[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
COASTAL RECREATION PLAN SUPPLEMENT TO THE MARQUETTE COUNTY RECREATION PLAN JULY 1986 This document was prepared by the Marquette County Planning Commission in accordance with the provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act (PL 92-553 and PL 94-370) administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Assistance was also received through the Michigan Coastal Management Program administered by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Division of Land Resource Programs'. Financial assistance for the project was received from the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration with matching funds provided by the marquette County Board of Commissioners. INTRODUCTION A. Scope This section of the Recreation Plan examines Marquette County's coastal recreational resources located along the County's 78.5 miles of Lake Superior shoreline. Of the total shoreline, 13.85 miles (18%) are in public ownership. Exclude the Huron Islands and this figure drops to 8.75 miles (11%). This ratio translates into about one-half a foot per County resident. In contrast it is interesting to note that about half (49%) of all land in the County is publically owned or is otherwise open for public recreation. Existing public coastal lands are presently used for a variety of recreational uses. Some coastal resources such as river mouths, or prime fish and wildlife habitat lie primarily im private or corporate hands. Of the 12 major river mouths which empty into Lake Superior only three provide for public access. Of the three, one can only be reached by leaving the County and two are associated with incompatible adjoining land uses, i.e., power plant and sewage treatment plant. Increased population growth and desirability of shorelines for private use will reduce the availability of lands for public use. Environmental issues such as eroding Lake Superior shoreline in conjunction with high lake levels will continue to threaten all uses of shorelands. B. Purpose This document was prepared in order to revise and update the 1979 Marquette County Coastal Recreation Plan and incorporate it into the 1986 County Recreation Plan. As such, the consolidation of these recreational planning documents will provide a more coordinated effort by the County in providing for future coastal recreational opportunity for County residents. Completion of this document will also maintain County eligibility in the Coastal Zone Management program. This program has historically provided the County with considerable financial assistance for reconstruction of facilities at the Sugar Loaf Mountain Natural Area. C. Direction The County Recreation Plan calls for an update of the Coastal Recreation Plan as a 1986 project (page 72, Implementation). The Plan also states as an objective that shorelands should be acquired along the Lake Superior shoreline for public use (page 69). Specific objectives related to County-owned recr-eational facilities within the Coastal Zone can be found ages 69 and 70 of the Plan. on p The 1986 County Recreation survey included several questions related to the public's desires for shore or water based recreation. When asked their preference, respondents indi- cated that the following characteristics were important in relation to the provision of recreational facilities: 1) More small nearby parks & recreation facilities. 2) Better maintenance or expansion of existing parks & recreation facilities vs. new construction. 3) Water access. -2- INVENTORY OF COASTAL AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN A. Overview This section of the Plan contains an inventory of shoreland areas of particular concern in Marquette County that are or have the potential to become recreational areas. The inven- tory of the particular areas outline the location, ownership, and size, as well as describing what the area offers now, what the development limitations are, management concerns are and recommendations. Maps of the sites are provided in Figure 1. B. Sources of Data The background information regarding the areas of particular concern was obtained from many sources, beginning with the 1979 Marquette County Coastal Recreation Plan. A simila-r format for recording the data was used. The number of recrea- tional areas was expanded from 14 to 25. The Regional Shoreland Areas of Particular Concern Inventory by CUPPAD provided some additional information. The City of Marquette Recreation Plan inventoried the coast- line, however it did not state goals for the area except that of a bike path which is to be completed in phases. The City Park and Recreation Department was not able to provide any additional information. The City of Marquette is designing a Master Plan for the Lower Harbor and is holding special Planning Commission meetings on its future. Pat Gruber, Assistant Planning Director, was very helpful in providing this information. The Little Presque Isle Plan clearly stated the present uses and future goals as did the Plan for Sugar Loaf Mountain Natural Area. Both described the importance of cooperative management between the two areas. The Chocolay Recreation Plan along with Mark Maki (Township Assessor) were instru- mental in determining their future plans. Pat Farrell of the Governor's Advisory Board on Coastal Management had many important coastal recreation suggestions. The Lake Superior Dive Club and Mrs. Tomasi provided the location and descrip- tions of popular dive sites. The Maritime Museum, Marquette Historical Society, and the U.S. Coastguard in Marquette all helped with the historical aspects of this Plan. -3- 176 59 203 Lighthouse Islan I (house T53N -1129W ighthouse Island Huron Islan HURON HURON NATIONAL WILDLIFE R NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE jb -30 Ay Island- 763 cf S 2 - HURON ISLANDS 10, 103 as -3 AD -30 3 BIG HURON RIVER 32 LITTLE HURON RIVER 12 63' 00 ------- 18 -17, 13 -AT 16 is 14 @737 BARAGA TAT. am 717 x 'T 721 @M 731 FORE! 773 703 - - 720 7;v _10,0 093 + 7 7 -1'-. ------ 8q,7 '819 Howe Lake 692 L, -- ----------- o 20," 21 22 19 ?3 24 19 Bald Mountain 47 -+-o- r) 1735 ----- d37 0 0 Li n t SCALE 1:62500 ?6 2 2 3 -ILES 300D 0 G. .3000 6000 9000 12000 1 -1" 18000 21000 FEET ..t Id. 2 3 4 5 K-LOMETI-+_ 0'49' 1 1 1 - T===========@ F5 M nu@7,j IN: % @LIL -te Jr.ki. h.k H..d UTM GRID AND 1956 MAGNE 1IC NORTH 3 34 35 36 31 f, 7 DECLINATION AT CENTIEROF SHEET 0 Mountf 1,ey Lumberman PC&- Bay ------ - iv7 0 ch, L4ke 2 5 4 3 2 1 @ik 6 2 t 't 11 -4- T.,.e, PC In 13 0 SCALE 1:62500 0 2 3 4 MILES 30DO 0 .3000 6000 9000 12000 19= 19" 21030 fE[ 0 1 2 3 4 5 KILOMETERS 0*49, 15M 0 Ulm GRID AND 1956 MAGNU TIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER Of SHEET 17 COUNTY ROAD 550 V .15 PRESQUE ISLE MARINA/PARK (b 16 DEAD RIVER tz@ 9 Y T T 18 PICNIC ROCKS AREA -T@V/T 23 L@L T. V6 P-11k MARQUETTE LIGHT HOUSE 20 22 19 MARITIME MUSEUM 7 21 LOWER HARBOR AREA M. .Q 29 -27 22 CARP RIVER 23 CHOCOLAY RIVER 34 36 Ile S A N 2 -6 C If, . . ............ 2 H ............... sto ti.@11 Mt 62 .0 7 . ... ....... 10 ...... Oct, off . ............ .......... . .... 13: T_ SCALE 1:62500 0 1 2 3 4 MUS 3OW 0 -3000 6000 9000 120DO 11000 19000 Z1000 UET G. 0'49' 0@ 1 .5 0 1 2 3 4 5 KILONIETERS UTM GRID AND 1956 NtAGNE TIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTEROF SHELT 126 630000 FEW ot 0 t 24 ROAD SIDE PARK 11 47 A Q 25 ROAD SIDE PARK I 3 HO OL 32 P, E U P 6 LA - -2 6@?@ @EAN -6 17 soul, Sa r 'A BM f,2f ORE OL U1 4 G,-1 Pi Sand 8 9 - Ce? Lake 7 7_1 7 B ANtIC 12 62T -Gordon A 628 12 61, A P, 5 @s NO 13 1 18 17 16 15 14- 13 18 73 ki G-ei P+ 663 _66, 629 0 A Y tiog C H 0 "66, 24 lial M 19 211, -122 24 24- 23 1 C3 20 14 am 66, 682 geo 77f '0' so _M C H I G A M M E OS 2 25 25 30 2 211 ',26. 25 30 -6- S T A T _P 0 _R E @S T so 0 SCALE 1:62500 2 3 4 MILES ]low 0 .30W 6000 9000 12000 )WOO 21000 FEET G- 1 5 0 1 2 3 5 KILOMETERS c).49' CONTOUR IN-j ERVAL 20 FEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 UIM GRID AN[) 1956 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET STANNARD ROCK 30 3: 3: ------ 0 y Point 25 @@30 SALMON TROUT RIVER Tro 6 all Trout Point 36: -31 '33 32', a 35 3M698'- 667 7 BIG BAY POINT LIGHTHOUSE Is 5 Big; pi@i@ P Q, ighthou K633 6M 661 7, BaLd Hit B A Yl BIG BAY HARBOR OF REFL IGE 37 8 754 7 5 12 9Gra ef 12 17 .1 drng - -- - .- -- -- - - - - - 11 E3, @,,k - I; Da,by @4,afth B e B-d 72 72 '7@6 % SIM 635- \ IRON RIVER 617 is 14 Bi&p y 13 18 17 13 6 :18 17 -_ te e 620 8 PERKINS PARK 622 Community C. 41 2 . . 669 24 2 15@': McKemie Bay C, 22 756 Ider 759 _7L -)OM 6 W- 30 29 28 '@@2 7 p 0 25 E 25 26 em,,- 915 S C A@ A 3 A R-1 V E R Jp I --,O@ 0 SCALE 1:62500 2 3 4 MILES ------------------ 3ODD 0 3000 600D 9000 12000 1 @4OW ieoDo 21000 f((T 1 3 5 -ILOPETERS 0*49, 2Z 1,@5 UTIM GRIO ANO 1956 MAGNEW NORTH F)ECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET BIG GARLIC RIVER bmvo 0 2 6 77 10 GRANITE ISLANE (CASTLE ISLAND) so 4- Garlic Mountain i C 12 GRANOT LOMA .1 d S9 Birch, 2 ey Pol.t 695 33 34 !35 464 am 693 T50 N T 49 14- SM4 Uc 4 Ble"thu 3 0 Lake 2 -p 765, f, 13 LITTLE PRESQUE ISLE AREA + + -7 , J, 10 11 am MICHIGAMMIE 9A A& C-9 128 STATE F,OR ST qm 61) 1 16 Prho Lake 1-4- Cre 0 U E T T.j E A R m f 22 21 -22- 24 22 21 Jd. A F 'r T E CD- 34 13 14 SUGAR LOAF MOUNTAIN NATURAL AREA ------- 33, A@ Y C. The Inventory I - STANNARD ROCK Location 34 Miles northeast of Big Bay Ownership Federal Size - One mile radius of Stannard Rock Shore Type - Rock bluff/man made Present Use Trends - Coastguard navigational aid (old light- house). Surrounding reef provides prime lake trout habitat and as a result is an important fishery for sport & commercial fisherman. Development Limitations 1) Lighthouse is on the National Register of Historic Places 2) Physical characteristics of the site Management Concerns - 1) Continued need for navigational aid 2) Competing uses for the fishery Recommendations - Continue and maintain present uses. 2 - HURON ISLANDS Location - Section 27, 29, 34 and 35, T53N-R29W Ownership - Federal Size - 5.10 miles Shore.Type - Rock bluff Campeau Creek gneiss Present Use - National wildlife refuge, scuba diving, light- house is listed on the National & State Register of Historic Places Development Limitations - 1) Slightly vegetated and 2) Fairly rugged topography Management Concerns - 1) Continued management as a wildlife refuge concerns 2) Maintenance of historic facilities Recommendations - Continue and maintain in present use. -9- 3 BIG HURON RIVER Location Section 7, T53N-R29W and Section 18, T52N-R29W Ownership State of Michigan Size - 184 acres Shore Type - Low dune/river mouth Present Use Trends - State forest campground Development Limitations - Erosion and flooding Management Concerns - Difficult access by County residents Recommendations - Continue existing use 4 - LITTLE HURON RIVER Location - Section 17, T52N-R29W ownership - Private Size - 40 acres Shore Type - Low dune/river mouth Present Use Trend - Vacant privately-owned land. Devf@_lom@ent_Limitations Erosion Management Concerns Investigate potential for public ownership Recommendations Establish area for public recreation (degree of development requires further study). _10- 5 SALMON TROUT RIVER Location - Sections 31 and 32, T52N-R27W Ownership - Private Size - 40 acres Shore Type Low dune/river mouth Present Use Privately-owned vacant land Development Limitations - 1) River provides important fishery for "coaster" brook trout 2) Erosion Management Concerns 1) Impacts of future use on the fishery 2) Access considerations Recommendations - Secure area as a public natural area 6 BIG BAY HARBOR OF REFUGE Location - Section 10, T51N-R27W Ownership - County of Marquette Size - 15 acres Shore Type Low dune Present Use The Refuge is the only boating access between Marquette and Baraga. It provides boat launch, picnick- ing, seasonal and transient mooring, and access to productive fishing and scuba diving. Development Limitations - Depth Management Concerns 1) Periodic dredging 2) Balancing of transient, seasonal and commercial boaters needs. 3) Explore the feasibility of turning over the operation to the state as it serves a more non-local transient population. Recommendations - 1) Continued maintenance of marina and launching facili- ties. 2) Maintain the harbor as a harbor of Refuge catering to transient boaters needs first and seasonal mooring second. 3) Discourage private uses of the Harbor which would adversely affect its operation. _12- 7 - BIG BAY POINT LIGHTHOUSE Location - Section 1, T51N-R27W Ownership - Private Size - 53 acres Shore Type - Bluff 10' and higher, sandstone/clay Present Use - U.S. Coastguard maintains a light on a small parcel within the privately owned property. Structures are presently vacant. Development Limitations - Erosion Management Concerns - The possibility of public ownership of this parcel should be explored because of its historical/ recreational value. Recommendations - Establish public historical/recreational site. -13- 8 PERKINS PARK Location - Section 15, T51N-R27W Ownership County of Marquette Size - 62 acres Shore Type - Low-high sand bluff Present Use - Camping, picnicking, boat launching, swimming and beach facilities. Development Limitations 1) Erosion hazards Management Concerns - 1) Increase attendance consistent with Park capacity. 2) Implement the soil erosion plan developed by SCS. 3) Upgrade sewer and water systems in accordance with state law. 4) Institute a user fee concept which more closely matches revenues with expenditures. 5) Utilize a County employee form of managing the Park/harbor operation as it is in the best interest of the County. 6) Acquire all Road Commission holdings in conjunction with the Park. 7) The development of a "Master Plan" for the Park is important for goals and guidance. Recommendations - 1) Continue and maintain present use. 2) Explore feasibility of turning the operation over to the state. -14- 9 - IRON RIVER Location Section 18, T51N-R26W Ownership Private Size - 480 acres Shore Type - Low bluff less than 30 feet Present Use Trends - Low density residential undeveloped, private recreation Development Limitations - 1) The immediate river mouth is poorly drained swamp with low natural fertility. 2) Surrounding areas are deep with sands with weak profile development. 3) This area ia a special wildlife habitat area. 4) Erosion/flooding Management Concerns - 1) Water quality monitoring 2) Protecting the special wildlife habitat Recommendations Utilize area for recreation (developed or undeveloped use requires further study). 10 GRANITE ISLAND (CASTLE ISLAND) Location - Section 22,.T50N-R25W Ownership - Federal Size - Less than one acre Shore Type - Rock bluff 0-30 feet Present Use Trends - Lighthouse and scuba diving Development Limitations - Rock bluff Management Needs - 1) Nomination of the site to the State or National Historic Register. 2) Maintenance of historic values. Recommendations - Continue lighthouse operation 11 - BIG GARLIC RIVER Location - Section 21, T50N-R26W Ownership - Private Size - 80 acres Shore Type Low bluff, less than 30' high Present Use Seasonal residential and undeveloped Development Limitations - 1) Sandy soils on the .66 mile beach area. 2) rock outcrops and varied and mountain relief at the southern and river mouth areas. Management Concerns - 1) Water quality monitoring, increased development could possibly cause water quality problems in this area. 2) Erosion Recommendations - The Big Garlic provides excellent fishing opportunities because of the spring runs of steelhead and rainbow trout. Public ownership of such rivers is lacking in the County. Public ownership is recommended. 12 - GRANOT LOMA Location - Section 2, T49N-R26W Ownership - Private Size - 5,180 acres total Shore Ty e - Low bluff, less than 30' Present Use Trends 1) Undeveloped 2) Low density residential 3) Public access at Co. Rd. 550 approximately one mile from the mouth anadromous. Development Limitations - 1) Erosion 2) Competing uses Management Concerns - 1) Water quality monitoring 2) Erosion Recommendations 1) Public ownership -116- 13 LITTLE PRESQUE ISLE AREA Location - Section 20, T49N-R25W OWDership State Size - Island, 8.6 acres; river mouth, coastal lake, 2,800 acres, mainland. Shore Type Low sandy beach, low bluff sandstone 30' and less. Present Use The Little Presque Isle area is accessible via Co. Rd. 550. Hiking, unmanaged camping, picnicking, beach use, fishing, swimming, scuba diving. Little Presque Island is designated an Island area of particula-r concern. Development Limitations - 1) Wildlife migratory & feeding corridors, winter deer yard. 2) Erosion Management Concerns 1) Litter and debris removal 2) Toilet facilities 3) Continued maintenance 4) Coordinate future development at Sugar Loaf Mountain with the state 5) Continue to promote take-over of Sugar Loaf Mountain Natural Area by the state Recommendations - 1) A bike trail should be constructed from Presque Isle to Big Bay. This will create greater accessibility to the Little Presque Isle. Potential for use of the old Marquette & Huron Mountain railroad should be examined for this purpose. 2) Managed camping -17- 14 SUGAR LOAF MOUNTAIN NATURAL AREA Location Section 32, T49N-R25W Ownership County of Marquette Size - 120 acres Shore Type - High bluff 30' or higher, mostly Compeau Creek gneiss and Granite Rock Knobs. Present Use - Hiking, picnicking, scenic view and snowshoeing. Development Limitations - Topography is steep with slopes ranging from seven to more than 25%. Management Concerns 1) Encourage cooperation with the DNR Forest Management Division regarding mutual planning concerns for Little Presque Isle and Sugar loaf Mountain Natural Area. 2) Continue to implement and revise the Sugar Loaf Mountain Natural Area Master Plan. Recommendations - 1) Continue present use trends and increase the number of trails. At present a "managed" trail provides access to the summit via the south to southeast side of the mountain. 2) A second trail should be constructed on the north side and cooperatively linked with the Little Presque Isle area. This will mitigate vegetation degradation by condensing many unmanaged trails into one concentrated trail. 3) A bike trail should be constructed along Co. Rd. 550 connecting Presque Isle and Big Bay in order to create greater accessibility to the site. 4) Continue to explore turnover of the site.to the State. -18- 15 - PRESQUE ISLE MARINA/PARK Location - Sections I & 2, T48N-R25W Ownership - City of Marquette Size - 314 acres Shore Type - high bluff 30', sandy beaches Present Use Trend - Two picnic areas, zoo, hiking tails, open space, swimming, 95 boat slips, two launching ramps, concession facilities, toilet facilities, playground, tennis, shuffleboard, horseshoe, band shell, gazebo, breakwall (fishing) art on the rocks, snowshoe, scuba diving. Development Limitations - Size of facility Management Concerns - Not obtainable from City Parks and Recreation Department. Recommendations I)Current needs of the marina exceed present capacity, hence, additions to the facility should be addressed. 2) Continue present uses and maintenance. 16 - DEAD RIVER Location - Section 11, T48N-R25W Ownership - Corporate & City of Marquette Size - 5-10 acres Shore Type - River mouth, beach 1-20 feet Present Use - Harbor view park has picnicking, swimming, grassy open space, beach facilities, fishing and tempor- ary boat launching. The power plant industrially warms the water from the Dead River which makes for excellent fishing and swimming opportunities. it is accessible by Lake Shore Blvd. and the bike path. Development Limitations - Erosion Management Concerns - 1) Hazardous waste disposal sites 2) Erosion mitigation Recommendations - 1) Public Recreation 2) A bike path should join at the Lake Shore Blvd. bike path at Hawley Street and run to the Dead River Tourist Park area on Co. Rd. 550. _19- 17 - COUNTY ROAD 550 Location Marquette to Big Bay Ownership Public (Mq't. County Road Commission)/Private Size - 14 miles Shore Type - N/A Present Use Trends - County Road 550 is an access to various recreational places. Development Limitations - Physical characteristics - slope topography Management Concerns - Existing Co. Rd. 550 has major align- ment/safety problems. As this road serves over half of the County's shoreline it is in need of major upgrade prior to expansion of facilities which will increase traffic related problems. Recommendations - Construction of a bike trail along the road to make the recreational placed along this road more accessible to the public. 18 - PICNIC ROCKS AREA Location - T48N-R25W, Sections 13 & 14 Ownership - Federal Size - 10 acres Shore Type - Beach width 0-10 feet, bluff 1-3 feet, erosion mitigated by rockfill and in some areas vegetative cover. Present Use Trends - Picnicking, swimming, scuba diving on picnic rocks and the wreck of the Luety, beach facili- ties, grassy open space, accessible by the bike path. Development Limitations - Erosion Management Concerns 1) To maintain & initiate soil stabilization. 2) Beach upgrade. Recommendations - 1) Public recreation 2) Handicapped recreation -20- 19 - MARITIME MUSEUM Location - Section 24, T48N-R25W Ownership Private Size - 2-5 acres Shore Type - Low bluff Present Use - The building is a historical structure on the state register. The surrounding grounds have historical artifacts displayed. The property abuts the breakwater used by the public for fishing. This is the beginning of the bike path to Presque Isle. Development Limitations - Parcel size Management Concerns 1) Promotion of the Museum. 2) A greater demand on maintenance. Recommendations - 1) Continue present recreational historical uses. 2) Encourage the development of a bike path from the Maritime Museum to the Carp River. 20 - MARQUETTE LIGHT HOUSE Location - Section 24, T48N-R25W Ownership - Federal Size - 2-5 acres Shore Type - Rock bluff 10-30 feet - mona schist, erosion mitigated by rockfill. Present Use - U.S. Coastguard. The site is accessible by the bike path. Development Limitations - Rock bluff Management Concerns - Better promotion of the light house. Recommendations -- 1) Light house 2) Low intensity public recreation -23.- 21 - LOWER HARBOR AREA Location Section 23, T48N-R25W Ownership City of Marquette, private and corporate Size - 25 acres Shore Type - Shoreline has been altered by breakwaters. The grassy open area sits on an old coal storage site. Present Use - The lower harbor is the beginning of the Lake Shore Blvd. upon which many travel to enjoy Lake Super- ior. South Beach Park provides swimming and beach facilities. Father Marquette Park offers greenspace. The Lower Harbor Park is open space used for various gatherings (festivals, concerts, picnics). At the east end of the park, there is a boat launching facility operated by Marquette Dock Association with several slips. Fishing occurs all along the shoreline extending along the breakwater. The lower harbor is also fre- quented by scuba divers diving on the several schooner wrecks, the old docks (pilings), Ripley's Rock and along the breakwater and ore dock. Development Limitations - 1) Ecologically, Whetstone Creek may have an influence on the water quality in the lower harbor resulting from the runoff it handles from hard -surfaces in the urbanized area. 2) It is zoned Deferred Development because of the desire to control the future land usage which may possibly be detrimental to establishing public access. 3) Erosion Management Concerns 1) Handicapped provisions 2) Maintenance of recent lower harbor improvements. 3) A continuation o 'f improvements such as restroom facilities, bike path and landscaping to fulfill the plan objectives adopted by the City. Recommendations 1) The shore between Carp River and the light house should be connected with a bike path. This includes the lower harbor area. 2) Handicapped recreational uses. -22- 22 - CARP RIVER Location - Section 36, T48N-R25W Ownership State of Michigan Highway Dept., Corporate Size - 2-5 acres Shore Type - Beach width 0 feet, beach bluff height 5-10 feet, river mouth. Present Use - Fishing. Marquette waste water discharge" is located a few hundred feet upstream from the mouth. Development Limitations 1) Water Quality 2) Erosion/slope conditions 3) Adjoining land use (i.e. railroad, sewage treatment plant) 4) Location of roadway Management Concerns - Water Quality monitoring should be increased. Recommendations - The Carp River is recreationally important from a fishing standpoint. However, the fish should not be eaten according to the 1986 Michigan Fishing Guide because of toxins within fish. A bicycle path between the Carp and the light house Phould be considered. -23- 23 - CHOCOLAY RIVER Location Sections 6 & 8, T47N-R24W Ownership- Chocolay Township/Private Size Shore Type River mouth. Deer park sand with 0-8% slope. Present Use 1) Fishing, boat launch, with substantial residential use. The Chocolay River is a river mouth of particular concern. 2) Picnicking. Development Limitations - Erosion/blowing sand. The river mouth has a tendency to fill with sediment which causes flooding and boat maneuvering problems. Management Concerns - 1) Efforts should continue to stabilize the mouth and channel for access to Lake Superior. 2) Wind erosion controls. Recommendations 1) Boat slips at the Chocolay Marina and MDNR access. 2) Small tot lot type playground near the picnic area at Chocolay marina. 3) Encourage development of bike path through this area connecting at the Carp River. 4) Public acquisition or private land at the river mouth and within the 100 year flood zone. -24- 24 ROAD SIDE PARK II Location Section 1, T47N-R23W Ownership State of Michigan Size - 32 acres Shore Type - Low sand dune, less than 30' high, less than 25% vegetative cover, beach width, 10-20 feet, bluff height, 10-15 feet. Present Use - Picnicking and general beach use. Development Limitations - Residential, commercial, industrial and resource production development al-1 present sever-e limitations. This is a high risk erosion area of particular concern. Management Concerns - 1) Continued maintenance 2) Erosion controls which do not affect beach and dune aesthetics 3) M-28 will be threatened by erosion. Recommendations - Continue present recreational uses and discourage further development. Encourage the develop- ment of a bike path from road 'side Park A to Big Bay and eventually work with Alger County to join paths at the line to Pictured Rocks. -25- 25 - ROAD SIDE PARK I Location Sections 7 and 8, T47N-R23W Ownership State of Michigan Size.- 18 acres Shore Type - Low sand dune, less than 30' high, less than 25% vegetative cover, beach width 10-20 feet, beach bluff height 10-15 feet. Present Use - Picnicking and general beach use. Development Limitations - Residential, commercial, industrial and resource production development all present severt- limitations. This is a high risk erosion area of particular concern. Management Concerns - 1) Continued maintenance. 2) Erosion controls which do not affect beach and dune aesthetics 3) M-28 will be threatened by erosion. Recommendations - Continue present recreational uses and discourage further development. Encourage the develop- ment of a bike path from road side Park A to Big Bay and eventually work with Alger County to join paths at the line to Pictured-Rocks. -26- III PRIORITIZATION OF COASTAL AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN This section of the Plan presents a framework for ranking the importance of the sites identified in Section II - Inventory of Coastal Areas of Particular Concern. It is suggested that this ranking be used as a basis for-County policy for addres- sing future coastal recreational needs. The results of the ranking provide a basis for the Coastal Resources Action Plan in Section IV, Implementation. A. Methodology The following criteria were developed in order to objectively prioritize the coastal sites in accordance with their indivi- dual needs as well as those listed in the County Recreation Plan. Criteria Points 1) - Development of the site would provide new 20 types of recreational opportunity to the general public. -Development at the site would continue an 30 existing recreational opportunity for the general public. 2) - Site is recommended for recreational develop- 10 ment in a non-County recreation plan, capital improvement schedule or action plan. 3) - Development at the site has potential for 20 multiple recreational facilities. 4) - Distance from urban center Within Urban Center 20 0 - 5 miles 10 greater than 5 miles 5 5) The site has capability for multi-seasonal use Four seasons 10 Three seasons 6 Two seasons 3 One season 1 6) The site is documented as an important his- 10 torical resource. 7) The site has documented flood or erosion 20 hazards which do not reduce the utility of the site for at least low intensity recreation. -27- Criteria (cont'd) Points 8) The site has better than average potential 10 to serve special populations (handicapped, senior citizens). 9) The site includes documented significant natural resources. - Sand dune (low) 5 - Wetlands 8 - Natural river 10 - Wild or natural area 10 - Rare or endangered species habitat 15 - Any other resource identified in the unique/ 8 natural features inventory. 10) Site aesthetics are: - Unique 30 - Average 20 - Poor 10 11) Parcel size is: - Over 100 acres 30 - 50 - 99 acres 20 - 10 - 49 acres 10 - 0 - 9 acres 5 12) Current ownership is: - Public 10 - Corporate or private 2 13) Current use of the site is: - Recreation 20 - Undeveloped 15 - Development compatible with recreation 5 14) Surrounding land use is generally: - Compatible 30 - Incompatible with recreation development 0 15) Popul:ation served: - greater than 100,000 20 - 40,000 - 99,999 10 - 0 - 39,999 5 -28- Criteria (cont'd) Points 16) Water access type - Coastal river 25 - Coastal lake 15 - Coastal river mouth 30 - Lake Superior 5 17) Accessibility: - Good 30 - Fair 10 - Poor 2 18) Competing uses: - None 10 - Forestry/agricultural 8 - Industrial/extractive 2 - Residential 5 19) Local Zoning Compliance - Positive 10 - Negative 0 20) Site or development measurably enhances -15 potential for tourism. TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS 486 -29- B. Application of the Criteria Rank Site Name Total Points Scored I Little Presque Isle 411 2 Presque Isle/Upper Harbor 383 3 Co. Rd. 550 347 4 Granot Loma 310 4 Marquette Lower Harbor 310 5 Perkins Park 308 6 Chocolay River 306 7 Big Huron River 303 8 Sugar Loaf 210 9 Dead River 262 10 Iron River 257 11 Big Bay Harbor 240 12 Road Side #1 243 13 Road Side #2 238 14 Salmon Trout River 237 14 Picnic Rocks 237 15 Maritime Museum 222 16 Big Carlic. River 220 16 Light House Point 220 17 Little Huron River 214 18 Big Bay Light House 172 19 Huron Islands 168 19 Marquette Lower Harbor 168 20 Stannard Rock 141 21 Granite Island 131 -30- IV IMPLEMENTATION A. Summary Management concerns -and recommendations were presented in Section II of this Plan for each of the areas of particular concern. In as much as all concerns and recommendations cannot be addressed simultaneously by the County, a priority list (ranking) was utilized in Section III to suggest which coastal areas or particular concern provide the greatest public benefit. Future efforts by the County towards coastal area development should be guided by the concerns, recommenda- tions and rankings established in the previous sections of this Plan. A six-year coastal action plan is provided here in order to summarize the previous sections and give broad direction for future coastal area development. B. Six-Year Coastal Recreational Resources Development Schedule Year Project Objectives Funding Source Cost 1987 - Perkins Park Grounds Local $ 8,000 Erosion Control Project RC&D 8,000 - Perkins Park Master Local 10,000 Plan LAWCON 10,000 - Coastal River Acquisi- Local 5,000 tion Study LAWCON 5,000 1988 - Sugar Loaf Mountain Local 12,000 Final Phase Coastal Zone 12,000 - Perkins Park Building Local 9,000 Consolidation LAWCON 9,000 1989 - Phase I Coastal Area Local 100,000 of Particular Concern NRTF 100,000 Acquisition 1990 - Phase II Coastal Area Local 10,000 of Particular Concern LAWCON 10,000 Design & Specification 1991 - Phase III Coastal Area Local 75,000 of Particular Concern NRTF 75,000 Development 1992 - Phase III Continued Local 75,000 NRTF 75,000 -31- NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 6668 14111691-5 C. Methods of Implementation In spite of dwindling public funding in general, several grant and assistance programs are available to help realize the 'project objectives listed in -the six-year development schedule- above. Such programs include: 1) Coastal Zone Management' Program - Administered by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Division of Land Resource Programs. Provides technical and financial assis- tance to local units of government for recreati,onal facili- ties, planning design and construction.' 2) Historical Preservation Grants - Administered by the Historv Division Michigan Department of.Commerce. Grants are awarded to local units of government for various histo-ric preservation efforts state-wide 3) National Flood Insurance Program Administered by Federal Emergency management Agency and/or local units of government. Provides a vehicle for public condemnation of private lands which are flood hazard areas. 4) Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund Administered by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. The p rogram provides grants to local units of government for publi'c land acquisition or construction of public recreation facilities. 5) Land & Water Conservation Fund - Administered by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. The program provides grants to local units of government for acquisition or construction of recreational facilities. 6) Michigan Equity Program - Administered by the Michigan Department of Commerce. Grants are provided to local units of government for various cultural/recreational projects. 7) Resource Conservation and Development Fund - Administered bv the Soil Conservation Service. This program pr 'ovides financial and technical assistance to local units of govern- ment for recreation projects which are tied to erosion problems. -32-