Feasibility Study To Define Costs & General Conditions For Construction of Improved Entrance Structure

Similar documents
OAK RUN BUILDING PERMIT

Hartwell Lake Application for Dry Dredging

Site Plan Review Application. Interest in the Property (e.g. fee simple, land option, etc.)

State of New Jersey Chris Christie, Governor. Dept. of Environmental Protection Bob Martin, Commissioner

Procedure to Petition for Plat Review and Site Plan Review

Site Plan/Building Permit Review

B.2 MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN CHECKLIST

SECTION 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

SITE PLAN, SUBDIVISION & EXTERIOR DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS

RESIDENTIAL DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICANT CHECKLIST

ARTICLE 3: WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMITTALS

A. ARTICLE 4 SKETCH PLAN REQUIREMENTS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION AND/OR LAND DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECK LIST

SITE PLAN REVIEW GUIDELINES Rev. 2016

HAMILTON TOWNSHIP Department of Planning and Zoning Application for a Commercial / Industrial Site Plan Review

Article 4 PROCEDURES for PLOT PLAN and SITE PLAN REVIEW

Legal Description & Site Plan Requirements and Layouts

Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control (GESC) Checklist

CHECKLIST PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

List of Figures. List of Forms

Town of Skowhegan Application For Development Review

Oakland County Michigan Register of Deeds Plat Engineering, GIS, & Remonumentation Dept. Ph: (248) Fax (248)

Conceptual, Preliminary and Final Site Plan Review in Holladay City

INFORMATION SHEET. : Properties Subject to the Slope and Seismic Hazard Zone Protection Act (SSPA) Ordinance

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 2.2.3

Revised Public Hearing Minutes Approved Tuesday, August 5, :00 p.m.

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Executive Summary 1 Acknowledgements 3 Introduction 3 Storm Recovery and Beach Project Effectiveness 3

SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION

TOWN OF AMHERST PLANNING DEPARTMENT MINOR SITE PLAN AND MINOR ADJUSTMENT REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURE

SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARDS A.1 SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

Subdivision Application Checklist

Clear Creek County Site Development

PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS CLASS 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. A. Written Material

PUBLIC ART PROGRAM Guidelines for Site Plan Projects

SECTION II PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection Shore Protection Program

Salt Lake County (Utah). Planning and Development Services Aerial Photographs, Series #PD-001

Cat Island Chain Restoration Project Brown County Port & Resource Recovery Department

SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE PROJECTS

City of Hamilton INFORMATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT

CITY OF OLIVETTE SITE PLAN AND COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW INFORMATION PACKET

City of Palmetto Florida

LOWNDES COUNTY ENGINEERING PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST. Design Professional: Phone: Developer: Phone: 2 nd Submittal (No Fee)

Corps Dredge Plan 2016 Emily Hughes Env Resources, USACE BUILDING STRONG

BRASELTON WATER AND WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST May 2006

Proposed Telecommunications Facilities within the Prince George s County Public School System October 11, 2013

U.S Army Corps Of Engineers ENG 4345 Permit Application Video Script Feb- 10

RANDY SCHMELING INSPECTIONS HARDER ROAD THREE RIVERS, MI Home Mobile

City of Massillon Site Plan Checklist

CONCEPT REVIEW GUIDELINES

REPORT TO COUNCIL DORWICK DITCH PETITION REHABILITATION PROJECT JUNE 8, 2016

Town of Apex, North Carolina

WILTON MANORS, Island City 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305

With your dreams, you ve entered Step 1 of the National Association of the Remodeling Industries (NARI) Remodeling Process:

Young at Heart Annual Holiday Craft Fair Vendors Needed!

AVISTA CORPORATION ' FEDERAL STORAGE CLAIM A-1

John Ahern, Chairman Donald Strenth Weston Pryor Tim Stanley. Not present: Donna Storter Long. Others present:

STATE UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION FUND

MINIMUM DRAWING REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER AND SEWER LINE PROJECTS

P.L. 1999, CHAPTER 258, approved October 15, 1999 Assembly, No (First Reprint)

TOWN OF CLINTON PLANNING BOARD MEETING FINAL MINUTES December 15, 2015

TOWN OF NORTH BRANFORD

White Lake Township Building Dept Highland Rd. (248) White Lake, MI Fax (248)

CITY OF RICE LAKE COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS ORDINANCE NO. 52 AN ORDINANCE REGULATING SMALL CELL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.

June 5, The following persons signed in as being present in the audience:

CITY OF EL MIRAGE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROCESS

INFORMATION FOR OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT

APPLICATION FOR SITE PREPARATION PERMIT

Application for Construction of Improvements at Morse or Geist Reservoir. Property Owner or Owner's Agent (if applicable)

A Bill Regular Session, 2017 HOUSE BILL 1926

VARIANCE APPLICATION (NO SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION)

SECTION III SUBMITTALS AND APPROVALS

MINOR SUBDIVISION. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] B. Dimensions, bearings and curve data for all property lines and easements.

SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS RCV D REJECT PENDING

BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON * * * *

C I T Y O F M c K I N N E Y PLANNING

REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CITY OPERATIONS AGENDA ITEM: 7 PORTFOLIO: TRANSPORT, PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY (COUNCILLOR RAMESH PATEL)

Checklist for Tentative Subdivision Map

How to Structure (and Land!) Profitable Retainer Agreements Summary Handout

SUMMIT COUNTY PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

September 29 October 1, 2013 Indiana Convention Center 100 South Capitol, Indianapolis, Indiana 46225

CHESTER COUNTY AREA AIRPORT AUTHORITY MINUTES. May 3, 2011

Plan Preparation Checklist

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

UTOPIA Historical Overview

M I N U T E S LOWER SWATARA TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY JANUARY 25, 2010

Veteran Institute for Procurement (VIP)

February 12, Regular Session Bonifay, Florida

Mussey Township Building Department. 135 N. Main, P.O. Box 118 Capac, MI Phone: Fax:

SPECIFICATION FOR TOPOGRAPHIC AND HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYS OF RECLAMATION AND DREDGING WORKS

Identifying and Managing Joint Inventions

PUBLIC ART PROCUREMENT GUIDELINES

SATELLITE NETWORK NOTIFICATION AND COORDINATION REGULATIONS 2007 BR 94/2007

PORT OF POOLE DEVELOPING FOR THE FUTURE

APPENDIX E - FLOODPLAIN INFORMATION

Example Plans: Business Signs (Not For Construction)

Recommended Changes to the Public Hearing Draft Zoning Ordinance

SECTION DEWATERING TANKAGE PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS

KC Water Rules and Regulations For Water Main Extensions and Relocations

Transcription:

Feasibility Study To Define Costs & General Conditions For Construction of Improved Entrance Structure From Lake Michigan Into Mona Lake Muskegon County, Michigan Muskegon Chronicle, August 2007 Prepared for: Mona Lake Improvement Assoc. Dr. John Cress, Chairman 4226 Vineyard Lane Muskegon, MI 49441 Muskegon Chronicle, August 2007 Prepared by: Westshore Consulting 2534 Black Creek Road Muskegon, MI November 2008

Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Riparian Rights & Historical Data Results... 1 Proposed Work Scope...3 Consideration One... 3 Consideration Two... 3 Consideration Three...4 Other Considerations... 6 Maintenance... 6 Figures Figure 1-1837 GLO Survey Map Figure 2-1880 Plat Map Figure 3-1900 Hackley Park Assembly Grounds Figure 4 - Layout of GLO Survey on Current Aerial Mapping Figure 5-1938 Aerial Photograph of Mona Lake Channel Figure 6 - Boundary Ownership Map Appendices Appendix A - Photographs of Existing Channel & Outlet, November 2008 Appendix B - January 2001 Joint Permit Application Excerpts Appendix C - Great Lakes Land Submerged Act 3501-3999\3801-3850\3824\3824-1\Feasibility Study.doc

Introduction Westshore Consulting has been retained by the Mona Lake Improvement Association to assist in providing recommendations regarding several considerations. Consideration One is to determine the likely extent of a breakwall type structure that would be proposed to be constructed at the Mona Lake/Lake Michigan interface. Currently there is a defined channel that does not extend into Lake Michigan and is not reliable to provide even small boat access to and from Lake Michigan. The geometries of the existing channel are such that a deflection in the channel occurs and does not represent a safe boating condition. Rough or semi-rough waters make it even more of a challenge for even an experienced boater to navigate the entrance. When one combines the effect of low water and dark conditions, it is easy to see why this entrance is a major concern to the boaters of Mona Lake. Refer to the photographs on the cover of this report taken by the Muskegon Chronicle in August 2007 which show how severe shallow water conditions can be at the outlet. Consideration One will be to make recommendations as to the extent of a proposed breakwall improvement that extends into Lake Michigan. Photographs found in Appendix A indicate the extent of the current channel and outlet in November 2008. Once the extent of the construction for a proposed breakwall has been established, cost estimates for construction will be determined. The costs associated with this construction will become Consideration Two. Consideration Three will be a discussion centering on the ability of a proposed Lake Board to assess costs for the construction of these improvement, and to project costs based on several best guess, but likely scenarios. Riparian Rights & Historical Data Results As a part of the work completed by Westshore Consulting, a search of the original survey records (GLO) and a historical recap of how the channel has been recognized by the adjacent landowners (the City of Norton Shores to the north and Maranatha to the south) was accomplished. Black Lake (Mona Lake) and the respective channel were first surveyed and meandered by government surveyors in 1837. Interestingly, the mouth of the channel was located approximately 1300 feet south of the present day channel. Consequently, respective GLO maps were prepared and government lot designations were defined by that survey. In 1837, Government Lot 5 held almost the entire Lake Michigan frontage; with Government Lot 6 fronting Lake Michigan near the mouth as surveyed (see Figure 1, GLO Survey Map, 1837). It appears that the GLO surveyors made a 200 foot± error in their mapping of the channel as shown on Figure 4, which compares existing aerial mapping to the GLO survey. It appears lumbering, ice operations, and early tourism took hold in the later 1800s. This was more than likely the time that channel improvements were made. In The Romance of Muskegon by Alice Prescott Keyes, p. 174 indicates that the early channel was wider than Mona Lake Channel Feasibility Study Westshore Consulting Mona Lake Improvement Association 1 November 2008

present day (1937). This wider width is shown in the 1880 Plat Map (Figure 2) and the 1900 Hackley Park Assembly Grounds (Figure 3). It is assumed that the title holders of Government Lots 5 and 6 agreed to the configuration of the altered channel improvements as the boundary between Lots 5 and 6 at that time; which is the 2008 location to the best of our knowledge. The 1938 aerial photograph (Figure 5) represents the channel similar to the present day. Mona Lake Channel Feasibility Study Westshore Consulting Mona Lake Improvement Association 2 November 2008

Proposed Work Scope Consideration One In January of 2001, the Mona Lake Improvement Association made application to the MDEQ and the US Corps of Engineers through the Joint Permit process to construct a double-sided steel sheet pile breakwall structure, situated on both the north and south sides of the channel. Refer to Appendix B which contains the three sheets representing the extent of the permit application. The proposed structure was to extend roughly 150 feet into Lake Michigan and would provide a 40-foot wide channel that would tie into the existing 30-foot wide channel. The bottom of the proposed channel was to be dredged to a proposed elevation of 571.5 (IGLD). Low water datum is recognized to be 577.5 (IGLD); and at these limits, a minimum depth in the channel would be 6 feet. Approximately 900 cubic yards of sand were proposed to be excavated (dredged) to achieve the proposed channel bottom of 571.5. Westshore contacted Mr. George Bailey of Muskegon Dock & Dredge, who prepared the permit application. Mr. Bailey indicated that the intent of the permit was to construct an affordable and serviceable outlet. Westshore has also reviewed the existing lake depth maps and riparian rights associated with how the channel has evolved. Based on this review, Westshore believes that the general extent and design of the original permit application submitted by the Lake Improvement Association is essentially appropriate; and in our opinion is an efficient design. We would suggest that the dredge spoils be placed on the Maranatha side of the channel, and an agreement be made with Maranatha that they receive any maintenance dredge spoils. This would be in recognition that by extending the breakwall into Lake Michigan a portion of the littoral drift that moves from the north to south will be lost by the current that originates from the breakwall structure. The permit application indicates that these spoils should be split evenly between the north and south property owners, and this is a recommended revision to the original permit application. Consideration Two Consideration Two consists of estimating the cost of the proposed improvements. as identified in Consideration One. Westshore has contacted several heavy pile driving/dredge type contractors, including Mr. Bailey, to ascertain their take on the cost of constructing the proposed improvements. Slowdowns in our regional economy have made contractors eager to build significant projects as contemplated by the scope of this work, however worldwide shortages of critical materials like the steel needed to construct the sheet pile walls tends to cancel out the eagerness of our local contractors. Westshore currently estimates the cost of constructing the proposed improvements to be in the range of $.75 million to $1 million. Consideration Three uses the $1 million budget figure as a worst case figure. Mona Lake Channel Feasibility Study Westshore Consulting Mona Lake Improvement Association 3 November 2008

Consideration Three A budget figure for construction has been determined to be $1 million. In January 2001 the MDEQ challenged the Mona Lake Improvement Association s ability to submit an application for a permit, and the application was eventually withdrawn. Westshore believes that if a Lake Board was created, they would have the ability to both apply for a permit to construct, and the ability to assess costs for improvements to members of the Lake Board. A Lake Board would be formed under Part 309 (Inland Lake Improvements) of P.A. 451. The formation of the Board would be either by a motion of the local units (Norton Shores and Muskegon Heights) or by a petition of two-thirds of the fee holders abutting the Lake. This process would produce a Plan that demonstrates the feasibility of the improvements, and would determine a detailed special assessment district or method for prorating benefits. It is likely that once a Lake Board is created they could partner with the County of Muskegon to use the County s ability to secure bonding to construct improvements at the best rate available. This partnership has been used successfully by the County to construct various improvements through township governments, and this may be available for the Lake Board. Cost projections are to be accomplished using standard commercial bond rates; therefore if a deal can be reached with the County, the following projection will likely be conservative. In discussing the financing of a cost to construct the identified channel improvements there are several considerations to consider. First, the ability to access Mona Lake and Lake Michigan is a benefit for all who utilize the numerous public boat ramps. The opportunity exists for an unlimited number of non-riparians to use and enjoy the waters of Mona Lake and Lake Michigan. One way to assess this benefit is to use a method similar to ones that are used by drain commissioners as they prorate costs (benefits). The Cities of Norton Shores and Muskegon Heights both have frontage on Mona Lake. Refer to Figure 6 wherein the limits of these cities boundaries are indicated. The City of Muskegon Heights has a well designed, modern boat launch on the north side of Mona Lake. This boat launch is available to not only the citizens of Muskegon Heights, but others as well. The City of Norton Shores has significant holdings on Mona Lake, and the majority of the riparian owners are taxed within the City of Norton Shores. This has value not only to the riparian owners, but also to the City of Norton Shores itself because access to Mona Lake and Lake Michigan make the lake frontage more valuable, which in turn produces more tax revenue for the City. The following proration is presented as a model to spread costs based on benefit determinations. A more detailed determination of costs and benefits will be accomplished for a final special assessment. In that it is likely the Lake Board would be created by a motion of the municipal units, they would have to be convinced of the benefit. A range of percentages has been used with the purpose of being conservative. City of Muskegon Heights... 5% to 10% City of Norton Shores... 15% to 30% County of Muskegon...2 ½% to 5% Riparian Owners of Mona Lake... 55% to 77 ½% 100% Mona Lake Channel Feasibility Study Westshore Consulting Mona Lake Improvement Association 4 November 2008

Based on these percentages, the Mona Lake Board would have to finance a present worth of between $550,000 to $775,000. If a bond issue was passed wherein money was borrowed and then paid back through a typical assessment over 10 years using a bond rate of 6 percent, an annual payment of between $75,380 and $106,215 would be necessary. It is estimated that approximately 350 property owners would be riparian owners and liable for assessment. If this were the case, a cost per year for these individuals would be approximately $215 to $304. Westshore had suggested that the potential to obtain grants to construct the improvements would be considered. To that end, internet searches and conversations have occurred with the US Army Corps of Engineers, the MDNR, and the MDEQ to determine the likelihood of grants being secured to construct the improvements. Unfortunately, it is very unlikely that grants will be available to construct the pier improvements. The Corps of Engineers has suffered from a lack of dollars to maintain existing piers and break walls, and so monies for new construction through this agency is extremely unlikely. The State of Michigan offers grants for certain activities, but they are processed through governmental agencies, and the Mona Lake Board would need to have the City of Norton Shores sponsor a grant. Funds are available, and are considered on a yearly basis, with April 1 being the deadline for new applications. An engineering feasibility study is required to make a formal grant application. There may also be fishery grant funds available in 2010. The awards for 2009 have already been determined. The fisheries grants are limited in size, however, and a typical award would be $20,000 to $25,000. The entire amount given for grants in 2009 will be $200,000, but it is believed that the pier project would be a good candidate; but again, the grant application process is through governmental agencies. Mona Lake Channel Feasibility Study Westshore Consulting Mona Lake Improvement Association 5 November 2008

Other Considerations Maintenance As previously mentioned, maintenance dredging will be required to maintain the channel at a design depth. Wind and water conditions will determine the extent of the maintenance needed. Westshore recommends a budget of $25,000 per year be established for maintenance activities, which would add $71.50 to the assessment for the outlet channel construction. Mona Lake Channel Feasibility Study Westshore Consulting Mona Lake Improvement Association 6 November 2008

Figures

Figure 1 1837 GLO Survey Map

Figure 2 1880 Plat Map

Figure 3 1900 Hackley Park Assembly Grounds

Figure 4 Layout of GLO Survey on Current Aerial Mapping

Figure 5 1938 Aerial Photograph of Mona Lake Channel

Figure 6 Boundary Ownership Map

Appendices

Appendix A Photographs of Existing Channel & Outlet, November 2008

Appendix B January 2001 Joint Permit Application Excerpts

Appendix C Great Lakes Land Submerged Act