Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coastal Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PBIA says abutters refuse easement; commission will consider engineer-funded study for jetty relocation
Summary
Representatives of the Pinehurst Beach Association told the Wareham Conservation Commission that abutters will not grant an easement and are not selling land where a private jetty encroaches; engineers say relocation likely requires no seabed excavation but a two-foot buffer around an old water main prevents moving the structure onto town land. The commission agreed to review an engineering plan but gave no permit.
Kimberly Scheib, acting president of the Pinehurst Beach Association, told the Wareham Conservation Commission that abutters will not grant an easement and are unwilling to sell the strip of land where the association’s jetty encroaches. Scheib said the group has six follow-up items requested at an earlier meeting and reported their findings.
She said the association located the storm-drain outflow and confirmed with the town water department that an older water main lies adjacent to a newer main near Pinehurst Beach; the water department recommended a two-foot buffer on either side of the line. “Based on those markings in the two‑foot buffer, it doesn’t appear that it will…have enough room to move the jetty from its current position to the position in front of the road,” Scheib said.
Scheib said the association consulted local engineers—Brian Wallace of JC Engineering and Dwayne Flacco of Flacco Marine—who, in her account, told the group that construction of a replacement jetty of this type would “not require seabed excavation.” She added that the association had the old water main marked and that the engineers recommended siting any new structure further west on the association’s own property to avoid the water mains.
Commissioners pressed the association on several practical concerns. Members asked whether moving the jetty could block public access from Beach Road and whether raising or lengthening the structure would require additional beach work. Commissioner Scott Sobey and others urged exploration of less aggressive alternatives—such as dune grasses or small-scale fencing—saying these measures can reduce erosion without creating the bypass and scouring effects associated with jetties. “A lot of the times things that can help with keeping sand in place are if you have, like, beach grasses,” one commissioner said.
Commissioners also flagged ecological and permitting issues: the prospect of scouring that could expose a buried waterline, potential impacts to shellfish habitat, and the absence of hydrodynamic studies. Scheib said she has been in touch with the UMass Dartmouth School of Marine Biology and Technology and may be able to secure volunteer assistance to investigate shellfish relocation, but she said formal plans and funding are not yet in place.
The commission did not make a permitting decision. Instead members indicated they would be willing to review a paid engineering plan so long as the applicants understood that the commission was not promising approval. The association said it preferred not to spend limited funds on a full engineering and permitting plan if the commission would rule it out; commissioners answered that they were not ready to deny the possibility outright and asked the association to return with engineering details and additional data on potential sand bypass and waterline exposure.
The commission also instructed the association and its engineers to consider measures that would allow sand to pass through or around any structure in order to avoid accelerated erosion on the down‑drift side.
