Storm surprises New England
A house on the Plum Island seacoast in Newbury, Mass., sits partially collapsed into the churning surf, driven by winds from a slow-moving storm centered far out in the Atlantic Ocean, at high tide Friday morning, March 8, 2013.
Photo by AP | Newburyport Daily News
WHITMAN, Mass. — The late winter storm that buried parts of the country was forecast to be little more than a nuisance for most of New England. Try telling that to Connecticut and Massachusetts residents who spent two days shoveling 2 feet of snow.
“The forecast was 4 to 6 inches, and I think I'm looking at about 12 to 14 inches,” West Roxbury resident Mark Spillane said as snow continued to fall on Friday. “I did not expect to have to bring out the snow blower.”
The storm was centered far out in the Atlantic Ocean, and by the time it reached New England, forecasters were focused on the potential for coastal flooding and not snow, which in many places was predicted to reach a maximum of 6 to 8 inches.
The coastline was battered by three high tides during the storm, the worst on Friday morning, when some roads in coastal towns were flooded by up to 3 feet of water.
The National Weather Service reported nearly 13 inches of snow at Boston's Logan International Airport as of 1 p.m., with more than 2 feet in a few Massachusetts towns and nearly that much in many others.
Some parts of Connecticut and New Hampshire also had more than a foot.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.