Lancaster County Wetlands Board approves six shoreline projects; Yankee Point ramp draws neighbor objection

The Lancaster County Wetlands Board approved six shoreline permit applications at a regularly scheduled meeting, clearing a series of revetments, armor‑stone sills and beach nourishment projects intended to address shoreline erosion. One application for a larger boat ramp at Yankee Point Marina drew a formal objection from a nearby property owner and extended public discussion about what falls inside the board’s jurisdiction.

The board approved applications for shoreline stabilization for John Paxton, Kendall Stone, Lyle Beckworth, David and Julie Lundberg, Ronald (Ron) Cox, and Yankee Point Marina. Staff recommended approval for each application after site visits and technical review. Several agents presenting the projects said designs aim to minimize disturbance to salt‑marsh vegetation and to incorporate living‑shoreline elements where feasible.

Why it matters: the projects restore or protect eroding private shorelines and, in one case, add a dry hydrant that proponents say will aid local fire response. Opponents at the meeting urged more information on hydraulic effects and alternative siting for the Yankee Point ramp; the board repeatedly noted its authority is limited to the shoreline zone between mean low water and mean high water (plus one and a half times that vertical range).

Agents and staff described each proposal as follows. Joseph Scott of Solterra Solutions, agent for John Paxton, said the application combines a living‑shoreline approach with localized revetment work to protect eroding banks on Mile Creek, including 225 linear feet of riprap, 46 linear feet of stone revetment, 60 cubic yards of sand nourishment and 300 square feet of wetland educational plantings (tax map 26‑16A; VMRC 25‑O191). Scott described the plan as “a combination of a little bit of a living shoreline and a revetment” to reduce ongoing bank loss and preserve access.

Kendall Stone’s agent (Solterra Solutions) told the board the project on the Rappahannock River would add about 50 linear feet of riprap to buttress a failing bulkhead and stabilize the eroded bank (tax map 13‑72; BMRC 25‑O243). Sherry McDearman, agent for Lyle Beckworth and for Ronald Cox on separate applications, said the Beckworth work is a short revetment placed to avoid impacts to wetland grasses along Deep Creek (tax map 13‑35H; BMRC 25‑022O). For Cox, McDearman said the plan replaces existing, failing jetties in the same footprint and will cover demolished concrete with new class‑2 armor stone (tax map 35‑1‑2305‑1‑3; BMRC 25‑O269).

Craig Palovinski of Bayshore Design described a two‑part project for David and Julie Lundberg on Fleet’s Bay that includes a 70‑foot armor‑stone sill plus beach nourishment (15 cubic yards) and 375 square feet of wetland plantings, and a 70‑foot armor‑stone spur aimed at stabilizing a migrating sandbar (tax map 35‑122A; BMRC 25‑O260). Staff said the Lundberg plan required a higher structure than a general permit would allow because of the site’s wave climate; the agent explained the sill was raised to address those conditions.

The longest public discussion focused on Yankee Point Marina’s revised plan to replace an earlier ramp with a 16‑by‑85‑foot concrete ramp and to install a dry hydrant for fire‑rescue use (tax map 26‑18; MRC 24‑2369). Owner Todd Patterson told the board the applicant removed jetties from the design, widened the ramp from 14 to 16 feet, and added the dry hydrant after community input. Patterson said the dry hydrant was proposed “at the suggestion of a five‑year client of Yankee Point who’s a retired fireman,” and that improved access to water would assist local emergency responders.

A nearby property owner, Ken Knoll, said he objected to the ramp permit and asked for additional design information, including water‑depth data and the volume of materials to be placed underwater. Knoll told the board he had operated the marina for many years and urged that an alternative site on the property’s southeastern cove be considered. “I must object to the issuance of a permit,” Knoll said, adding that “the application is deficient in that the full dimensions of the proposed major enlargement … are not disclosed.”

Board chair Edna Revere repeatedly reminded speakers and the public of the board’s technical limits. “We can only act within our jurisdiction, and that is from the mean low watermark to the mean high water … plus one and a half times,” Revere said, noting that issues beyond that vertical zone fall to VMRC, the Army Corps of Engineers or other agencies.

Votes at a glance

- John Paxton (Mile Creek) — VMRC 25‑O191; proposed 225 ft riprap, 46 ft stone, 60 cu yd sand, 300 sq ft plantings. Motion to approve the application as submitted — approved (unanimous; vote recorded as “all in favor”). - Kendall Stone (Rappahannock River) — BMRC 25‑O243; proposed ~50 ft riprap to stabilize failing bulkhead. Motion to approve as submitted — approved. - Lyle Beckworth (Deep Creek) — BMRC 25‑022O; proposed 33 ft revetment (agent described efforts to avoid wetland grasses). Motion to accept application as submitted — approved. - David and Julie Lundberg (Fleet’s Bay) — BMRC 25‑O260; 70‑ft armor‑stone sill, 15 cu yd nourishment, 375 sq ft plantings; 70‑ft spur to stabilize sandbar. Motion to approve as submitted — approved. - Ronald (Ron) Cox (Rappahannock River) — BMRC 25‑O269; replacement of existing jetties with new armor stone in the same footprint; agent said existing concrete would be broken up and covered with class‑2 armor stone. Motion to approve as presented — approved. - Yankee Point Marina (Currituck/Curri[t]ulum River) — MRC 24‑2369; replace existing ramp with 16×85 ft concrete ramp and install a dry hydrant. Public objection on record; staff recommended approval. Motion to approve the project as submitted — approved.

Staff and board comments at several hearings emphasized minimizing disturbance to salt‑marsh vegetation, retaining upland vegetation where possible and using silt‑containment measures during construction. For example, a board member noted the contractor proposed a vinyl silt fence to limit turbidity during ramp work at Yankee Point.

What the board did not do: members noted repeatedly that questions about tidal currents, large‑scale hydraulic impacts or activities landward of the mean high‑water line are outside the county board’s permit authority and must be considered by VMRC, the Army Corps or other state agencies. Several speakers encouraged the applicant and federal/state reviewers to consider alternative sites where appropriate; the board did not direct staff to require relocation.

The board approved the meeting minutes for the previous month, recognized alternate member John Norton for his service, and adjourned shortly after the approvals.