And if you're dumb enough to want to build where she doesn't want you, too bad. I'm with another commenter here - return it to a preserve/national park that can be enjoyed by the many, not just the few.
These houses are fairly new and built on a barrier beach where things are always going to be shifting. While not looking for a direct handout from the state, these folks are looking for help to maintain their houses on a piece of land that is going to continue to shift. Good money after bad real estate. I'm "sure" they also would have been willing to share part of the proceeds of these dwellings should they have bought/sold during the real estate boom. If the insurance companies were careless enough to underwrite an insurance policy for them, then that's their problem - and we shouldn't be bailing them out either. The ONLY environmental regulation that should be in place is NO residential building at all - Plum Island should be a natural preserve. State and local governments constantly make really bad decisions about developments - and they have "caught" some equally self indulgent people. Just can't muster up a lot of sympathy or any funds.
The destruction of homes on Plum Island is simply Mother Nature's way of saying that barrier islands are for everyone's enjoyment and recreation during the summer season not for permanent residence.
I grew up in a shoreline community and I completely understand the desire to be near the shore. My heart breaks for these homeowners. That being said, I also think it's time to face facts. All the sea walls in the world are not going to save those houses. It's time to bail. Rather than investigating ways to save these houses we should be investigating ways for some combination of government and private non-profit (Trustees of Reservations) to take over this land and to relocate the permanent residents and fairly compensate all the homeowners for their loss.
Two points regarding the article: 1. I wish it had specified which regulations have left Plum Island home owners aggrieved. 2. As others have noted, Plum Island is the canary in the coal mine. Its fate is a portent for such places as Nantucket, Hilton Head, SC, and Palm Beach, FL. I predict a lot of real estate loss and agony over the next twenty years or so.
We're not Holland where targets swaths of land must be protected for large groups of people not for a few.
I think that "Scratch..." makes a good point, but everywhere on earth, sea levels are rising due to glacier-melt, and Holland's experience will be ours in the lifetime of our children.
Meanwhile, in D.C.and state legislatures, our elected officials appear incapable of dealing effectively with present challenges — nevermind those looming over future generations. However their collective lack of foresight is only a reflection of our own, since we elect them — our more accurately — our apathy allows special-interest groups to wage coordinated attacks on our Nation's well-being, by sending representatives to Congress who disregard the welfare of the entire nation while they stubbornly champion the narrow goals of special interests – oil refining and mining, wall sreet bankers and investors, polluters, health insurers, defense contractors, tobacco producers, tax breaks for the rich...
At the "end of the day" those elected officials go home without the time, funds or conviction to deal with our really important challenges which depend on coordinated national responses — education, climate change, energy policy, affordable and accountable health care, immigration, public transportation, repairing highways, dams and bridges, food safety, consumer protection...