Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreline Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges developers to rethink Cane Island riprap and seawall plans, citing habitat and flooding risks
Summary
Resident Mr. Austin told the council the proposed 1.1-mile riprap and tall seawall on Cane Island could require hundreds of truckloads of stone, worsen stormwater and harm wildlife; he urged developers to consider living-shoreline alternatives and asked the body to press for re-engineering.
Mr. Austin, a Beaufort County resident, told the meeting he is concerned a proposed coastal protection project on Cane Island would do more harm than good and asked officials to press developers for alternatives. "They're gonna install their riprap so they can have maximum utilization on those piece of property and who pays the price, we do the residents," he said, arguing the work prioritizes property protection over shoreline health.
The comment came during the meeting’s public-comment period, where Mr. Austin described a plan he said would place about 1.1 miles of riprap and an 8½-foot seawall along parts of Cane Island’s shoreline. He said the installation could require "almost 400 to 500 truckloads of riprap" and raised environmental concerns including altered sediment flow, loss of trees that provide natural stormwater relief, effects on local wildlife such as dolphin strand-feeding areas, and increased flooding for nearby neighborhoods.
Local officials and Mr. Austin noted the application had been the subject of a recent public hearing with the Department of Environmental Services (DES). Mr. Austin said DES public comments had closed for one hearing but that DES is accepting written comments through Nov. 6, and that a decision period would follow. A council member asked whether the riprap plan had been approved; Mr. Austin said it remained under discussion and that the county was reviewing engineering reports provided by the developer.
Mr. Austin urged the use of living-shoreline techniques — including spartina grass and oyster-based approaches — to reduce environmental impacts. Another participant referenced broader shoreline-protection planning in the area and asked the public and officials to take a long-term view of estuary health and stormwater impacts.
The meeting did not record a formal action on the Cane Island proposal; public commenters were directed to make written submissions to DES before the comment deadline. The council did not vote on the project at this meeting.
