Tidal Fish Forum banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Please correct me if I am wrong, Claude, but are you no longer a waterfront property owner on Old Donation Creek that is in desperate need of dredging, are you no longer an avid fisherman that launches your boat from your dock in your backyard and won't be able to in the near future if your backyard and the Western Branch is not dredged as well as concerned for your personal boating safety while traveling through the Lynnhaven, and are you no longer a Virginia Beach taxpayer that simply doesn't care how your taxpayer dollars are spent? If so, then I apologize. If not, then you are among the many that read the Virginia Board whose recreational fishing will be affected by dredging and poorly planned dredged transfer sites, whose boating safety and quality of life many be affected, and whose taxpayer dollars may be wasted.

The Virginia Board and its many members that chose to become involved and speak out in 2008 against the Lynnhaven Boat Ramp being used as a permanent dredged transfer station played a very important role in its defeat. I hope its members and moderators continue to allow this to happen. THERE IS A RIGHT WAY AND A WRONG WAY FOR DREDGING PROJECTS AND TRANSFER STATIONS TO BE DESIGNED. WITHOUT DREDGING, WE WILL LOSE THE RIVER AND THE FISHING IT AFFORDS US TODAY. However, the City of Virginia Beach has yet to learn this. It is our duty and obligation as citizens, taxpayers, fishermen, and stewards of the waterways to see that the proper way and the proper places get utilized as dredge transfer stations with respect to boater safety and quality of life by those directly affected.

The internet and message boards such as this can play an important tool in balancing the unfair scales of bureaucracy. The members of this Board did, and can continue to have an enormous impact on the fishing in Virginia Beach and the Lynnhaven River. Let's use this to our advantage now and for future generations.

Master Captain Lee M. Shuler
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
One more thing for our members, especially Virginia Beach taxpayers to know about proposed dredging projects This is in no way a personal attack on you only the City of Virginia Beach. The City is proposing a program in which "private channels and coves" along the Lynnhaven River can participate in a Special Service District ("SSD"), having additional real estate taxes imposed on homeowners much like the Sandbridge sand replenishment project, for dredging of waterfront property. Old Donation Creek is slated to be one of the first, if approved, projects in which the City is going to use taxpayer dollars to dredge PRIVATE PROPERTY before collecting the money from the homeowners. The City has no business using taxpayer dollars upfront for such a situation, has absolutely no business getting into dredging of private property, and I personally feel they are making promises to homeowners that the regulatory agencies may not approve after the additional taxes are collected. I ESPECIALLY OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED USE OF THE LYNNHAVEN BOAT RAMP AS A TRANSFER SITE FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY BEING DREDGED. The Lynnhaven Boat Ramp is utilized by a majority of boaters that DO NOT have waterfront property and have a need launch for access to the River or Bay, already afforded by waterfront homeowners. By using the Lynnhaven Boat Ramp as a transfer site for waterfront homes, not only are they giving priviledge to the waterfront homeowners, but taking away from the recreational boater or fisherman than needs it more., many of which paid for the facility Talk about another proposed dredging injustice by the City of Virginia Beach and why message boards such as this are so very much needed to protect the average fisherman.

I don't think many of us are anti-dredging, I'm certainly pro-dredging. Just don't like how the City does its planning (specifically public works), its public presentations or lack of community involvement, and certainly its attitude towards those who have valid and legitimate concerns for the overall welfare of those who don't benefit, only sacrifice for the wealthy and chosen minority of City staff and certain councilmembers.

Master Captain Lee M. Shuler
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Just wondering:drama:
Desperate to protect our waterways and our fishing areas -- Tidal fish has become
an outlet for many as one our only sources to let people know what our city government is going to do to the waterways and fishing habitats.

For the Maple St. area -- the historically known crabbing, bait fish, speckled trout area is gone. Anyone who fishes in Long Creek knows the spot. It's gone. As a matter of fact, we'd love to hear your stories about fishing in that spot -- my stories go back 32 years -- fried speckled trout dinners -- my son pulling in a big 2 lb flounder then cooking him right on the spot......those memories and why we moved here will be gone.....

then there's the rest of the story and all the reasons why an industrial transfer site shouldn't be on the Long Creek waterway..........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks for clearing this one up for me, It now explains why 20% of the posts on the first page are from the same people about the same topic. Whew, I was getting worried I was missing something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
Captain Lee - I have heard the city's proposed neighborhood dredging program a few times. The use of city funds to help private neighborhood dredging is limited to a short access channel from the main channel up to where neighborhood channels start. The Special Service District (SSD) increased taxes will pay for neighborhood collector channels, and each participant will directly pay for their own channel and turning basin (like a driveway). Preliminary cost estimates indicate city funds amount to only 10 percent of the total dredging cost, and a portion of those city funds are participant's taxes too.

The neighborhood dredging program is a very creative approach at minimal city cost and huge participant cost spread over 16 years, and re-evaluated and adjusted every 4years. Requiring 80 percent sign-up is a super majority thereby assuring real commitment by the neighborhood.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
It's a Virginia fishing forum . As part of that Virginia fishing issues do appear from time to time. Given there is one, now two with this, thread focusing on that issue we have left it. One main thread or two on a hot topic I think is OK as it relates to fishing.
Your point is well taken, Brandon but you miscounted. There are 5 separate threads on the same topic within the last week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,552 Posts
To answer just a few quick comments one directed at me I believe...

1. Anti Dredge? I think NOT...I am PRO Dredge...absolutely PRO DREDGE...I am ANTI VB.GOV spending tax money putting transfer facilities where they do not belong, namely Long Creek at the Maple Road site and the Lynnhaven Boat ramp. I applaud the cities efforts in getting Thalia approved and now soon up and running. It has been my contention all along that all transfer facilities need to be at the lower reaches of the waterways away from high traffic areas at the top of the waterway. If this necessitates higher dredge costs so be it. However I do not buy into that argument. If turn around time is an issue than multiple scows (barges) can be used to facilitate the dredge cycle. Multiple 300HP diesel trucks traveling from the top of the waterway will definitely use far more fuel that a single diesel pushing to the lower reaches then offloading to them to transit to the land fill.

2. Yes I have posted a few threads here about this issue...maybe some tire of it, maybe some see it as education. I have asked Brandon to merge them and possibly make them a sticky until this issue is again resolved or we have lost. If we and I use WE because of the 21000+ users of the LBR (last year I have data on) many, a lot, a sizable portion of those end users of the LR are members here.

3. One post dealt with the absolute unprofessional and nasty ass (no other way to put it) attitude of city officials in the way they spoke to citizens at the SDCC meeting. Perhaps Mr Hansen should remember that he is no longer a Colonel in the USACE and that the citizens of Va Beach are NOT his privates and sergeants to order around and lecture. Tone and civility will get you places that other methods fall short of. Of Mr Roahrs demeanor, his "how dare you question me or the intent and methods of City of Va Beach officials or my office of engineers" is getting old...too played...he is actually doing more harm than good for this effort...every time he opens his mouth on camera and off the arrogance runs out like a wet slobbery mouthed Great Dane looking at a plate of pork chops...the verbal argument you got into with an SDCC member over you stating you own, that the city OWNS the beach front at Maple street when in truth you/VB own an easement was indicative of your total disdain for the citizenry involved. Pick you battles, that wasn't one of them. If I were Mr Hansen you would not be doing anymore briefings, perhaps a associate engineer with some people skills might serve the city better in this effort.

4. As far as SSD's, they will not pay for private dredging. The city will simple collect taxes, much like road taxes to open up the main channels leading into neighborhoods, spurs off the main channel to the coves and creeks. Private owners will then pay out of pocket for channels linking them to the main s well as turn basins. Think of it this way...maybe we should be taxing the non waterfront citizens of Va Beach a little more in form of drainage and runoff fees. Remember, its city streets and the yards and parking lots of businesses every off water property that contribute to this problem. I would venture and someone prove me wrong that waterfront property owners account for less than 1% of the silting issues we have here. Its the cities steadfast refusal over decades to address the problem that have got us to where we are now. Yet waterfront property owners pay a premium in taxes and higher real estate assessments for living where they live, while reaping no benefit of living on the water other than a view and the smell of a mud flat at low tide on water that was once navigable. It is time the city does something to address this issue and SSD are a step in the right direction.

5. If wish the mayor would secretly attend one of these community meetings to see first hand how city officials speak to his constituents. To see first hand the disdain and holier than thou attitudes of the people he entrusts to handle the operations of the city.

6. What the city needs is a salesman to explain the features and benefits of this program and present all the information so citizens can make informed intelligent decision instead of misleading statements, second hand information, city websites closed down for weeks on end, this is the one for the Lesner Bridge Replacement Project its been down for weeks and I and others have complained about it several times. Why? Like I said, the city needs to sit back, reorganize its strategy, LISTEN to its citizens and proceed with respect...I was in the car biz for a long time and now I feel like the salesman is TELLING me this is the car your getting like it or not...get in and drive, you have nothing to say about color, options or transmission. Oh, you cant drive a stick shift...no problem, you'll learn... I'm sure the citizens want a say so in where these facilities will go.

7 The Lesner Bridge and the LBR is the absolute worst place for a Permanent Dredge Spoils Transfer Facility and while I am almost sure the VMRC would see it this way we cannot leave that to chance...the cit MUST remove this site from its selection process forever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Captain Lee - I have heard the city's proposed neighborhood dredging program a few times. The use of city funds to help private neighborhood dredging is limited to a short access channel from the main channel up to where neighborhood channels start. The Special Service District (SSD) increased taxes will pay for neighborhood collector channels, and each participant will directly pay for their own channel and turning basin (like a driveway). Preliminary cost estimates indicate city funds amount to only 10 percent of the total dredging cost, and a portion of those city funds are participant's taxes too.

The neighborhood dredging program is a very creative approach at minimal city cost and huge participant cost spread over 16 years, and re-evaluated and adjusted every 4years. Requiring 80 percent sign-up is a super majority thereby assuring real commitment by the neighborhood.
1. It was confirmed by an email by Councilman Wood -- that it is 80% of the owners on the waterway for the area/channel requesting the work --Let's say 10 or 20 people... which would be only a super majority of 10 or 20 people more or less. Not 80% of 800 people of the entire neighborhood. This is a confusing misrepresentation at the SDCC, the BAC meeting on March 17th and the City website....and what was presented on the ESTREAM at the Council workshop on March 15th. So, a group of 10 can vote to impact thousands... those who live on the waterway and those who use it.
2. The SSD program could be a very good idea for the owners that need it. Some will gain deep water access that they never had before, some will regain their deepwater access due to naturally occurring reasons (or lack of their own maintenance, bulkhead, riprap) -- or the city's impact from neighborhood drainage. However, you can easily see by "google" maps and driving in the neighborhoods themselves -- there appears to be either access for the temporary project or a city area where the spoils could be offloaded for each project. I've even met with people willing to offer their properties. Lots of city areas at the end of streets. A disturbance to their own neighborhood every 5-6 years for a few weeks or months. But to create and impact waterways and entire communities --with the potential for each project, in congested, heavily used areas by boaters, fisherman, personal watercraft, and wildlife habitats is not the answer. At the Crab Creek site - the boat ramps & the boat traffic --truck impact to the community & distance to the disposal site.... at Marina Shores/Maple -- the heavily used waterway -- with 4 marinas, 2 dry storage units, residential property, fish and wildlife impact, one of the last areas of marsh and wetlands (next to an area that was proffered to be a nature conservancy)....barges backing into a channel on a tight waterway -- around homes, a marina and traffic... and the impact to a neighborhood from trucks filled with sludge running behind their home for an unknown time and unknown amount to a far away disposal area. The city wants a start up kitty of $800,000 of tax payers money (per ESTREAM video) and eventually hire more engineers and employees to run the program. IRONICALLY, to control the masses -- and to keep them quiet -- they tell the public that they don't expect a lot of people to use this program to take the spoils/sludge to the dredge sites.... they see very little use... but they don't know. So, making a plan to spend millions of tax dollars upfront for a program to establish the "virtual dredge sites" of which many are truly a dream - that they are promoting to the 'GENERAL PUBLIC" won't be used -- is either A POOR BUSINESS PLAN -OR PROVES THEY ARE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH TO THE IMPACTED AREAS AND PEOPLE WHO USE THE WATERWAYS -- It's an experiment -- that they have no answers -- no how much, how many, when, or who will use it. For Maple St. - no independent waterway studies, safety, impact, evironmental -- zip. Don't plan to as said at the BAC
meeting. They're bypassing a local wetlands hearing.

I can understand beachfordman's thoughts about all contributing to the infill of the canals and if those playing a part in this --should also help with the cost. We're already taxed and isn't a storm water management fee collected? What is the city doing with it? We're back to the city. There could very well be a need for a site -strategically placed. But the reality is -- some of these sites will NEVER be developed and the burden will not be shared. And according to Councilman Wood, Colonel Dave Hansen and PHil Roahr -- they expect VERY FEW
PEOPLE TO USE THE TRANSFER SITES....SO, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? Do the SSDs-- but not at life-changing impact to the people who live and use the waterways and the Lynnhaven Boat ramp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,552 Posts
I am for SSD's, I am for dredging and I for properly placed permanent dredge spoils transfer facilities.

I am dead set against a transfer facility at Marina Shores and at the LBR. These are easy outs for the city in a very hard situation. Easy because Mrs Higgins is offering $$$$ and lots of it to get the Maple Street facility built quid pro quo and the LBR because they think they can sneak it into the Lesner Bridge Replacement infrastructure and then leave it. Its the easy way out in both instances.

While there will be a increase in barge traffic on the Lynnhaven I do not think its going to be the boogie man its been portrayed. Think house boat on steroids...slow, lumbering and ugly and you have the idea...as long as the transfer stations are at the southern reaches the most impact it will have on the waterways is VISUAL...most people will simply watch them sail by on the way to their transfer stations. It is only when they are placed in poorly chosen areas that they become nuisances like if Maple or LBR are chosen. These sites represent placing the transfer operation in its entirety in your faces per se...they are too close to residential homes, in too close a proximity to personal property, bridges, high current areas and congested waterways. Poor placement has been the key all along. Thalia is a perfect place to operate out of...its close to Va Beach Blvd and the Highway, its removed from residential homes by several hundred yards, its adjacent to commercial property and with the noise level at Va Beach Blvd it will never be noticed. It is a perfect site if there could be one. The only impact residents will have is the sight of one coming up and down the waterway. This far removed from the upper reaches safeguards boaters are well as the water ways are most crowded during the weekends WHEN THESE OPERATIONS WILL NOT TAKE PLACE.

There are several sites I can think of that mirror this...behind Farm Fresh on Va Beach Blvd, near Pep Boys and like it or not one is needed near Laskin Road. That would give 3-4 permanent sites to end this fiasco...

I do believe that the barge operations are compatible, feasible and manageable so long as the proper siting is attained. The cities mantra should be " LEAST AFFECTED" not easiest to kick down the road...do the hard work NOW that you have been punting to the next council all these years and get a grip on waste water drainage...its either SSD and water front inhabitants deal with it (and pay for it) or we can always raise storm water fees for everyone and mandate they be spent correctly addressing the problem. One way or the other dredging has to take place. Like I mentioned in another post, 1 percent waterfront property owners are paying for what 99% non waterfront owners are depositing in a common resource, the Lynnhaven Water Shed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
There is still the option of Saw Pen Point as a transfer station. This is a large chunk of land with ready access to Independence Blvd. If you have ever noticed a water tower back there , that's it. Of course its in a city councilman's neighborhood and he wants it placed at Crab Creek so all the stupid taxpayers and dredge participants can pay to waste a whole heck of a lot of gas to drive dump trucks from Shore Drive to Oceana to dump just so he doesn't have to see it in his neighborhood. A barge hit the bridge after we argued with the city for a year about how stupid it is to have barges in the Inlet current and mix with boat ramp traffic and beach use.

I was at the SDCC meeting and I agree with Beachfordman, city staff talked to this group as if they were stray dogs pissing on their plan. There were a very diverse group 0f boating captains who are licensed at all levels who attended the meeting at Bayside Middle meeting Beachfordman memorialized where councilman Jones was spitting fire about how he could take that boat ramp away, never once did they consider the opinions of professional watermen and the currents in the inlet. Instead he told us he was embarassed at our behavior and that he was the one who brought that boat ramp to VB in a very long drawn out and boring speech to his triumphs.

I'm not opposed to dredging but I am appalled that any of these politicians could possibly place citizens , a new 135 million $ bridge or a boater in danger over personal financial gain .

No council man or woman should be allowed to vote on any of these dredge sites unless they are willing to get in a boat and lose power and see how ridiculous site selection is. They can not trust one engineer (Roehrs) with facts as he has been proven to be influenced by "powers that be". This new bridge is on now, it's funded and city of VB has an opportunity to shove a dredge transfer facility in that plan. It's ridiculous, unsafe but it could happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
There is still the option of Saw Pen Point as a transfer station. This is a large chunk of city owned land with ready access to Independence Blvd. If you have ever noticed a water tower back there , that's it. Of course its in a city councilman's neighborhood and he wants it placed at Crab Creek so all the stupid taxpayers and dredge participants can pay to waste a whole heck of a lot of gas to drive dump trucks from Shore Drive to Oceana to dump just so he doesn't have to see it in his neighborhood. A barge hit the bridge after we argued with the city for a year about how stupid it is to have barges in the Inlet current and mix with boat ramp traffic and beach use.

I was at the SDCC meeting and I agree with Beachfordman, city staff talked to this group as if they were stray dogs pissing on their plan. There were a very diverse group 0f boating captains who are licensed at all levels who attended the meeting at Bayside Middle meeting Beachfordman memorialized where councilman Jones was spitting fire about how he could take that boat ramp away, never once did they consider the opinions of professional watermen and the currents in the inlet. Instead he told us he was embarassed at our behavior and that he was the one who brought that boat ramp to VB in a very long drawn out and boring speech to his triumphs.

I'm not opposed to dredging but I am appalled that any of these politicians could possibly place citizens , a new 135 million $ bridge or a boater in danger over personal financial gain .

No council man or woman should be allowed to vote on any of these dredge sites unless they are willing to get in a boat and lose power and see how ridiculous site selection is. They can not trust one engineer (Roehrs) with facts as he has been proven to be influenced by "powers that be". This new bridge is on now, it's funded and city of VB has an opportunity to shove a dredge transfer facility in that plan. It's ridiculous, unsafe but it could happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
tree huggers

its too bad all the the NINBY folks cant get a grip ! I dont care if they cruise the channel in front of my place all day every day.

You can stand on the side, and try to be a big shot for making a difference ( even if you have no dog in this fight) !!!!!!!! and maybe you just want your name out there. !!!!!!!!!!! It doesnt matter to me. Dredging is needed and will continue to be needed for the entire inlet forever. ( well except for the select few that have masive current cleaning in front of your property). It needs to be done continously, and with the taxes water front tax payers are charged it is expected!

You can play the safety game, or what ever. the truth is , unless you want the inet to become a sand flat, it needs to be dredged!

Marina Shores docks are another game. And only your representatives are going to stop it ! get involved, call or send a message, but for god sakes do something.

This non stop bullshi########### of folks that really dont care except for Oh dang its near me or near a friend of mine, or I might be recognized for this **** has to stop. If you care ( really care), then call someone who can stop it. If you are just calling out names and have a concern or permenant ***** against the city and their lack of proper inspection of dredging operations. then at least go to someone who can stop it ...

This **** is so old. Two or three people *****ing about the same thing !!!!!!!! Sorry, forgot this was a fishing post::::::::::::: Couldnt catch a croaker today, no matter what type of bait I used! The bait fish are here, but the pups and specs arent in yet. Caught several crabs but thats all. I thank you for your support " Bartles and James" !!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
its too bad all the the NINBY folks cant get a grip ! I dont care if they cruise the channel in front of my place all day every day.

You can stand on the side, and try to be a big shot for making a difference ( even if you have no dog in this fight) !!!!!!!! and maybe you just want your name out there. !!!!!!!!!!! It doesnt matter to me. Dredging is needed and will continue to be needed for the entire inlet forever. ( well except for the select few that have masive current cleaning in front of your property). It needs to be done continously, and with the taxes water front tax payers are charged it is expected!

You can play the safety game, or what ever. the truth is , unless you want the inet to become a sand flat, it needs to be dredged!

Marina Shores docks are another game. And only your representatives are going to stop it ! get involved, call or send a message, but for god sakes do something.

This non stop bullshi########### of folks that really dont care except for Oh dang its near me or near a friend of mine, or I might be recognized for this **** has to stop. If you care ( really care), then call someone who can stop it. If you are just calling out names and have a concern or permenant ***** against the city and their lack of proper inspection of dredging operations. then at least go to someone who can stop it ...

This **** is so old. Two or three people *****ing about the same thing !!!!!!!! Sorry, forgot this was a fishing post::::::::::::: Couldnt catch a croaker today, no matter what type of bait I used! The bait fish are here, but the pups and specs arent in yet. Caught several crabs but thats all. I thank you for your support " Bartles and James" !!!!!
Differences of opinion are always welcome. However, and all agree and understand that the main waterways have to be dredged -- required to be dredged -- and sand is pumped into the holding area to later be used to replenish our beaches for the entire public.. However, our councilmen, Colonel Dave Hansen "tap dancing Dave" and Phil Roahrs "Quid pro Quo Man" -- believe that they have the right to use tax payers money to enhance and increase personal wealth for a few people at the impact of others.(yes, they are going to create new deepwater canals for people who never had them on the backs of others) (And granted, some people have their waterways filled in due to the ridiculous way the city directs or non-directs storm run-off - & then has no responsibility for it) The SSD (special service tax districts) could be a great idea for those who need private dredging...and to be periodically taken out at their own site --- every 5,6 or 10, 20 years......but transfer sites impacting the citizens at terrible locations, is not.... but as stated over and over by these irresponsible city workers -- they don't have that many onboard, don't now how much -- don't see that much coming to the dredge sites -- don't now how long - just don't know when the cash flow is coming in -- and want to use start up funds from the taxpayers for an experimental venture -- a private businessman wouldn't go into this with his own funds on these terms. That's called a gambler. But, when you use other people's money, step on people with no voice -- "What the heck" roll the dice. And some of these people writing may not be affected on the water -- they get the trucks filled with sludge running in front of or behind their house ---12 months a year --- again....I believe everyone understands the need and the impact from the United States Army Corps of Engineers task of keeping our main channels navigable. As far as pleading with the powers to be -- we've done everything except fall in front of their feet and beg -- even then, I believe they'd just take a step over us. And think about it -- the higher up you go...why will they help-- come election time they need the lower people to support them.....why are they going to help...
I've heard over and over that no one has quite seen the abuse of power being inflicted for these ill planned dredge sites..... and we keep asking why? -- they say, "because a city can do anything it wants." - that's the final answer.

BACK TO FISHING -- my son has been watching the canals to see if there's any activity in the water -- anything to tell him that the fish are coming.... he's already making plans to get his bait buckets ready, his crab pots, where their first trip is.... get his boat ready......that's what life on the water is supposed to be about....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
URGENT! URGENT! URGENT! TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!!! - Colonel DAVE HANSEN AT THE SDCC and the BAC MEETING SAID THAT PEOPLE on THE CHANNELS ARE BEING ASSESSED FOR DEEP WATERFRONT PROPERTIES -- EVEN THOUGH THEIR CANALS MAY NOT BE DEEP WATER ANYMORE. He said something like, "taxation without representation."
That may be something to look into. If the use of your property has decreased - can't get your boat out --city dumping storm water in front of your property and the channel has infilled -- and you feel that your assessment on your house is too much - you may be entitled to 3 years worth of overpaid taxes - if it's found to be true.
Real estate sales and market should have adjusted your assessment -- but apparently, a city representative is saying that "ain't so." Hmmmm.
So, if you do participate in the SSD (special tax service program) and they're talking about raising your taxes and the value of
assessment --to pay more taxes..... it would be a good thing to know if your current assessment is too high so that you have an appropriate starting point.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top