The Mathews County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to send its recent action on a county-owned parcel at the end of South Bay Haven Drive back to the planning commission for review and to hold a public hearing.

Residents from South Bay Haven and neighboring streets told the board at length that they were surprised and upset that last month’s motion — which the board had approved — included language allowing a range of improvements “not limited to” picnic tables, a pavilion, a pier and parking. Speakers said they received no formal notice that the topic would be raised and described the neighborhood as a quiet, narrow-road residential area that cannot absorb boat trailers, extra parking or late-night noise.

The public comments framed the central dispute: neighbors said they are willing to compromise for limited, low-impact public access (kayak launch, a few parking spots, picnic tables and dawn-to-dusk hours) but strongly oppose a pier, porta-potties and a pavilion. Diane Congrove, who said she lives “at the end of my street,” told the board she and her neighbors were not consulted before the earlier motion and asked the board to rescind it. "Neither I nor my neighbors are fine with this motion," Congrove said.

Other longtime area residents raised environmental and safety concerns. Susan Vaughn cited Code of Virginia 15.2-2204 and told the board she believed the county had not provided the required public notice for adoption of plans. John Bonner and others described poor road conditions and muddy shoreline that would make launching and larger vehicle traffic impractical. Several speakers flagged nearby private oyster grounds and tidal wetlands and urged the board to ensure any action protects shellfish habitat and wetland setbacks.

Board members responded that the county owns the parcel and has legal responsibilities, including management obligations stemming from FEMA acquisition. Supervisor Bowen (chair) and others said the May vote was meant as a conceptual step and that no money had been appropriated for park improvements. Supervisor Walls acknowledged misinformation and said Parks and Recreation and staff had been discussing the property since 2022.

Supervisor Phillips and others said they want clearer restrictions and stronger public engagement before allowing development. The board adopted a motion (option B from staff packet) to refer the matter to the planning commission and to require that the planning commission advertise and hold a public hearing on whether locating a park there is in substantial accord with the county comprehensive plan. The board emphasized it will not appropriate funds for improvements until citizens and the planning commission have provided input and a plan is developed.

The motion to refer passed on a roll-call vote with all supervisors voting in favor.

The planning commission’s review will focus on whether a public facility at that location fits the comprehensive plan; any specific operational rules (hours, permitted facilities, enforcement mechanisms, signage, and maintenance responsibilities) would be considered later by the board. Several supervisors said they may ask the planning commission to comment specifically on operational matters (hours, enforcement, kayak launching, pier allowance) even though the state statutory question presented to the planning commission is narrowly framed.

The board did not adopt any construction plans or appropriations during Tuesday’s meeting; supervisors said the referral and public hearing are intended to gather additional public input and clarify regulatory and maintenance obligations before any development proceeds.

Pending planning commission action, the county’s current approach will be to maintain the parcel in its present condition (mowing and trash pickup) while the process unfolds.

Residents who spoke were told the board will publicize the planning commission hearing and that supervisors will continue to accept written comments and petitions from neighbors.

Mathews County staff and the board indicated next steps: the planning commission will review the question of substantial accord with the comprehensive plan, hold a public hearing, and forward its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for a final decision.