Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves Yorktown Dockmaster and waterfront operations buildings, staff to include archaeology protections
Summary
Supervisors approved village‑activity permits to replace the Dockmaster office and public restrooms and to add a waterfront operations building. Staff emphasized ADA upgrades, year‑round restrooms and archaeological review plans; engineering presented a $1.5M–$2M combined estimate and the board directed phased procurement.
The York County Board of Supervisors approved two Yorktown village‑activity applications to replace aging waterfront facilities and create a dedicated waterfront operations office, citing both visitor needs and public‑safety advantages.
Planning staff said the Dockmaster office and adjacent restroom buildings — built in the 1970s and lacking climate control and ADA compliance — will be replaced with modern facilities that provide ADA‑accessible restrooms and a consolidated visitor information point. The board approved Resolution R24‑66 to permit the Dockmaster building replacement after staff and public engagement produced a design that reduces height and responds to earlier Historic Yorktown Design Committee concerns.
In a separate but related application, supervisors approved Resolution R24‑65 for a new waterfront operations building to house permanent staff and to serve as an operational hub for waterfront ambassadors, parking services and event logistics. Planning staff described the building as roughly 1,860 square feet and said it would serve as an on‑site command and coordination center during large events; engineering’s initial cost guidance for the two waterfront buildings together was $1.5 million to $2.0 million.
Multiple residents and board members urged archaeology safeguards. Bonnie Karwack and others asked that ground‑penetrating radar and phased archaeological study be required before ground disturbance, and staff confirmed that required phase‑1 reviews and additional study when artifacts are suspected will be incorporated into design and permitting. Staff also noted prior GPR work in the area and said consultant archaeologists are already engaged.
Board members pressed for clarity on cost and timing; staff and the county engineer said the approvals tonight establish land‑use permissions and direction to proceed with design, not an immediate appropriation or ground‑breaking. County staff said they plan a phased procurement and will return to the board with firm cost estimates and contract terms before proceeding on the second building.
The board approved both resolutions by roll call (R24‑66 and R24‑65) and instructed staff to include archaeology protections and to present final cost and contract details in subsequent procurement steps.
