SWAMPSCOTT — While members of the King’s Beach Steering Committee had been working to secure state funding to clean bacteria-ridden water at the beach with UV rays, a more expensive and longer-term project is now on the table.
King’s Beach is frequently polluted with sewage-mixed groundwater discharge, leaving the water too contaminated for safe swimming. Earlier this month, the Metropolitan Beaches Water Quality Report Card gave the Lynn and Swampscott beach the worst water-safety rating in the region based on data collected in 2022.
In February, the King’s Beach Steering Committee, which comprises representatives from the Town of Swampscott, the City of Lynn, regulatory agencies, public-interest groups, and consultants, sent a letter requesting $25 million to disinfect the beach with UV rays to state Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper.
Until recently, zapping the beach with UV light was the committee’s preferred option. With a $25 million cost and an estimated three-year cleanup time, state Rep. Jenny Armini, whose district includes Swampscott and part of Lynn, said the option served as the cheapest and fastest solution to reopen the beach.
“The [steering committee] has been trying to find options, balance time and money to get that beach open as quickly as possible,” Armini said. “A generation has gone by that hasn’t had access to this beach on a regular basis.”
Armini said the committee met with Tepper earlier in the year for a preliminary informational meeting about King’s Beach. After the committee pitched the UV-light solution, Armini said representatives from Kleinfelder, the engineering and construction firm working on the King’s Beach project, met with EEA planners and engineers to discuss the different options in depth.
In a recent meeting with Undersecretary of Environment Stephanie Cooper, Armini said the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs was receptive to one of the committee’s secondary options — construction of a 4,500-foot outpour extension pipe that would dilute the stormwater runoff.
The pipe, however, comes at an estimated cost of $50 million, and would take eight years to bring the beach’s water quality to a safe level.
“Let’s have the discussion of how long it will take to get the outfall pipe installed, and at what cost? The priority is opening the beach for this generation, not the next one,” Armini said.
While officials from Swampscott and Lynn are seeking state funding for water-quality infrastructure, both municipalities are responsible for eliminating source contamination. In Lynn, the Water and Sewer Commission has been working to repipe illegal water and sewer hookups, which are largely responsible for the contamination. In Swampscott, old clay pipes will have to be “sleeved” or reinforced to eliminate polluted runoff.
Some residents who spoke at last week’s Select Board meeting expressed concerns about the town’s commitment to source elimination and advocated for easier access to public information on the beach’s status. Select Board member MaryEllen Fletcher said she was worried that the town is “kicking the can down the road” by neglecting to focus on, or fund, the necessary source-elimination-infrastructure projects.
“I don’t think we have a clear capital plan on how we’re dealing with the lining of the pipes, and with the source elimination,” Fletcher said. “We have a failing or an aging infrastructure that really needs a lot of help, and it’s concerning to me that we’re not really addressing this.”
In response, Town Administrator Sean Fitzgerald said that while additional capital planning toward source elimination might be needed, the town is balancing state, federal, and local resources to undertake the massive infrastructure project in a cost-effective way.
“We have an ancient system, we have clay pipes that were put in 100 years ago halfway around this town and we’re going to spend the next 20, 30, 40 years replacing these pipes, either through a methodical or through a fix-and-maintain process,” Fitzgerald said. “We are on it. We are looking at the capital plan that would help support a responsible steady annual investment. Simultaneously, we’re trying to work with the state to figure out how we do it in a way that does not add an incredible tax burden to Swampscott taxpayers.”
