Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreline Management Dredging topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wetlands board approves Winds Island Estates maintenance dredging, armoring and wetland planting with five-year permit
Summary
The Baptist County Wetlands Board voted to approve a maintenance dredging and shoreline stabilization plan for Kibble Creek submitted by the Winds Island Estates Property Owners Association, and amended the approval to extend the permit period to five years to allow project completion.
Winds Island Estates Property Owners Association’s proposal to dredge the Kibble Creek inlet, build stone armoring and plant restored wetland was approved by the Baptist County Wetlands Board at its September meeting, with the board extending the permit term to five years to allow time to complete work.
The project aims to maintain a navigation channel in Kibble Creek to minus 4 feet mean low water and to create a shallow shoal area to minus 3 feet mean low water; it also includes constructing a 120-foot armor-stone jetty and a series of stone spurs, placing beach-quality sand in created embayments, and planting new wetland vegetation. The board approved the application as described in the permit materials and adopted the maker’s amendment to extend the permit term to five years.
Board members said the work is intended to halt recurring sand migration up the inlet and to keep the channel open longer than it has been under the existing, deteriorated jetty. Greg Palabinski, the project agent, described the application and engineering intent, saying the work continues a maintenance strategy that has been in place for “20 plus years.” He outlined the proposed channel widths and depths, the jetty and spur replacements, and placement-and-planting of dredged sand to re-establish vegetated beach and wetland in pocket areas.
The written application and the agent’s presentation included several numerical estimates for material and planting extents. The permit application text read into the record listed: placement of 2,700 cubic yards of beach sand within a created embankment, 640 cubic yards of sand landward of previously permitted spurs, and installation/planting of about 5,600 square feet of wetland/beach vegetation. During his presentation the agent gave somewhat different on-site estimates (for example, citing about 3,150 cubic yards for a shallow shoal area); the board discussion noted those differences and asked the applicant to clarify final quantities in construction documents.
Board members who spoke in favor said the project would stabilize the inlet and reduce the need for frequent maintenance dredging. No formal public opposition was recorded in the meeting record; the agent said no written objections were received during notice. The board’s approval included a direction that permit documents should address construction timing, contractor identification, and the method for placing sand and protecting adjacent resources during construction.
Action details: the board approved the permit and amended the motion to extend the permit term to five years to allow the applicant time to secure a contractor and complete work. The outcome recorded in the meeting was approval; the board did not record any formal negative votes on the application in the transcript.
What remains: the board requested clarified construction plans and numbers (final cubic yards to be used, exact spur/jetty footprints, and planting plans) and noted that the applicant must follow any staff or Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) recommendations included in the staff report. The applicant retains the right to appeal the board’s decision in writing to the Virginia Marine Resources Commission within 10 days of the board decision.
The board’s action will allow the project to proceed to final permitting and contracting, subject to submittal of final construction documents and adherence to the permit conditions the board and staff identify.
