Town Administrator Steven Contente recently received a letter from Elks Club leadership alerting him to an issue that came to the attention of the club last summer, the first season the new Marina was fully installed.

They claim that the wave attenuator produces wave action and currents at the Club’s slips that is impacting the ability of their members to tie up. Moreover, they said that their attendance and voicing of their concerns at the past four Harbor Commission meetings has failed to lead to any resolution, with the boating season fast approaching. Consequently, they would like the exclusive use of eight Marina slips, at least until such time as this issue can be resolved.

According to the letter, their reasoning for the request is as follows: “The Lodge currently has (4) deep water slips, with the ability to raft additional vessels. The Lodge slips are also conveniently attached to the Lodge's patio with direct access to enter the building. Slips in the Town Marina will require our members, including many over 70 years old, to walk a quarter mile to get to the facility and a quarter mile back to their boat. The request for (8) slips is accounting for all these factors.”

At the center of the issue: was an analysis on the impact of the Marina design on abutters ever performed, and if not, why?

Contente opened the discussion at the April 19 Town Council meeting.

“They're asking for 8 slips, and the Harbormaster and I spoke together, and we just don't feel that we have that authority to grant 8 slips. So that's why it's here before the Council.”

Ken Belanger spoke for the Elks. “Anybody, even if you're not a marine engineer, you can see the refraction of the waves from the new dock that has been built out there…the waves aren't just going to dissipate, it's energy, and they have got to go someplace.”

“It has gotten to the point that we can't safely tie up our boats.”

The solution remains unclear, whether it’s another jetty past the Coast Guard Station, or something else. “And while these things are being worked out, we're asking, as a temporary solution, for 8 spaces at the dock closest to the walkway, because we do have elderly and actually, we have young folks that are in wheelchairs. So we want to make it as accessible as possible for them,” said Belanger.

“There is a permanent solution in the long run, but what we propose, we hope, is acceptable, and that's why we're here for that consideration this evening.”

“The refraction, is that happening when the wind speeds are at a certain point, or certain tide? Or is it 24/7?” asked Councilor Tim Sweeney.

“If the wind's coming from the north, you're not going to see much,” said Belanger. “But if it comes with the prevailing winds from the south, you'll still see the refraction. Some of the smaller boats bounce around a lot more, and once again depending on the size of the boat, the age of the individual, their ability to get on and off it, and the weather and the wind direction all impacts it.

“It just seems like a lot of slips,” said Councilor Mary Parella. “How many people are really using them? That is something that I think needs to be thought through a little bit more.”

“I agree. We don't know,” said Belanger. “I don't have a crystal ball on the weather and the sunshine, and know how many people are going to show up.”

“I understand the problem that you are saying that we allegedly created,” said Parella. “But why would we tie up all these dock spaces that we could be getting revenue for when there may be nobody at the Elks? I just think there's a lot of questions.”

“We had our dock. We were able to use it. So whether one person uses it or 8 people use, we had the ability to use it every day, and now we don’t,” said Belanger. “We didn't create an issue there, and so we're just saying we would still like the ability. We just want something that's fair, so our members can still utilize that and have the same enjoyment that I know I did with my family.”

Why no impact study?
Elks member Eric Gardiner stepped up to speak in support of the Club. “We feel this is a valuable asset that's been diminished,” he said. “And our bigger concern is that the fact that there was no impact study done for any of the abutters to this Marina, because it wasn't asked for, is not a a good excuse, as far as we're concerned.”

“Those waves have to go somewhere, and they're coming right back and damaging our docks, diminishing our ability to use our docks. And from what I've read about concrete breakwaters, they also create erosion because because of the natural flow of the the the bottom, it needs to go somewhere. It doesn't go anywhere, it comes back, and it may damage the structure of our property, too. But we're just starting to understand what kind of impact this could have.”

“Why wasn't there an impact study done for this when our own harbor management plan says we're going to do impact studies for all occasions?” asked Elks member Owen O’Rourke. “Why should the Elks have to pay for an impact study? The town and their own policy says they're going to do an impact study. It wasn't done. Why?”

“It’s a very good point that you raise, and I don’t know the answer to that at this point,” said Parella.

The Marina plan, in the works for some eight years, went through CRMC approvals, Army Corps of Engineers studies, and countless meetings and conversations. “What you're saying is that no one knew the impact of that technology?” asked Parella.

“I think you and I think your points are are definitely valid,” said Sweeney. “We’re just asking you for a chance to be able to do our due diligence and look into that.”

“This was helpful,” said Contente, “and we'll look at the harbor management plan…It never occurred to us that this could have been an issue. We’ll keep an open mind, and if we did something wrong we'll do our best to correct it and be reasonable about it.”

The Council voted to send the issue for recommendations from the Harbor Commission, Harbormaster, Town Solicitor, and Town Administrator, and to continue the conversation at the May 10 meeting.