[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]










                      oo              0 W  i mo,



                                  UEELAN.AU PENINSUILA
                              CURRENT TREND FUTURE:
                  IMPLICATIONS OF ""BUSINESS AS USUAL"






                                                         "V'





                                                                    V  -4







                                      .@v







                                   .o.N
                                             DRAFT


                                                             ff


                          @THE LEELANAU                GENERAL          PLA'--N
                        Policy Guidelines for Managing Growth on the Izelanau Peninsula
                                          Worldng Paper Number 5

                                             September 5,1991
                                                     N,






















































                                                Printed on Recycled Paper










                                                            LEELANAU COUNTY
                                                      BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

                                  John D. Stanek                                                 Philip E. Deering
                                  Chairman                                                       Vice Chairman


                                  Louis A. Girard                                                Donald W. Mitchell
                                  Gerald N. Henshaw                                              Joseph F. Brzezinski
                                  Rochelle Steirnel






                                                            LEELANAU COUNTY
                                                         PLANNING COMMISSION


                                                                  Dana MacLellan
                                                                    Chairperson

                                  Merle Bredehoeft                                      Margot Power
                                  Jack Burton                                           Lois Cole
                                  Louis A. Girard                                       Richard (Rick) N. Stein
                                  Steve Kalchik                                         Daniel Heinz
                                                                                        Lawrence Verdier




                                                       LEELANAU GENERAL PLAN
                                                          STEERING COMMITTEE


                                                                  John D. Stanek
                                                                     Chairman




                         Gary Bardenhagen                       Carl Headland                          Glen Noonan
                         Joann Beare                            Dan Hubbell                            Richard Pleva
                         Sargent Begeman                        Richard Hufford                        Margot Power
                         Ross Childs                            Kalin Johnson                          Robert Price
                         Barbara Collins                        Linda Johnson                          E. Larry Price
                         Shirley Cucchi                         Colleen Kalchik                        Ed Reinsch
                         Catherine J. Cunningham                Edward Kazenko                         George Rosinski
                         Walter Daniels                         Ray Kimple                             Richard Sander
                         Phil Deering                           Stan Kouchnerkavich                    Charlene Schlueter
                         Judy Egeler                            Fred Lanham Jr.                        Ruth Shaffran
                         Randy Emmeot                           Elizabeth Lafferty-Esch                Thomas Shimek
                         Kathy Feys                             Don Lewis                              Dennis Stavros
                         Mary Frank                             Douglas Manning                        Harry Stryker
                         Gary Fredrickson                       Larry Mawby                            Mitsume Takyama
                         James Frey                             John McGettrick                        Midge Werner
                         Paul Gardner                           James Modrall                          Ben Whitfield
                         John Hardy                             John Naymick                           Ruth Wilbur
                         Max Hart                               Mary Newman





                                                                               DRAFT


                                                                TABLE OF CONTENTS




               PREFACE          ....................................................................................................................... iii
               EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                      ................................................................................................ iv
               INTRODUCTION                ............................................................................................................ ix
                         Purpose of Working Paper                 ................................................................................... ix
                         Your Opinions are Important-Please Share Them                               ............................................. ix
                         Data Qualifiers         ......................................................................................................x
                         Presentation Format            ..............................................................................................x
                         "Big Picture" Considerations               .................................................................................x

               Chapter 1: POPULATION                   ........................................................................................... 1-1
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 1-1

               Chapter 2: ECONOMY                 ................................................................................................ 2-1
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 2-1

               Chapter 3: LAND             ........................................................................................................ 3-1
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 3-1


               Chapiter 4: PUBLIC FINANCE                     .................................................................................... 4,11
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 4-1

               Chapter 5: TRANSPORTATION                        ................................................................................. 5-1
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 5-1


               Chapter 6: COMMUNITY SERVICES                            ......................................................................... 6-1
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 6-1


               Chapter 7: INFRASTRUCTURE                        .................................................................................. 7-1
                         Introduction      ....................................................................................................... 7-1


               Chapter 8: ENVIRONMENT                     ......................................................................................... 8-1
                         Introduction      ........................................................................................................ 8-1


               POSTSCRIPT










                                                                                                                                                              0

                                                                                                                   Working Paper #5- Trend Future
                                                                                                                                                   Page i






                                                    DRAFT


                                      LEELANAU GENERAL PLAN
                                             PROJECT STAFF


                Timothy J. Dolehanty                               Duane C. Beard
                County Planning Director                           County Coordinator

                Trudy J. Galla                                     Pat Stratton
                Assistant Planner                                  County Board Secretary

                Joyce Pleva
                Planning Department Secretary






                                      LEELANAU GENERAL PLAN
                                   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE STAFF



                                       Planning And Zoning Center, Inc.
                                             302 S. Waverly Road
                                               Lansing, MI 48917
                                                 (517)886-0555
                                              (517)886-0564 FAX

                Mark A. Wyckoff, AICP, President                   Mark A. Eidelson, AICP, Sr. Planner
                Brenda M. Moore, Community Planner                 Jennifer L. Morris, Planning Aide
                Coy Vaughn, Jr., Graphic Artist



















         Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
        .Page #






                                                           DRAFT


                                                         PREFACE



                This working paper is the first in a series providing background information for the prepara-
           tion of the Leelanau General Plan: Policy Guidelines for Managing Growth on the Lee-
           lanaui Peninsula. It is numbered as the fifth working paper because the first four working pa-
           pers Were generated to document the activities of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC).
           This committee studied the need for a new County plan and various approaches that could be
           taken in the preparation of such a plan. They concluded that while a new plan was needed, it
           should not be simply another "County Comprehensive Plan"prepared by the! County Planning
           Commission. Instead, what is needed is a growth management plan for the Peninsula that in-
           volves the direct input and participation of all the local units of government in the County. This
           led to the initiation of the Leelanau General Plan.

                This working paper documents current trends facing the County in eight different cate-
           gories:
                ï¿½Population
                ï¿½Economy
                ï¿½Land
                ï¿½IPublic Finance
                ï¿½'Transportation
                ï¿½("O"ornmunity Services
                ï¿½11nfrastructure
                ï¿½Environment.

                In each case there is an effort to identify the current or emerging pattern or trend and then
           to describe the future if the trend continues. If no citizen or local government or groups of citi-
           zens or governmental organizations were to make an effort to change anything (i.e. no new
           plans, regulations, taxes, subsidies, incentives, etc. were initiated), and current trends were to
           continue, what would the future be like? This report attempts to project the implications of the
           f utu re if it is "business as usuaL "


                This working paper is intended to serve as a discussion document to stimulate thought and
           motivate participation in the preparation of the Leelanau General Plan. If you have sugges-
           tions Ifor additions, deletions or refinements, please direct them to the Leelanau County Plan-
           ning Department.

                Working paper #6 presents draft goals and objectives for the General Plan. A series of
           working papers beginning with #7 will address a wide range of technical iSSUes in more detail.
           The introduction and postscript explains the process in more detail.








                                                                                      Working Pkoer #5- Trend Future
                                                                                                              Page &





                                                        DRAFT


                                             EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

             Listed below are the emerging trends and projections for each of the eight categories of in-
         formation addressed in this report.

              Population
                    Trends
                          ï¿½Total permanent population is increasing at about 2.5 - 3% per year.
                          ï¿½In-migration continues to be the primary source of population growth.
                          ï¿½Seasonal population continues to grow at a faster rate than permanent popu-
                           lation.
                          ï¿½While the County population is aging, it is not the number over age 65 who are
                           increasing the median age as much as it is the "baby boomers" reaching
                           middle age.
                          ï¿½Average household size continues to fall as new households are created
                           faster than population grows.
                          ï¿½Multi-unit residential facilities are increasing in response to the growth of sin-
                           gle person and childless households and the relative decline of married couple
                           families.
                          ï¿½New seasonal housing units are built about twice the rate of permanent resi-
                           dences.
                          ï¿½Persons of low income are proportionally fewer, but the disparity between the
                           wealthy and the poor is growing. The need for more affordable housing is be-
                           coming more acute.
                          ï¿½The number of school-aged children is increasing at a slower rate than the
                           general population.

                     Projections
                          ï¿½The year-round population will continue to increase between 2.5 - 3.0% per
                           year.
                          ï¿½Population increases due to in-migration will account for the majority of addi-
                           tional population increases
                          ï¿½Peak seasonal populations will continue to outnumber resident populations by
                           at least 7 to 1.
                          ï¿½Median age will continue to rise, staying higher than the state's average. Older
                           residents will be more economically well-to-do and politically active. They will
                           demand a higher quality of life and expect a higher level of services.
                          ï¿½The Native American population will continue to grow but will still comprise a
                           relatively small percentage of the total population unless in-migration in-
                           creases.
                          ï¿½Increases in the number of households will continue to outstrip increases in
                           population by at least 50%, and as a result, average household sizes will re-
                           main relatively small. On a per-unit basis, more land will be used to accom-
                           modate fewer people.
                          ï¿½There will continue to be an increase in demand and production of multi-unit
                           residential facilities. The impacts of such development (both perceived and
                           real) will affect the rural character and public facilities in specific areas. Single
                           person and childless households will become a larger percentage of total
          WorOng Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page iv





                                                       DRAFT

                           households. Many of these households will want non-traditional housing ar-
                           rangements that fit their lifestyles (e.g., condominiums, and apartments vs.
                           large lot single family homes). The percentage increase in number of sea
                           sonal housing units will be more than twice as high as the increase in year-
                           round units.
                         ï¿½ The margin between the wealthy and the poor will widen. Those with fewer
                           economic resources will find it more and more difficult to survive as cost of
                           living and cost of public services rise.
                         ï¿½ Smaller families, senior, childless and single-person households will continue
                           to increase at a faster rate than nuclear families. As a result, the number of
                           school-aged children will not increase at the same rate as the general popula-
                           tion. Education levels of the County's population will rise with the influx of af-
                           fluent people.


              Economy
                    Trends
                         ï¿½ The County's labor force is growing at a slower pace than it's more urbanized
                           neighbor, Grand Traverse County.
                         ï¿½ Except in times of severe recession, unemployment rates are lower in Lee-
                           lanau County compared to Benzie and Grand Traverse Counties.
                         ï¿½ The County is becoming more dependent on the tourist trade.
                         ï¿½ Service and retail establishments and employment are increasing faster than
                           other trade sectors.
                         ï¿½ Agriculturally based businesses are declining in economic significance relative
                           to other sectors.
                         ï¿½ Small businesses provide the majority of jobs in the County.
                         ï¿½ Transfer payments in the form of pensions and social security represent a
                           significant flow of money to the local economy.

                     Projections
                         ï¿½ The County's labor force will grow at a slower pace than the population
                           (approximately 8% in the next several years).
                         ï¿½ Unemployment rates in the County are projected to be between 6.8 and 7.4%
                           in the next several years.
                         ï¿½ Relatively low paying retail and service jobs and construction jobs, will provide
                           the bulk of new employment opportunities.
                         ï¿½ Agricultural profit margins will decrease as taxes and cost of production rise
                           and revenues fluctuate. More agricultural land will be taken out of production
                           in anticipation of higher profits from potential development.
                         ï¿½ Small businesses will continue to grow in number to try to ccapture tourist op-
                           portunities and because of the lack of other job alternatives.
                         ï¿½ Tourism will continue to increase its economic significance while agriculture
                           and the little industrial activity will decline.
                         ï¿½ Imported retirement funds (pensions and social security) will become a larger
                           part of the local economy.



                                                                                 Working Paper #5- Trend Future
                                                                                                       Page v






                                                    DRAFT


            Land
                   Trends
                         Urbanization in the form of sprawl is occurring on the Leelanau Peninsula and
                         is expanding at an increasing rate.
                         Land division practices are continuing to fragment renewable resource lands.
                         The commercial viability of agriculture and its economic importance to the
                         Peninsula are increasingly threatened as sprawl continues.
                         Sprawl is continuing largely unabated because current local and county plan-
                         ning and zoning programs encourage it.

                   Projections
                       ï¿½ Urbanization of the Leelanau Peninsula will continue and will become the fun-
                         damental force in the loss of the Peninsula's rural character and important
                         open spaces.
                       ï¿½ Land fragmentation will fuel continued sprawl, an early demise of agriculture in
                         some areas, and result in significantly higher taxes due to both increased land
                         values and the higher costs of providing public services.
                       ï¿½ The Leelanau Peninsula will witness a decline in agricultural acreage as farm-
                         land is converted to residential and other urban land uses.
                       ï¿½ Community unrest and political pressures will heighten as local and county
                         governmental entities grapple with diverse community attitudes in their inde-
                         pendent efforts to better manage growth.


            Public Finance
                   Trends
                       ï¿½ The tax base is growing with new development.
                       ï¿½ While there are significant differences in millage rates among local units of
                         government in the County, all are generally increasing.
                       ï¿½ On a per capita basis, the County receives lower than state average alloca-
                         tions from most state departments.

                   Projections
                       ï¿½ New revenues from development will eventually fail to pay for associated
                         costs of community services because development is too spread out.
                       ï¿½ Millage rates will become more disparate as more developed, wealthier com-
                         munities increase millages at a higher rate than communities of modest or low
                         incomes in order to meet growing service burdens.
                       ï¿½ While public service needs will increase, state and federal aid will not propor-
                         tionately increase.


            Transportation
                   Trends
                       ï¿½ The automobile will remain the dominant mode of transportation and is in-
                         creasing faster than the population.
                       ï¿½ Traffic levels are increasing Peninsula-wide, although the rates are higher
                         along traditionally lower volume roadways.


         Wofkng Paper #5 - Trend Future
        Page W





                                                          DRAFT

                             The increases in travel time, congestion, and traffic hazards spurred by
                             growth and development are exacerbated by the circuitous roadway network
                             in the County.
                             The need for major roadway improvements is increasing while available funds             0
                             are decreasing.
                             Road ends are increasingly serving as public access sites -to the area water
                             resources.
                             Congestion is most apparent in urban and activity centers; where seasonal
                             residents compete with permanent residents for parking.

                      Projections
                             The number of single occupancy passenger vehicles will continue to grow at a
                             faster rate than the population.
                             Significant decreases in the level of service of both primary and secondary
                             roadway corridors will be experienced as traffic volumes continue to increase.
                             Travel time will lengthen and traffic safety will become increasingly threatened
                             at rates proportionally'higher than area population growth.
                             Future transportation funding will not be sufficient to resolve the inadequacies
                             of the Peninsula's roadway network.
                             Parking and congestion problems will increase in the urban centers and key
                             activity centers as tourism grows.
                             Increased conflicts will evolve between visitors and waterfront property owners
                             along road ends.


              Community Services
                     Trends
                          ï¿½  Community leaders and the citizenry are recognizing potential needs for addi-
                             tional community services (e.g., education, health, recreation),.
                          ï¿½  An older population is becoming established in the County that is accustomed
                             to urbanized levels of service.
                          ï¿½  Demand on fire and police services is rising.
                          ï¿½  Youth services are limited in the County and needs for them appear to be in-
                             creasing.

                     Projections
                          ï¿½  While the need for additional community services is recognized, the financial
                             support to provide them is not there.
                          ï¿½  An older population will place more demands on community service systems,
                             in particular, health care and emergency services.
                          ï¿½  Needs of those with low incomes will increase as cost of living rises in the
                             County.
                          ï¿½  Child care and child service needs for households in poverty will increase.
                          ï¿½  Fire, emergency response, police calls and public annoyance crimes
                             (trespassing, disorderly conduct and vandalism) will increase with additional
                             seasonal population increases.



                                                                                     Working P4)er #5- Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page Y#






                                                      DRAFT


            Infrastructure
                    Trends
                        ï¿½ The current sprawl pattern of land development minimizes the pressure for
                          new or expanded public infrastructure systems.
                        ï¿½ New public infrastructure systems to serve existing developed areas are rela-
                          tively costly due to the small population centers and limited cost sharing op-
                          portunities.

                    Projections
                        ï¿½ Infrastructure will play a limited, but increasing role in the Peninsula as urban-
                          ization continues.
                        ï¿½ The provision of new infrastructure in existing villages will be more costly, and
                          hence less likely, than the provision of new facilities as a part of new large
                          scale development.


             Environment
                    Trends
                        ï¿½ Air quality continues to decline due largely to land use activities hundreds of
                          miles away within the Lake Michigan Basin.
                        ï¿½ Sprawl-like development is the leading threat to the quality of land and water
                          resources.
                        ï¿½ Surface waters are vulnerable to contamination due to the lack of a coordi-
                          nated stormwater management program.
                        ï¿½ New sites of groundwater contamination are being discovered.
                        0 Significant losses of sensitive environments (wetlands, sand dunes, flood-
                          plains, high risk erosion areas, shorelines) are continuing from many small in-
                          cremental encroachments.
                        ï¿½ Solid waste disposal is not the huge problem it is in most counties for the
                          foreseeable future, but is likely to be later unless a stronger multi-county solid
                          waste disposal alliance is created.

                    Projections
                        ï¿½ Air quality levels will remain high throughout the Peninsula, though pollution
                          from hundreds of miles away will continue to lower air quality.
                        ï¿½ The existing high surface water quality of inland lakes and streams may be
                          reduced as new development occurs in the absence of a coordinated
                          stormwater management program.
                        ï¿½ The identification of new sites of groundwater contamination will result in new
                          efforts to clean up existing sites of contamination and to prevent future ones.
                        ï¿½ Decreases in the quality and quantity of sensitive environments, including
                          wetlands, woodlands, shoreline and dune areas, will likely occur with future
                          growth.
                        ï¿½ The Peninsula's solid waste disposal needs for the foreseeable future will be
                          adequately addressed by implementation of the County's current solid waste
                          management plan. However, long term needs will require a stronger multi-
                          county alliance.


         Wotkng Paper #5 - Trend Future
         Page viii





                                                       DRAFT


                                                 INTRODUCTION



         Purpose of Working Paper

             The purpose of this working paper is to stimulate thought and discussion about the future.
         Rather than rely on sophisticated projections of many variables which in turn imust be founded
         on a set of assumptions, which may or may not be viewed as reasonable (or perhaps even
         likely) by most people, this working paper examines the future based on a very simple
         premise. What will the future be like if it merely reflects a continuation of existing trends?

             After examining the current trend future, several questions will likely come to mind. For ex-
         ample:

                   ï¿½If the future turns out to be a continuation of recent trends, is that what the citizens
                    of the Peninsula want? Is it a desirable future?
                   ï¿½Does it represent a quality of life at least equal to that presently enjoyed?
                   ï¿½Does it represent a sustainable future?
                   ï¿½Will it leave the next generation with reasonable options or will exploitation of natu-
                    ral resources and current opportunities leave future generations with more prob-
                    lems than possibilities?
                   ï¿½Is the public prepared for the loss of agricultural land and open spaces that would
                    occur?
                   ï¿½Are citizens prepared for the growth that is likely to occur even if there were no
                    changes in local or County policies or both?
                   ï¿½Are County and local governments prepared for the new demands, for services in-
                    herent in the increases in both year round and seasonal populations?
                   ï¿½Are citizens prepared for the higher taxes necessary to pay for new services?

             Following a presentation on September 5 based on material in this repoil, the Leelanau
         General Plan Steering Committee was asked as a group the following questions:

                   Is the trend future different from what you expected?
                   Is it what you want?
                   If not, why not? If so, why?

             The Steering Committee responded "Yes" to the first question and "No" to the second.
         Reasons expressed in opposition to the trend future ranged from a loss of open space, to
         higher taxes, to a lack of good paying employment opportunities for youth in the County who
         may want to stay and make a living here. No one expressed support for the current trend fu-
         tu re.

         Your Opinions are Important-Please Share Them

             The Leelanau County Planning Department, Leelanau County Planning Commission, Lee-
         lanau General Plan Steering Committee, County Board of Commissioners and the elected of-
         ficials in your local government want to know your thoughts about this report. Do you want the
                                                                                Working Paper #5- Trend Future
                                                                                                      Page ix






                                                      DRAFT

         current trends to continue? If yes, why? If not, how do you want the County to grow and
         change? Please let people know what you think and why.


         Data Qualifiers

             This report relies largely on statistical indicators of change. In many instances the specific
         information most desirable to document a trend was not readily available. As a result, surro-
         gates had to be used. None of the data presented was originally collected. It has all been as-
         sembled by other agencies and most of it has been reported elsewhere. It is possible that
         there are errors, although efforts have.been made to prevent any new errors by reporting it
         here. An effort has also been made to present available information simply. There may be
         other ways to interpret the same data. Feel free to contact the County Planning Department
         about any errors, questions or comments you may have on the data presented herein.

             All of the data has been presented exclusively for the Peninsula. No effort has been made
         to identify, collect and display information related to any of the islands that are a part of Lee-
         lanau County. In large part this is because of the lack of such available information.


         Presentation Format

             The presentation style, format and structure of this report is modeled after a similar report
         prepared by the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments in 1990 entitled The "Business
         as Usual" Trend Future: The Data Base. That pioneering report has spawned a number of
         similar efforts because of the simplicity and clarity with which important trend information can
         be conveyed. The authors of this working paper both acknowledge and thank the authors of
         the SEMCOG report for their foresight and creativity.


         "Big Picture" Considerations

             This working paper documents current trends facing the County in eight different cate-
         gories:
             ï¿½ Population
             ï¿½ Economy
             ï¿½ Land
             ï¿½ Public Finance
             ï¿½ Transportation
             ï¿½ Community Services
             ï¿½ Environment.

             Together these trends present the prospect of significant change in the Peninsula over the
         next two decades. Most formidable are changes to the people and to the land. If the current
         trends continue, within 20 years Leelanau County will:
                    Have a resident population
                        - at least 50% greater than the present
   0                    - older than the present

         Wor;dng Paper #5 - Trend Future
         Page x





                                                      DRAFT

                           that is one-seventh to one-tenth of the seasonal population
                           with greater disparity between the wealthy and the poor.
                    Have an economy more dependent on tourism
                         ï¿½ with more commercial and tourist oriented establishments
                         ï¿½ with more low paying commercial and service sector jobs
                         ï¿½ with fewer agricultural establishments and jobs.
                    Have land that
                         ï¿½ is characterized more by sprawl and an early stage of urbanization than dis-
                           tinct rural and urban areas
                         ï¿½ has a noticeable loss in its rural character
                         ï¿½ has considerably less agriculture
                           has many more houses in rural areas
                           has considerably less open space
                           has fewer views of public resources
                           with more open space in 'Yards" and less in fields, orchards and woods
                           continues to be fragmented and developed in rural areas in part because of
                           local planning and zoning programs that encourage it.
                    Have public finance that is characterized by a
                         ï¿½ growing tax base
                         ï¿½ but also higher taxes
                         ï¿½ great differences in millage rates within the County with the wealthier com-
                           munities having much higher rates than the poorer ones
                         ï¿½ greater reliance on local revenues over state or federal ones.
                    Have roads with
                         - considerably more traffic
                         - longer travel times
                         - less safety due to more driveways and higher volumes
                         - more congestion and serious parking problems in the villages.
                    Have community services which
                         ï¿½ are inadequate to meet those in need
                         ï¿½ are inadequate to meet the level of service desired by the elderly
                         ï¿½ are significantly greater in terms of police and fire service in order to meet
                           growing needs
                         ï¿½ are inadequate to meet some of the special needs of youth.
                    Have infrastructure which
                         ï¿½ is still largely limited to the villages but needed elsewhere
                         ï¿½ is very costly to install because of the low density sprawl devolopment pattern.
                    Have an environment which
                         ï¿½ has a reduced level of air quality due to activities hundreds of miles away has
                           a surface water quality that is somewhat reduced in quality due to the lack of
                           stormwater management
                         ï¿½ has more instances of contaminated groundwater
                         ï¿½ has had additional losses of wetlands, sand dunes and other sensitive envi-
                           ronments through incremental encroachments
                         ï¿½ needs to find other alternatives for solid waste disposal.

             These changes are presented as trends and projections in the body of this report. Addi-
         tional background information is also presented.

                                                                               Working Paper #5- Trend Future
                                                                                                    Page xi






                                                        DRAFT

                                                       Chapter 1

                                                 POPULATION


          INTRODUCTION

             Characteristics of the permanent residents of Leelanau County have changed steadily over
          the past forty years. Four different populations appear to be emerging. The first are lifelong
          residents, the second are native Americans, the third are immigrants, and the last is the sea-
          sonal population. The latter two are more affluent than the first two groups and tend to have
          higher educations. This is resulting in the creation of "haves" and "have nots" and some jeal-
          ousies and tensions between the various groups. The likelihood of conflicts between values
          held by each population may grow if the disparities between them become more acute.

             However, the precise characteristics of the existing population, as represented by the 1990
          census, won't be known until final count data is released in the spring or summer of 1992. So-
          phisticated projections also won't be available until then. However, some preliminary data is
          available for comparative analysis with past census data and with simple straight line projec-
          tions. In general, this data confirms the continuation of trends that began several decades ago
          and indicates the following emerging patterns:

             ï¿½  Total permanent population is increasing at about 2.5 - 3% per year.
             ï¿½  In-migration continues to be the primary source of population growth.
             -  Seasonal population continues to grow at a faster rate than permanent population.
                While the County population is aging, it is not the number over age 65 who are increas-
                ing the median age as much as it is the "baby boomers" reaching middle age.
             ï¿½  Average household size continues to fall as new households are created faster than
                population grows.
             ï¿½  Multi-unit residential facilities are increasing in response to the growth of single person
                and childless households and the relative decline of married couple families.
             ï¿½  New seasonal housing units are built about twice the rate of permanent residences.
             ï¿½  Persons of low income are proportionally fewer, but the disparity between the wealthy
                and the poor is growing. The need for more affordable housing is becoming more acute.
             ï¿½  The number of school-aged children is increasing at a slower rate than the general popu-
                lation.












                                                                                   Woridng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                         Page 1-1





                                                          DRAFT

                                                         Chapter I

                                                   POPU      LATION


            INTRODUCTION

               Characteristics of the permanent residents of Leelanau County have chcanged steadily over
            the past forty years. Four different populations appear to be emerging. The first are lifelong
            residents, the second are native Americans, the third are immigrants, and the last is the sea-
            sonal population. The latter two are more affluent than the first two groulm and tend to have
            higher educations. This is resulting in the creation of "haves" and "have nots" and some jeal-
            ousies and tensions between the various groups. The likelihood of conflicts between values
            held by each population may grow if the disparities between them become more acute.

               However, the precise characteristics of the existing population, as repre.sented by the 1990
            census, won't be known until final count data is released in the spring or summer of 1992. So-
            phisticated projections also won't be available until then. However, some preliminary data is
            available for comparative analysis with past census data and with simple straight line projec-
            tions. In general, this data confirms the continuation of trends that began several decades ago
            and indicates the following emerging patterns:

               ï¿½ Total permanent population is increasing at about 2.5 - 3% per year.
               ï¿½ In-migration continues to be the primary source of population growth.
               ï¿½ Seasonal population continues to grow at a faster rate than permanent population.
               ï¿½ While the County population is aging, it is not the number over age 6.15 who are increas-
                 ing the median age as much as it is the "baby boomers" reaching middle age.
               ï¿½ Average household size continues to fall as new households are created faster than
                 population grows.
               ï¿½ Multi-unit residential facilities are increasing in response to the growth of single person
                 and childless households and the relative decline of married couple families.
               ï¿½ New seasonal housing units are built about twice the rate of permanent residences.
               ï¿½ Persons of low income are proportionally fewer, but the disparity between the wealthy
                 and the poor is growing. The need for more affordable housing is becoming more acute.
               ï¿½ The number of school-aged children is increasing at a slower rate than the general popu-
                 lation.












                                                                                    Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                          Page 1-1





                                                                         DRAFT




                                                                        Figure 1-1

                                                    Leelanau County Population: 1860 - 2010*
                                                                 projections made in 1985)


              25,000


              20,000


              15,000


              10,000


               5,000


                     0
                              (M     CD      CD     C=>    CD      C=)    C')    C)      CD     C=      C=)     =1    =1             CD      a)
                              r@     00      C"                                  -d-     LO     LO      r@      00    cr)     M      C@,
                              00     00      00     CM             M      a)     M       cm     M       M       M     Cn      Cn     C=)
                                                                                                                                     CI4     CN

                                          Source: Decennial Census 1960-1990; Projections, Michigan Dept of Management Budget




                                                                      Figure 1-2

                                                         Population Change From 1940 to 1990

                   Suffons Bay Vill.
                 Suttons Bay Twp     . .....
                         Solon Twp.
                       Northport Vill.
                       Leland Twp.
                                                                                                                 01990
              E      Leelanau Twp.
                       Kasson Twp.                                                                                   1940
              CD
              0   Glen Arbor Twp.
                        Empire Vill.
                       Empire Twp.
                     Elmwood Twp.
                   Cleveland Twp.
                   Centerville TwP.
                     Bingham Twp.        IIIIIIIIUIIIILU
                                       0            500          1000          1500           2000           2500         3000          3500
                                                                                                                 @
                                                                                                                 01 go
                                                                                                                 1111 9940J



                                                                  Source: Derived from Decennial Census 1940-199o



            Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
           Page 1-2


                                                      DRAFT

          The year-round population will continue to increase between 2.5 - 3.0% per year.

             Leelanau County's lumbering era popula-                          Table 1-1
          tion reached its peak in 1910 at 10,608.
          Between 1910 and 1930 the population
          dropped 29%, to 8,206. Since that time, the                   Percentage qIncrEiase in
          population has continually increased, with the                  County Population
          most dramatic changes coming since 1960.
          In the last four decades the County has                    Year           Percentage Increase
          experienced a 91% increase in population                1950-1960                 +7.8%
          (see Table 1-1). In 1985, the Michigan                  1960-1970                +16.6%
          Department of Management & Budget                       1970-1980                +28.8%
          projected by the year 2010, the County                  1980-1990                 +18%
          population will increase by another 27%,                1990-2010                 +27%
          reaching 20,980. Projections presented in the
          County's 1989 Solid Waste Plan show the              Population increases in the County      have
          population reaching 20,300 by the year 2007.      not been consistent acros's, all jurisdictions
          Straight line projection based on the 1970,       (see Figure 1-2). For instance, the percent-
          1980 and 1990 census figures reveal a             age of change in population between 1940
          population in 2010 of approximately 23,000        and 1990 among local units of government
          (see Figure 1-1).                                 range from a high of +335% in Elmwood
                                                            Township to a low of +2% in the Village of
                                                            Northport (see Figure 1-3). This pattern will
                                                            likely continue without additional infrastruc-
                                                            ture in the villages (see Chapter 7).



                                                    Figure 1-3
                                   Percent Change in Population by Local
                                 Units of Government in Leelanau County
                                             Between 1940 and 1990


          





                                                         DRAFT




                                                       Figure 1-4


                                       Seasonal Population for Leelanau County



               120,000-                                                           RUNHU;
                              El Estimated in 1975
               100,000-
                              El Estimated in 1981                                 1111111114 IIIINI!!
               80,000-
                                  Estimated in 1987
                                                                                 H

               60,000-                                                 .. ... .


                                                                       ...... ....
               40,000-
                                                                                                       ilimplill R I'll!, q,

               20,000-


                                                                                      iiii.,
                                                                                                 p
                                                                                                  ..........
                    0
                            December               March to               Juneto               September
                                to                   May                  August                   to
                             February                                                          November
                          Source: Leelanau County 1989 Solid Waste Plan, 1975 a 1981 figure NWUCOG, 1987 Est. by Gosling & Czubak




























          Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page 1-4





                                                      DRAFT

          Population increases due to in-migration        will account for the majority of additional
          population increases.

              Over the last eight years, on an annual       In fact, in-migration, betweEm 1980 and 1990
          basis, there were three times more births         amounted to 1,703 persons and accounted
          than deaths in the County (see Figure 1-4).       for 68% of the County's population gain in
          Between 1981 and 1988 the average number          that time period. Net in-migration between
          of births per year was 215 and the average        1970 and 1979 amounted 'to 2,738 persons
          number of deaths was 76. The higher birth         and accounted for 87% of the population in-
          rate, however, does not account for the entire    crease during that period.
          population gain experienced by the County.











































                                                                              Working Paper #5 -Trend Future
                                                                                                  Page 1-5






                                                                                 DRAFT




                                                                                Figure 1-5

                                                      Births and Deaths Recorded in Leelanau
                                                                 County Between 1981-1988


                                         300


                                          200


                                                                              ............. I .. .....
                                           100                              iiiNMIiiIIIIIII 1111iMINIIIIIIII
                                                                        TIM! !lNIIIMT!I!l IIIIIIIINIIIIIi.

                                                                                                                                   MIM; MIN
                                               0                                                                                   Nii Mi

                                                   1981
                                                           1982
                                                                                                                                   i
                                                                    1983
                                                                             1984
                                                                                       1985                                               Births
                                                                                                 1986                   .........
                                                                                                            1987             ::: -    Deaths
                          Source: Michigan Vital Statistics System, Office of State Registrar, Michigan                1988
                          Dept of Public Health




































              Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
              Page 1-6





                                                      DRAFT

          Peak seasonal population will continue to outnumber rosident populatfon by at least 7
          to 1.

             While there's limited data available on the    season (June-August) the seasonal popula-
          County's seasonal population, it appears to       tion outnumbers the year-round population
          be increasing as evidenced by sales tax col-      by nearly 7 to 1. This number is up consider-
          lected by tourism related business, increases     ably from 1975 estimates that suggested
          in jobs related to tourism and visitation to      peak seasonal population outnumbered year
          Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore            round residents by 4 to 1 (see Figure 1-5). It
          (see Figures 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10 and 2-11 in      should be noted that 1981 -figures are down
          Chapter 2). The most recent available esti-       from 1975 figures due to the recession.
          mates (1987) suggest that during the peak









































                                                                              Woddng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                  Page 1-7






                                                                                             DRAFT




                                                                                         Figure 1-6

                                                             Percentage of the Population by Age Group

                                        60--,
                                                             El 1960
                                        so-                  E3 1970
                                                             El 1980
                                        40-
                                                             01990

                                  CEL,  30-
                                 Cl-

                                                                                 ....... ......
                                        20-



                                                                                                                   V
                                        110-



                                                                                                                                                 ...........
                                                                                      .......                     ...
                                                         ...... . . ......             .....


                                         0
                                                      Under 5                          5-17                          18-64                           65+

                                                                                          Source: Decennial Census





                                                                                       Figure 1-7

                                                                         Median Age for 1950 to 1990

                              El Michigan                     N Leelanau                     ED Benzie                      13 Grand Traverse

                  40

                  35   - -

                  30
                                                                                                                                                       ....        111gl
                                                                                                            Hi
                  25
                                                                                                                        ....              .... .
                                                                                                                                            .........

                                                           ....                         ......
                  20       ....

                  15



                                                                                                            ........... ...
                  10 -
                                                                                                            ...........
                                                                                                            .. ..............
                                                                                                            I ........
                                                                         I ...........
                                                                         ...                                . . ..........
                                                                                                            .........
                                                                                                            ...........
                                                                             ...........
                           ....                                          . ...........                      . ... ...........
                                                             ...             ..........                     ..... . ........... ....
                                                                         . . ..... ....                     i........... ....
                                                                             .........                      . ...........
                                                                         .. . ..............                . ......
                                                                                          ...               . . .....
                                                                         ... .. ...........                 . ......
                                                                             ...........
                                                                                                            . ... .............
                                                                             ...........
                                                                             ...........                    . ...........
                                                                             ..........                     . .....
                                                                                                            .. ...........
                                                                             . .........                      ......
                                                                         . . ...........                    . .. .. .....
                                                             ...         . ....... .     ....
                                                                          . ....... ....
                    0
                                    1950                           1960                            1970                          1980                           1990

                                                                                      Source: Decennial Census



               Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
               Page 1-8





                                                           DRAFT

           Median age will continue to rise, staying higher than the state's average. Older resi-
           dents will be more economically well-to-do and politically active. They will demand a
           higher quality of life and expect a higher level of services.

              The percentage of the population over 65            increase in median age can primarily be at-
           in 1960 was approximately 12%. It had risen            tributed to retirees relocating in the County
           slightly to approximately 15% by 1990 (see             and the relatively large number of baby
           Figure 1-6). By the year 2010, the Michigan            boomers reaching middle age.
           Department of Management and Budget
           projects that approximately 13% of the popu-              Illustrations of age/sex shifts over time
           lation will remain over 65.                            can be seen in Figures 1-8 through 1-10. In
                                                                  1960 those under 19 made up a much larger
              While state trends show an aging popula-            segment of the population than that same
           tion (i.e., an increase in median age) Lee-            group did in 1980. By 1980, the shifts in the
           lanau County consistently shows greater in-            population in older age groups can be seen.
           creases than the state (see Figure 1-7). In            According to projections for the year 2000 by
           1970 the County's median age was 29.3                  the Michigan Department of Management
           years of age (the state median was 26.5                and Budget, the top age groups will have the
           years), by 1990 the median age increased to            heavier gains, again, as tile baby boomer
           36.5 years (vs. 32.6 for the state). When              generation ages. What should also be con-
           comparing median age to neighboring coun-              sidered are the wave of baby boomer chil-
           ties, Leelanau is higher than Benzie (1990             dren coming of age to bear children.
           median age 33.2) but lower than Grand Tra-
           verse County (1990 median age 37.5). The



                                                        Figure 1-8

                                    1960 Age-Sex Pyramid for Leelanau County

                                                                  ...................... .................... ... ..... .@-
                    ..............................................


                                          ...........


                                                   ......                                         -female

                                                                                               El imale
                                        r7777777=.








                                                                         7=7=77=777rm



                            .............................
                                                        M-TIF
                                ................................ R a...... ..........
                 ............... ..............................                                   =3

           -600            -400             -200              0              200              400              600




                                                                                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 1-9






                                                            DRAFT



                                                           Figure 1-9
                                      1980 Age-Sex Pyramid for Lee'lanau County



                                                                                                     El female

                                                                                                     ED male















           -1000     -800       -600      -400     -200         0        200        400       600        800      1000





                                                          Figure 1-10
                                      2000 Age-Sex Pyramid for Leelanau County


                                              . . . . . . . .....
                                                                            MM
                                                                                                    female
                                                                     M.M.M.M.I. MOM?,

                                                                                                E)  male


                                                         40-44.,.

                                                        ..S5.




                                                                              I II MR
                                                F



                                         F77777777=  ......





            1500            -1000             -500              0               500              1000             1500



          Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page 1-10





                                                        DRAFT

           The Native American population will continue to grow but will still comprise a relatively
           smail percentage of the total population unless In-migration increases.
              The vast majority of the County's popula-        and identification by more persons of their 0
           tion is white. The highest number of minod-         Native American ancestry.
           ties in the County are Native Americans, who
           compdse almost 3% of the population (451               The success of the recently expanded
           persons). By comparison, in 1970 and 1980           gambling casino is providing job and eco-
           they represented slightly over 1 % of the           nomic opportunities for Tdbe members.
           population with 131 and 178 persons, re-            Given increasing toudsm in the County, this
           spectively. The increase may be due to in-          facility is likely to take on a more significant
           creased in-migration of Native Americans            role for the Native American population. Af-
                                                               fordable housing is also a strong attractor.








































                                                                                  Wor;dng Pager #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                      Page 1-11






                                                                   DRAFT




                                                                Figure 1 -11

                                  Number of Households in Leelanau County Fiom 1950-1990


                                    7000-

                                                                                                     . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .


                                                                                                        ..........
                                    6000-


                                .:2 5000-
                                  Q

                                    4000-
                                                                             .............
                                                                            ..............
                                                                            ..............
                                                                             ............

                                                                                      ..........
                                    3000-
                                              .......... . .
                                  E
                                                 .......... ......
                                              ..............
                                              ...............
                                              ..............
                                    2000  . .. ..........


                                                                             .............
                                    1000-


                                                            ...... ..... .
                                                                         .... .......... .
                                        0-
                                               1950         1960          1970          1980          1990

                                                                  Source: Decennial Census






                                                               Figure 1-12

                                          Leelanau County Percentage Change in
                                            Population and Households 1950-1990





                                  180%
                                                                                           .45.
                                  160%
                             w    1400/6-
                            vc    120%-
                                  100%-       A                              1111111111 !IlM11l            MMil
                                                                           Mid     iMMI!                   Miilil
                                  80%
                                                                           INN
                                                                           Oil
                            U
                                  60%
                                  40%-
                                  200%
                                    o,7,
                                                  1950-1990                        1950-1990
                                                  1
                                                            in
                                                  ncrease                          Increase in
                                                  Population                       Households



           Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
           Page 1- 12


                                                                   DRAFT

            Increases in the number of households will continue to outstrip increases in popula-
            tion by at least 50%, and as a result, average household sizes will remain relatively
            small. On a per-unit basis, more land will be used to accommodate fewer people.

                The number of households in Leelanau                      1950 to 2.62 in 1990 [a decqfqine of one person
            County have increased along with its popula-                  per unit, a 37% decrease (see Figure 1-13)].
            tion (see Figure 1-11). However, the percent-                 Ranges in persons per household among
            age of increase in households has been sig-                   local units of government in 1990 varied from
            nificantly greater than that of the population                a high of 2.90 in Kasson Township to a low of
            (see Figure 1-12). This is because of an in-                  2.13 persons per household in Glen Arbor
            crease in seasonal housing, the number of                     Township.
            single person households and the fact that
            people are now less likely to share housing                       Married couple families are becoming a
            (e.g., extended family households). In fact,                  slightly smaller percentage of households in
            the number of households increased 164%                       Leelanau County. In 1980 they represented
            between 1940 and 1990 compared to a 91%                       about 69% of all households, by 1990 the
            increase in population.                                       percentage decreased to 668q%. From an his-
                                                                          torical viewpoint, nearly 81% of all house-
                Average household size in the County de-                  holds in 1950 were married couple families.
            creased from 3.6 Dersons 8qoer household in



                                                                Figure 1-13


                               Leelanau County Population Per Household From 1950 to 1990



Source:Decennial Census






									Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
												    Page 1-13






                                                                           DRAFT



                                                                        Figure 1-14


                                                     Percent Change in Housing Units
                                                              Between 1970 and 1990



                               140.00%-                      % Increase Between
                                                             1970 and 1980
                               120.00%-                      % Increase Between
                               100.00%-                      1980 and 1990

                          U2    80.00%-

                                                         .................. .
                                                         .............. .
                                                         .............. ..
                                60.00%-
                                                         ... ........ ...                       ............
                                                           .........                                    ......
                         CL
                                                ...........
                                                ......................
                                40.00%-         ...........
                                                ....................
                                                ................ ..
                                                ...................
                                                ................ .                  . . . . . . . . . .
                                                ..................
                                20.00%-         :                         .-,- :.'
                                                ...............


                                                   ..............
                                  0.00%-         ..............
                                                     Total Housing Units                 Vacational, Seasonal, or Migratory
                                                                          Source: Decennial Census




                                                                         Figure 1-15

                                        Residential Building Activity in Leelanau County
                                                               Between 1980 and 1990
                                           1 unit
            250.                           2 Units

                                           3-4 Units
            200

                                           5+ Units

            150



            100



            50



                                                                                                                                 7 1
                                             Un'


                                           2 Un4s


                                                U
                                      . @3-4nfts
                                           5+   Units











                    1980         1981        1982        1983        1984        1985        1986        1987        1988        1989        1990
                                                     Source: Michigan State Housing Authority and Bureau of Census

            Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
            Page 1- 14


                                                  DRAFT
        There will continue to be an increase in demand and production of multi-unit residen-.
        tial facilities. The impacts of such development (both perceived and real) will affect the
        rural character and public facilities in specific areas. Single person and childless
        households will become a larger percentage of total households. Many of these
        households will want non-traditional housing arrangements that fit their lifestyles (e.g.,
        condominiums, and apartments vs. large lot single family homes). The percentage in-
        crease in number of seasonal housing units will be more than twice as high as the in-
        crease in year-round units.
        In the last decade the number of total                             homes are replacing them. This is most true
        housing units in the County increased just                         around inland lakes. In other cases, old farm
        over 23%. The number of seasonal or migra-                         houses are being demolished and new
        tory units increased over 125% in that same                        homes built nearby.
        time period (see Figure 1-14). The majority of                  
        new housing units still tend to be single fam-                     The nature of the County's housing units
        ily detached, but in recent years multifamily                      is still dominated by single family detached
        units have also increased in number (see                           homes. The most notable change in types of
        Figure 1-15). Of the 2,200 units permitted be-                     structures between 1980 and 1990 is the in-
        tween 1980 and May of 1991, 79% were                               crease in mobile homes, which have more
        single family units. The remainder were multi-                     than doubled in the 10 year period. This may
        family; 15% were in structures with5 or more                       be a direct market response to the need for
        units; and 6% were in structures with 2-4                          affordable housing.
        units (see Figure 1-16). Between 1980 and
        1990 there were 74 demolitions in the County                       The majority of the County's housing is
        (see Figure 1-17). In some cases, prime                            fairly new with over 50% of the housing stock
        properties are being purchased, older homes                        being built since 1970.
        demolished and newer. more elaborate



                                                           Figure 1-16

                                      Residential Building Activity Between 1980 and 1990

                                                       Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                     				   Page 1-15                                                   
                                                  




                                                                           DRAFT



                                                                        Figure 1-17

                                   Residential Building Activity in Leelanau County Between
                                                                          1980 and 1990


                300
                                     El Dernolftions
                                                                                                                                        10.
                250
                                         Total

                200
                                                                                                                              Hill
                150 -


                100


                  50


                                                                                                                                                  I fill
                                                                                                                                           I r .
                   0 -
                         1980        1981        1982        1983       1984        1985        1986        1987        1988        1989       1990
                                                        Source: Michigan State Housing Authority and Bureau of Census




                                                                       Figure 1-18


                                                         Per Capita Personal Income


             $18,000-
             $16,000     -                                                                                                131959
             $14,000-                                                                                                     E3 1968
             $12,000-                                                                                                     01978
             $10,000     -          po:
                                                                                                                          01988            4
               $8,000-
               $6,000
               $4,000               1111111 .1
                                                                                                    . . . . .....
               $2,000
                    $0
                            Michigan                           Leelanau                            Benzie                       Grand Traverse
                                                       Source: U.S. Dept of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Anaiy@
                                                                                                                                                     ! 110-
































             Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
             Page 1-16





                                                         DRAFT

           The margin between the wealthy and the poor will widen. Those with fewer economic
           resources will find it more and more difficult to survive as cost of living and cost of
           public services rise.

              Poverty rates declined between 1970 and           family incomes increased almost 710%. The
           1980 (1990 figures unavailable). In 1970             state figure increased by 528%; Grand Tra-
           nearly 13% of the County's population was            verse, 630%; and Benzie, (323% (see Figure
           below the poverty level. By 1980 8.3% of the         1-19).
           population was below the poverty level.
                                                                   Despite the percentage decrease in
              While per capita income of Leelanau               poverty level and increases in income, a
           County is lower than the state's average, the        slightly higher number of individuals receive
           County (since 1968) has had a consistently           assistance from the Department of Social
           higher per capita income than neighboring            Services. From 1982 to 1990 between 812
           Grand Traverse and Benzie Counties. Be-              (1986) and 924 (1990) people received pub-
           tween 1959 and 1988 the State's per capita           lic assistance per month in the County (see
           incomes increased by 630% while Leelanau             Figure 1-20).
           County's increased 865%. Grand Traverse
           and Benzie County's per capita incomes in-              The percentage of recipients in the
           creased 710% and 580%, respectively, in              County ranged from a high of 8% in 1982 to
           that same time period (see Figure 1-18).             a low of 5.8% in 1988. Leelanau County has
                                                                a low percentage of its population receiving
              Median family income in Leelanau County           public assistance compared to other counties
           has also increased at a greater pace than the        in the state. Transfer payments coming into
           state and its neighboring counties. Between          the County in 1990 to public assistance re-
           1950 and 1980 (note alternative time frame           cipients amounted to 1.4 million dollars (see
           from per capita figures) Leelanau County             Figure 1-21).



                                                     Figure 1-19
                                        Median Family Income for 1950-1980                            El 1950
                         25,000                                                                       El 1960
                                                                                                      El 1970
                         20,000-
                                                                                                      01980
                         15,000-


                         10,000-



                                                            ...     . . . . . . ..... .....
                          5,0000         1 1!
                              0
                                    Michigan        Leelanau    Grand Traverse    Benzie
                                                     Source: Decennial Census


                                                                                   Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                       Page 1-17






                                                         DRAFT




                                                      Figure 1-20

                                    Monthly Average Number of Public Assistance
                                              Recipients in Leelanau County

            940

            920

            900

            880

            860

            840

            820
          E
          2 800

            780

            760

            740
                1982                   1984                   1986                   1988                    1990
                                               Source., Michigan Department of Social Services




                                                       Figure 1-21


                                      Total Annual Public Assistance Payments to
                                              Recipients in Leelanau County


         1,600,000

         1,400,000

         1,200,000

         1,000,000

          800,000

          600,000  - -

          400,000

          200,000

                  0
                   ,..... . ................... ... . ............................ . .




















                   1982                 1984                   1986                  1988                   1990
      0                                        Source: Michigan Department of Social Services

          Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page 1- 18






                                                       DRAFT

          Smaller families, senior, childless and single-person households will continue to in-
          crease at a faster rate than nuclear families. As a result, the number of school-aged
          children will not increase at the same rate as the general population. Education levels
          of the County's population will rise with the influx of affluent people.

          Between 1980 and 1990 the number of                   General educational levels have risen in
          school-aged children aged 5-17 decreased           Leelanau County and are expected to con-
          from 22% to 18.5%. While the number of             tinue to rise. In 1970 only 57% of the popula-
          children 5 years and under increased from          tion had a high school diploma. By 1980 the
          6.5% to 7.5%. More significantly, while the to-    figure had risen to 77%. When 1990 figures
          tal population increased 18% in the last           are released, it is anticipated that a still
          decade, the percentage of the population that      higher average percentage will have com-
          are children did not increase.                     pleted high school and that levels of college
                                                             attainment will be relatively high.
          School enrollments have remained relatively
          flat in the last couple of decades in Leelanau
          County (see Figure 1-22).


             Figure 1-22







                                                     Figure 1-22

                               School Enrollment From 1970 to 1991


            4500
             
		4000
                                                                                         Total
            3500 
                                                                                         Northport
            3000
                                                                                         Glen Lake
            2500                                                                          
                                                                                         Leland
            2000
                                                                                         Suttons Bay
            1500                                                                          

            1000                                                                           
               500

                 0
                     1 2  3 4  5 6  7 8  9 0  1 2  3 4  5 6  7 8  9 0
                     7 7  7 7  7 7  7 7  7 8  8 8  8 8  8 8  8 8  8 9
                     9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9  9 9
                     1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1  1 1

                                        Source: Respective School Districts
                                        Traverse City not available
                                 




                                                                                Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                    Page 1-19





                                                         DRAFT

                                                        Chapter 2
          INTRODUCTION                              ECONOMY

              Leelanau County's economy has experience significant shifts over the last several
          decades. In the 1940's agriculture was the prime employer in the county. By 1988 retail and
          service sectors provided the majority of employment. Manufacturing has remained relatively
          stable in terms of the number of jobs provided, but it continues to be a minor employer overall.
          Other key emerging patterns in the local economy are outlined below.

              ï¿½ The County's labor force is growing at a slower pace than it's more urbanized neighbor,
                Grand Traverse County.
              ï¿½ Except in times of severe recession, unemployment rates are lower in Leelanau County
                compared to Benzie and Grand Traverse Counties.
              ï¿½ The County is becoming more dependent on the tourist trade.
              ï¿½ Service and retail establishments and employment are increasing faster than other trade
                sectors.
              ï¿½ Agriculturally based businesses are declining in economic significance relative to other
                sectors.
              ï¿½ Small businesses provide the majority of jobs in the County.
              - Transfer payments in the form of pensions and social security represent a significant flow
                of money to the local economy.























                                                                                   WorKng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                         Page 2-1





                                                                                               DRAFT




                                                                                            Figure 2-1


                                            Leelanau                                        Labor Force
                                      El Grand Traverse
                 40,000                     Benzie
                 35,000

                 30,000
             Cj                                                ....          ....
                                                                             ...          ....                       ....
             2
                                                 ....          ...                        ....
                 25,000
                                                                                                                     M


                                                                                          ......                                   ...
                                    X.           ....
                                                 .....                                    .....                                    ...
                 20,000
                                   .....         ....           ..           ...


             A   15,000
             E                                   ....          ....
                                                                             .....                     ......
                                                                                                       .....         ...                                      ....
                    0,000           ....
                                                              .....                       .....


                   !5 000


                           0
                                 1980          1981         1982          1983         1984          1985         1986          1987         1988          1989          1990
                                                                          Source: Michigan Employment Security Commission

































                 Workng Papter #5 - Trend Future
                 Page 2-2





                                                       DRAFT

          -The County's labor force will grow at a slower pace than the population.

             In the last ten years Leelanau County's           ment Security Commission projects that the
          average annual labor force has ranged be-            labor force will increase 8% to approxi-
          tween a high of 8,350 (in 1983) to a low of          mately 9,000 by 1992. For comparative
          7,650 (in 1985). As of December 1990, the            purposes, Grand Traverse County had a
          labor force was estimated at 8,300 (see              1990 labor force of 36,350; up nearly 15%
          Figure 2-1).                                         since 1985, and is also expected to experi-
                                                               ence an 8% increase in its labor force over
             Overall, since 1985, the County has ex-           the next several years. In contrast, popula-
          perienced approximately an 8.5% increase             tion growth will be about 2.5-3.0% per year.
          in its labor force. The Michigan Employ-








































                                                                                Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                      Page 2-3







                                                      DRAFT




                                                    Figure 2-2


                                             Unemployment Rates
         25.00                                                                   El Michigan

                                                                                    Leelanau
         20.00                                                                      Grand Traverse

                                                                                    Benzie
      E  15.00


                        -7
      P  10.00 -
                                            Mill'


      a_
                   MM
                                   Mill
                                            ...........




                                   ....     .....
          0
           00
           .
                 1980    1981    1982     1983   1984   1985    1986    1987     1988    1989   1990
                                         Source: Michigan Employment Security Commission
                                                                                         , @an
                                                                                          au


                                                                                          Traverse


                                                                                          L













































         Worldng Papter #5 - Trend Future
         Page 2-4







                                                          DRAFT
           Unemployment rates in the County are projected to be between 6.8 and 7.4% In the next
           several years.

              During the recession of the early 1980's,            Centerville Township, with a labor force of
           Leelanau County's unemployment rates                    400 and an unemployment rate of 14.9%.
           were higher than state averages. However,               The low was in Bingham Township with a
           Benzie County tended to have much higher                labor force of 900 and an unemployment
           rates than the state, and Grand Traverse                rate of 3.4%. The highest number in the la-
           County tended to have slightly higher un-               bor force is in Elmwood Township with
           employment rates than the state, fairing                1,950 persons. Differences in unemploy-
           better than Leelanau County in that time.               ment rates and labor force participation be-
           Since 1987, Leelanau County has had un-                 tween local governmental units are ex-
           employment rates lower than or equal to                 pected to continue. This range is so great
           those of the state. This has also been true             that it represents a major disparity in wealth
           of Grand Traverse, but not Benzie County                within the County.
           (see Figure 2-2).
              Within the County unemployment rates
           vary widely. In 1990, the highest rate was in


































                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 2-5






                                                         DRAFT




                                                        Figure 2-3

                                       Employment by Sector for Leelanau County
                                                   Between 1972 and 1988

          600                     1972
                              01976
          500
                              El 1980                                       ...
          400
                                  1984
          300
                              01988
          200
                                                                               :Iii:4
          100
                     -T-fl
                                                       FM           A-            L
            0                                                            +.
                  Transportation       Federal Govt.       Agriculture,          Farm            State & Local
                     & Public             Emp.             Forestry &          Proprietor         Govt. Emp.
                     Utilities                              Fisheries            Emp.
                               Source: Michigan State University: Center for the Revitalization of Industrial States (CRIS),
                                            U.S. Dept of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
                                                                                                                   is


                                                      Figure 2-4
                                       Employment by Sector for Leelanau County
                                                  Between 1972 and 1988
                           El 1972
         1600              El 1976
         1400
         1200              131980
         1000              El 1984
          800  -              1988                                                                     .....
          600
                                                      ::X
                                                       :::::-:-X
          400

          20
            0                          ......                                                          . . . ....
                                   . . . .....                                                          ..
            0
                     Finance      Construction    Retail Trade     Wholesale     Manufacturing      Services
                  Insurance &                                        Trade
                  Real Estate '3  '972
                              El  1976

                                3     0
                              @E8
                                  19


                                  19


                                  1988



                         El @19872
                           E, 1976

                              1980


                              jq@


                              19  8











                               source: Michigan state University: center for the Revitalization to Industfial States (CRIS),
                                            U. S. Dept of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis


         Working Papter #5 - Trend FUN
         Page 2-6






                                                          DRAFT
          Relatively low paying retail and service jobs, and construction jobs, will provide the
          bulk of new employment opportunities.

              Since 1972, the greatest increases in                etors, 67 jobs (13%) and agriculture,
          employment have come in the service and                  forestry and fisheries by 36 jobs (30%).
          retail sectors. The number of jobs in the                Federal government, wholesale trade and
          service sector increased from 871 in 1972                manufacturing employment have stayed
          to 1,433 in 1988 (up 64.5%). The number                  relatively flat (see Figures 2-3 and 2-4).
          of jobs in retail trade have gone from 464 to            These trends are expected to continue as
          957, an increase of 106%. Jobs in con-                   they are largely fueled by increases in
          struction and finance, insurance and real                tourism, in-migration and construction of
          estate have also increased 82% and 36%                   seasonal housing. Unfortunately, many of
          respectively. Jobs attributed to transporta-             the service sector and retail jobs are low
          tion and public utilities increased from 41 to           paying, are seasonal, and are not very
          79 (up 93%). Employment in state and local               stable. They are not very recession proof.
          government, farm proprietor, agriculture,                Rather than broaden the economic base of
          forestry and fisheries has decreased since               the County, they are narrowing it with as-
          1972. State and local government jobs de-                sociated declines in agriculture.
          creased by 113 jobs (20%); farm propri-


          Agricultural profit margins will decrease as taxes and cost of production rise and rev-
          enues fluctuate. More agricultural land will be taken out of production in anticipation of
          higher profits from potential development.

              In 1940, 56% of the County's labor force             of adjoining farmland increase. Associated
          was employed in agriculture. By 1960, 18%                higher taxes, in addition to rising costs of
          of the labor force was employed in agricul-              machinery, seed, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.
          ture. The percentage of reported jobs re-                have increased the cost of production
          lated to agriculture in the 1988 County                  making additional land sales attractive (if
          Business Patterns shows this figure has                  not necessary) to the farmer in years with
          fallen to approximately 10%. Part of this                low market prices for fruits and grains. New
          decline is due to improved mechanization                 nonfarm residents also often complain
          and productivity. Another reason is the                  about typical farm practices making life for
          large increase in other jobs during the                  farmers even more difficult. The end result
          same period. However, the rising in-migra-               is greater incentive to sell farmland for its
          tion and associated demand for rural lots                development value.
          has stimulated farmland sales. As more
          nonfarm related homes are erected, values











                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 2-7







                                                                     DRAFT



                                                                  Figure 2-5

                                                Leelanau County Establishments By Trade
                70           Agriculture
                         El Transportation
                60
                         ED Construction

                50
                                                                  .......            .....
                             Manufacturing
                                                                  ......             ......
                                                                  ......             ......                                 .....
                                                                  ......             ......
                40           Nonclassified
                                                                                     ....               7M



                                                                  .....              .....              ....                .....
                30
                                                                                        ...                                 .....
                                                                  .......            .....
                                                                                                             IR
                                                                                     .....                                  ..... .i
                20 - -
                                               .....              .....


                10                                                .......                                               . . . .....

                                                                  ........           .....
                                                                  .....       . . . ......
                                                                              . . . . .....             ......
                wo                                                              . . ...... ......
                          1968                1972                1976              1980               1984                1988

                                                      Source: County Business Patterns, Bureau of Census




                                                                  Figure 2-6


                                          Leelanau County Establishments by Trade

                        ED Wholesale Trade

                        El Retail Trade
                140 -   0 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate
           Cn   120 -
                           Services
           E    100


                                                                                  ......            .....
                                                                                  .. ...            ....
                80
                                                               ..... .            ........
           Cn
                60                                                                                 ......


                                            .........          .......
                40
           E                                                                      . .....
                         ... ....           ......
                                              ...              ........
                                                               .......            ..                                  .. . .
                20                                             ......
                                            ........           .....                               .......            ......
                         ........                              .... .                                                 ......
                                                                  . .... ..       .......
                         . ...              ....... ..                                             .....
                                                               ...... .... ....
                                            ....... ...
                  0
                               gricu

                              an
                                    0
                                       r


                                      rt
                                        e

                                  sp    ation

                              'onstruction

                                      tui g
                             Ian @acn
                             10   uf ssifr
                                ncla    ied























































                                                                                                                          HIP",

                          1968               1972              1976               1980              1984               1988
                                                    Source: County Business Patterns, Bureau of Census

            Workng Papter #5 - Trend Future
            Page 2-8






                                                       DRAFT
          Small businesses will continue to grow in number to try to capture tourist opportuni-
          ties and because of the lack of other job alternatives.

             The highest increase in numbers of es-            of employees was.7. In contrast, the larger
          tablishments by trade in the County since            private employers of the County include:
          1960 has been in retail trade and services.          Grand Traverse Band Ottawa Chippewa
          Retail trade establishments have gone up             Indians (casino), Homestead Resort, Sugar
          105% and service sector 409% since 1968.             Loaf Resort, and Prutsman Mirror. As a
          The number of construction establishments            destination location with abundant natural
          have nearly tripled between 1968 and 1988            amenities, the best opportunities for bud-
          (see Figures 2-5 and 2-6).                           ding entrepreneurs are tourist oriented. The
             The majority of jobs in the County are            easiest (and potentially most destructive)
          provided by small business. The average              have an origin in the exploitation of natural
          number of employees per reported service             resources.
          establishment in 1988 was 13. For retail
          trade establishments the average number




































                                                                                Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                     Page 2-9







                                                                            DRAFT



                                                                          Figure 2-7


                                                   Average Annual Number of Jobs in
                                                        Tourism-Related Businesses
                                                                 in Leelanau County

            700


            600-

            500

            400

            300


                                                                                                                                        ...........
            200-
                                                                                                    .....                .......

            100

                                                                      K:
                0
                1974                 1976                 1978                 1980                 1982                 1984                 1986
                      Source: Travel  Tourism in Michigan, A Statistical Profile, 1986 & 1991 (MSU, Travel, Tourism RecreationResource Center)



                                                                          Figure 2-8

                                       Annual Percentage Change in Tourism-Related
                                                         Business Jobs (1977-1987)


                                12
                                                     El 1977-82
                                 10-
                                                     El 1982-87
                                                                                  . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                 8-
                                                          1977-87
                                 6-


                                 4-


                                                                           . . . . ........
                                 2
                                                                                  ............
                                                    ......                        ...........
                                                                             . . . ............
                                 0@                                              .....
                                              Leelanau                          Benzie                    Grand Traverse
                                    Source: Travel a Tourism in Michigan, A Statistical Profile, 1986 a 1991 ed. (MSU, Travel, Tourksm a
                                                                      Recreation Resource Center)



              Working Papter #5 - Trend Future
              Page 2-10







                                                         DRAFT
          Tourism will continue to increase its economic significance while agriculture and In-
          dustrial activity will decline.

             The annual average number of jobs that               gan experienced a decline in watercraft
          can be attributed to tourism have generally             registrations between 1978 and 1985,
          increased since 1974 (see Figure 2-7). The              Leelanau's registrations continued to climb.
          average increases since 1977 have been                  Overall, between 1978 and 1991 the
          lower in Leelanau County than in neighbor-              County had a 42% increase in registered
          ing Benzie and Grand Traverse Counties                  watercraft. In that same time period, the
          (see Figure 2-8). The number of tourism                 state experienced an approximate 22% in-
          related jobs peak during summer months                  crease. This data not only demonstrates
          and taper oft during the off-season.                    the relative popularity of boating in Lee-
                                                                  lanau, but also demonstrates that more
             Another indicator of tourism activity is             people are calling the County their home
          sales tax collected by tourism-related busi-            port, as they have registered their water-
          nesses (see Figure 2-9). Sales tax collec-              craft here.
          tions associated with family restaurants has
          experienced the greatest increase since                    Sleeping       Bear      Dunes       National
          1983. Sales tax attributed to taverns and               Lakeshore is a major attraction in Leelanau
          clubs and hotels and motels have also in-               County. Visitation to the lakeshore has
          creased overall.                                        generally increased over time (see Figure
                                                                  2-11). Well over a million people visit the
             Water related activities are a critical              Dunes on an annual basis. Note that visita-
          component of Leelanau County's ameni-                   tion counts are down in recent years be-
          ties. While there is no direct data on the to-          cause the National Park Service has closed
          tal number of watercraft using Peninsula                a campground for upgrading. When this
          waters, the number of watercraft registered             facility is completed, it is anticipated that
          in the County has increased dramatically                visitation will once again climb.
          overtime (See Figure 2-10). While Michi-
                                                        Figure 2-9

                                          Leelanau County Sales Tax Collections
                                                   (11983, 1985, 1987, 1989)

            300,000
                                                                        El 1983 ED 1985 M 1987 0 1989
            250,000
            200,000
      cc,   150,000
       X
            100,000
       Cn    50,000
                                                                                                         IN

                      Taverns and    Hotel Dining      Family       Fast Food       Sporting      Hotels and
                         Clubs          Rooms       Restaurants     Resaurants       Goods           Motels



                                      Source: Travel and Tourism in Michigan, a Statistical Prorile, i9a6 a iggi.
                                                  MSU Travel and Tourism Research Center.
                                                    Ff











                                                                                    Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                          Page 2-11







                                                                               DRAFT




                                                                           Figure 2-10

                                                                     Registered Watercraft

              45.00% -                           County Percentage Change
              40.00%     -
              35.00%     -                  El Michigan Percentage Change

              30.00% -

              25.00%

              20.00%

              15.00%

              10.00%

                5.00%

                0.00%                                                                     ............
              -5.000/1                  I-Q751)                                                                          Ut2l F?QXr-QAtngQ
                       0
             -10.00%                                                                                                           Change

                                                                           Source: Department of State





                                                                          Figure 2-11

                                             Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
                                                                 Annual Public Use




                          1,400,000-
                          1,200,000-
                          1,000,000-
                            800,000-;::*:::'::'::'

                            600,000-
                            400,000
                            200,000

                                      0
                                     1984           1985           1986            1987           1988           1989            1990
                                     Source: Leelanau County Sheriffs Dept. (*note: In 1987 method for determining visitation changed.
                                                                                          7@







































                                        More accurate traffic centers installed. Camp site closed in 1990 for repairs which accounts for
                                                                               loss in visits)                                                                 0

              Working Papter #5 - Trend Future
              Page 2-12






                                                               DRAFT

           Imported retirement funds (pensions and social security) will become a larger part of
           the local economy.

               Between 1969 and 1989, the number of                      able data on employer pensions provided
           persons receiving social security benefits in                 to retirees in the County, but it can be sur-
           Leelanau County increased 168%, going                         mised that social security payments actu-
           from 1,036 to 2,780 average monthly recip-                    ally represent a relatively low percentage of
           ients. The amount of benefits imported into                   retiree income entering the County. As the
           the County increased over 24 times. In                        retiree population grows, so will future rev-
           1969, total monthly social security pay-                      enues from social security and pensions.
           ments amounted to 60,233. Comparatively,                      This is a stable source of income not as
           in 1989, total'average monthly payments                       subject to the vagaries of recession, but
           amounted to nearly 1.5 million dollars (see                   more prone to reduction in value due to in-
           Figures 2-12 and 2-13). There is no avail-                    flation.

                                                             Figure 2-12

                                           Total Individuals Receiving Social Security

                   3000--


                   2500 --


                   2000 --

                43 1500

                   10001


                     500--


                        0-
                       1969           1965           1971            1975           1980           1985           1989

                                                        Source: Social SecuriW Administration


                                                          Figure 2-13

                                            Leelanau County - Total Monthly Payments
                                                     to Social Security Recipients

                1,600,000
                1,400,000
             E@' 1,200,000
                1,000,000
                  800,000
                  600,000
                  400
                  2
                       000
                   00:000
                         V
                         1969           1965           1971          1975           1980           1985           1989
                                                        Source: Social Security Administration


                                                                                            Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                                    Page 2-13






                                                          DRAFT

                                                         Chapter 3

                                                          LAND


          INTRODUCTION

              Changes on the surface of the land are the most visible changes taking place on the
          Peninsula. When a forest is harvested, a new orchard planted, a hillside home erected or a
          new commercial structure built, the evidence is visible for all to see. However, the most impor-
          tant changes to the land taking place on the Peninsula are usually invisible for years. These
          are the land divisions which fragment land into parcel sizes too small for resource manage-
          ment and too large for efficient provision of public services. In most cases this is done for low
          density residential development purposes.

              While it is visible changes to the land which have heightened citizen awareness of the
          need for a Peninsula-wide approach to managing growth, it will be the degree to which the in-
          visible changes are brought under control in the near future which will establish the options for
          the future.


              Specific patterns which are emerging and discussed in this chapter include:

              ï¿½ Urbanization in the form of sprawl is occurring on the Leelanau Peninsula and is expand-
                ing at an increasing rate.
              0 Land division practices are continuing to fragment renewable resource lands.
                The commercial viability of agriculture and its economic importance to the Peninsula are
                increasingly threatened as sprawl continues.
              ï¿½ Sprawl is continuing largely unabated because current local and county planning and
                zoning programs encourage it.





















                                                                                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 3-1





                                                             DRAFT




                                                           Figure 3-1

                                         Leelanau County Land Use/Cover Analysis
                                                                                                           1)
                 Barren Land                                                            01990                     OT
                                                                                                             tj V
                   Wetlands                                                                1977           Act
       Inland Surface Water

                             4-
              Wooded Land


                 Open Land


                 Farm Land


                 Urban Land


                             0.00     15,000.00     30,000.00     45,000.00     60,000.00     75,000.00     90,000.00
                                     Source: DNR, Michigan Resource Inventory System and Leelanau County Planning Dept.



                                                          Figure 3-2


                             Leelanau County Land Use/Cover Percent Change Between
                                                             1977-1990


           40.00


           30.00


           20.00


           10.00 -


             0.00
          -10.00       Urban          Farm                       Wooded         Inland                     NBarren
                        Land           Land         wa            Land         Surface                        Land
          -20.00                                                                Water

          -30-00


          -40.00
                                                                                        0 '990
                             &MM                                                       LIM1 977)

                             @rr



                                                                                             hi




                                                    Source: DNR and Michigan State Univermty



          Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page 3-2





                                                        DRAFT


          Urbanization of the Leelanau Peninsula will continue and will become the fundamental
          force in the loss of the Peninsula's rural character and important open spaces.

             The urbanization of the Leelanau Penin-           large (and often noisy) equipment, the gen-
          sula has taken a dramatic shift in the past          eration of dust, smoke, fumes, odors, the use
          twenty-five years. Prior to that time, most          of pesticides, fertilizers, herbicides and other
          families either resided in one of the villages,      chemicals, the disposal of animal wastes and
          on a farm, or on property used for another           long hours of operation. These activities of-
          resource based activity (such as forest prod-        ten conflict with the quiet use and enjoyment
          ucts, fishing, etc.) or were retired around one      of residential property. In addition, residential
          of the numerous lakes in the County. How-            use drives up the value of agricultural land
          ever, since the mid-60's, non-resource based         resulting in higher taxes for the farmer and a
          residential development has begun to                 reduced capacity to continue farming.
          threaten, and in many cases replace, re-
          source based uses of land. This trend is an             The continuation of sprawl on the Penin-
          early form of low density urbanization known         sula threatens not only resource based in-
          as "sprawl." Sprawl is best characterized by         dustries, but also the open spaces sought by
          the lack of a clear functional relationship be-      new residents and thousands of tourists each
          tween one use of land (e.g., residential) and        year. It threatens to permanently change the
          the use of lands around it (e.g., agricultural).     character of the entire Peninsula.
          Sprawl occurs in part, in response to a mar-
          ket demand for low density living options in            The words "rural" and 'Pastoral" aptly de-
          rural settings, and also because it is both          scribe the past and current character of the
          permitted and encouraged by local zoning.            vast majority of the Peninsula. Of the ap-
                                                               proximately 216,000 acres which comprise
             However, while sprawl initially is a very         the Leelanau Peninsula, almost 94% are of
          low cost development pattern (from the               an open space character including extensive
          standpoint of public services), once the low         woodlands (approximately 7,430 acres) and
          rural level of service threshold of public ser-      agricultural lands (approximately 51,563
          vices has been breached (especially for              acres) as well as significant areas of wet-
          roads, police, fire, schools and emergency           lands, fields, rolling topography, and water
          services) it is the most expensive develop-          resources (see Figure 3-1). Urban lands ac-
          ment pattern, and the only one to also result        counted for 6.23% of the County area in
          in the systematic destruction of the resource        1990. That is an increase of nearly 38%
          value of renewable lands (such as farms and          since 1977. Nearly 80% of the urban lands in
          forests). This is because farms and nonfarm          1990 were residential with almost all of that
          residences are not compatible neighbors.             single family (see Figure 3-2).
          Farming for grains and orchards are essen-
          tially industrial operations involving the use of











                                                                                  Working Paper    - Trend Future
                                                                                                        Page 3-3






                                                                             DRAFT



                                                                           Figure 3-3
                                              Population Per Square Mile From 1940 to 199,0

                                                                                                                                 0 Leelanau
                                                                                                                                 EJ Benzie
                              150
                                                                                                                ............-        Grand Traverse
                               100                                                                .....   ...
                                                                    ... ...                     ... .....
                                                                  ..... ...                     . .....


                                                  . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                  ..... ..             .....   .. ....... ...
                                                                                         ........ ......
                                 so
                                                                                         ........ ..........
                                                                 . ....                ...... .. ....... ..
                                                                                      ...... ... ...
                                                                                    i*:7.
                                                                                               ... ..... ..   ..........
                                   0

                                                                                                        .... .... ..
                                                                                                                           Grand Traverse
                                        1940
                                                  1950
                                                                                                                      Benzie
                                                             1960
                                                                        1970
                                             Source: Decennial Census               1980         -   - -         Leelanau
                                                                                                 1990





                                                                         Figure 3-4

                                         Percent Increase in Density Between 1940 and 1990




                                                                                                               ...                   ......
                                     180%

                                      160%-

                                      140%-

                                      120%-
                                                      ...........
                                      100%-
                                                  X


                                                  X::K
                                      80%-

                                                        .......             ...
                                      60%-


                                                    .... ... ....
                                      40%


                                                                                ................................
                                      200/,-                                      ...........................
                                                             *jx                .................................
                                                                                ...........................
                                                                 X.: ...        .......... .. ..... .
                                                                                        ..............
                                                                               ...............r..... . . .... . . . . . .
                                        0%
                                                      Leelanau                     Benzie                 Grand Traverse

                                                                 Source: Derived from Decennial Census Data
                                                                                                                                      L
                                                                                                                                       e ana@
                                                                                                                                        e'     u


                                                                                                                                     Benzie


                                                                                                                                       r      T
                                                                                                                                13 LGand raversje










              Working Paper #5 - Trend FUture
              Page 3-4






                                                         DRAFT

             Of the approximately 3,820 acres in the                While a portion of the increased urban-
         Peninsula rezoned between 1980 and 1989,                ization is anticipated to occur adjacent to and
         nearly 37% were converted to a residential              near the greater Traverse City urban area
         designation and nearly 46% were converted               (and will greatly influence visitors' initial per-
         to a commercial designation. Total annual               ceptions of the Peninsula), the entire Penin-
         land acreage rezoned has risen sharply since            sula is expected to experience more sprawl.
         1986 and has averaged over 550 acres per
         year between 1986 and 1990. At current                     This sprawl will ultimately and significantly
         rates, an additional 7,000 acres of land will           transform the current character of the
         be consumed for urban use by the year 2010              Peninsula because of increases in vehicular
         resulting in an urbanized area approaching              traffic and congestion, decreases in the lev-
         10% of the total County area.                           els of public services (but with higher taxes),
                                                                 degradation of the Peninsula's unique char-
             Population density in the      Peninsula has        acter and scenic quality, and loss of special
         increased 50% since 1970 (Figure 3-3) and               environments.
         100% since 1940 (see Figure 3-4). The
         population density in Leelanau County in
         1990 (48 persons per square mile) is nearly
         what Grand Traverse County's was in 1940
         (50.4 persons per square mile). The popula-
         tion density in Grand Traverse County in
         1990 was 139 persons per square mile. Sig-
         nificant increases in urbanization have oc-
         curred in nearly all areas of the Peninsula
    *
         and have resulted in significant character
         changes in localized areas.                                   Diagram of the Urban Sprawl Cycle


                                                                                         URBAN
                                                                                        SPRAWL


                                                                         INCREASED                    INCREASED
                                                                         LAND SALES                   FARM LAND
                                                                                                        VALUES




                                                                       DECREASED                              :R
                                                                       PROFITABILITY                   ASSESSED
                                                                      OF FARMING                         VALUE

                                                                                       INCREASED
                                                                                       PROPERTY
                                                                                         TAXES



                                                                 Source: Duniont R. W, 1979., Farmland T&K Ratio( Alternatives: Use Value Assessment
                                                                 W Qrcuif-Srealw Rebates, Orc 617, C0490 of Agnculture Research Center,
                                                                 WmAinglon State University, Pullman, WA. (Sept.)





                                                                                    Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                           Page 3-5





                                                                                 DRAFT

                   Fig. 3- 5 - 3-6                                            Figure 3-5

                                                               I S@CTION, FIRST DIVISION INTO
                                                                         TEN ACRE PARCELS




                                                                                   caw"pw


































                                                                         t   I I-
                                                                                   COUrRY P40


                                                                              Figure 3-6
                                                      1 SECTION, SECOND DIVISION, 4 PARCELS
                                                              FROM EACH TEN ACRE PARCEL



                                                                                  Cmmty Rwd







                                                                                        ==L-j










                                                                                7-1
                                                                                                         I   L
                                                   L                      FF3               I I I -7TT-

               Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
               Page 3-6






                                                         DRAFT

         Land fragmentation will fuel continued sprawl, an early demise of agriculture in some
         areas, and result in significantly higher taxes due to both increased land values and
         the higher costs of providing public services.

             The division of lands in large acreages             of 10 acre parcels without going through the
         into smaller parcels is a standard feature of           formal review and approval requirements of
         the early stages of urbanization. Initially             the Subdivision Control Act. It also allows up
         farmers split 160 acre parcels off 320's or             to four divisions of under 10 acres in size
         80's off 160's for their children to continue a         from a parent parcel to be created each 10
         way of life. As the cost of farming increases,          years without platting.
         along with the market demand for rural living
         sites, smaller parcels are created and sold.               The result, over time, is the creation of a
         Unfortunately, PA 288 of 1967, the Subdivi-             rural subdivision without any public review,
         sion Control Act, has established a simple,             and the attendant loss of large amounts of
         but highly destructive way to do that. PA 288           farmland, forestland and open space. Figures
         permits the creation of an unlimited number             3-5, 3-6 and 3-7 show how it happens.


                                                      Figure 3-7



                                    I SECTION, THIRD DIVISION, EACH PARCEL
                                     DIVIDED ONE MORE TIME. PARCEL SIZE
                                                 LESS   THAN 2 ACRES


                                                         County Road





                                                 X.-


                                                   7

                                                                       =17=7F, If M
                                  C         Road                      Road









                                           I L-j








                                                         County Road








                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                           Page 3-7





                                                         DRAFT

            It usually begins with landowner, often a              Unfortunately, this kind of land division
            farmer, who in order to meet a cash need, or        practice, when carried out on a wide scale,
            to capitalize on rising land values, decides to     results in rural subdivisions with multiple
            sell some land. If he wants to stay in farming      driveways (and attendant traffic safety con-
            he will choose to sell marginal land (as long       cerns), high public serviCEi costs (it is not
            as it 'Perks') with good access (along a            compact), a near total loss of open space (all
            County Road). He will also make it as small         the open space is in front and back yards),
            as possible to preserve the largest amount of       and the establishment of a significant number
            farmland. The realtor, representing potential       of uses (usually residences) that are incom-
            buyers, wants the land in a marketable size.        patible with the use of adjoining farms. The
            This means it can't be too big because it           situation is exacerbated over time as taxes
            would cost too much and can't be too small          on the farm go up due to the new (obvious)
            because the farmer won't earn enough from           development potential for nonfarm resi-
            the sale. As long as the parcel size is greater     dences.
            then the minimum required by the local zon-
            ing ordinance, and there is no local lot split         This pattern is nearly invisible at first. It
            ordinance or private road ordinance (rarities       takes place over a 20-40 year time frame and
            in Leelanau County), the parcel size will be        is set once the land division occurs (often
            governed pursuant to PA 288. Often a farmer         decades earlier). Many ten acre and smaller
            will take a forty acre parcel and first divide it   parcels are split and sold under land contract
            into 4 ten acre parcels and then divide one of      (often unrecorded until paid off) and paid
            the 1 O's into 4 smaller lots (the size will de-    over a 9-11 year period. It may be several
            pend on parcel characteristics (e.g., slope,        more years before a house is built. While the
            access, whether it 'Perks", etc.). The realtor      impact on loss of open space may not occur
            will market the sale of the 10's as containing      right away, the impact on loss of farmland 'is
            future lots once the 10 year "no-redivision         often immediate (unless the farmer leases
            period" is up. This enhances the purchase for       backtheland).
            some because it represents a way to recoup
            part of the investment if they stay 10 years,
            or to enhance its marketability to others if
            they don't stay that long.




















            Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
            Page 3-8





                                                          DRAFT

              This pattern is rampant in Leelanau                represent a ready supply-of land for new
           County. One way to get a visual image of it,          homes in subdivisions. Because of marketing
           .s to compare 'Plat maps" (such as those              and good location, these lots are likely to de-
           produced by Rockford Map Publishers in                velop more quickly than many larger parcels
           Rockford, IL) over a period of time. A sample         scattered throughou    t the County. The aver-
           analysis of average parcel sizes in 1930,             age lot size is usually 1/2-1 acre in size.
           1960 and 1990 was performed on Suttons                While concentrated in a smaller area, they
           Bay, Centerville, Elmwood and Kasson                  represent a reduced loss of agrucultural land
           Townships. The analysis revealed that while           and open space compared to the more scat-
           the very large acreages that were common in           tered 10 acre residential pattern (see Figure
           1930 had been divided many times by 1960,             3-9).
           the average parcel size had only fallen 4%
           from about 71 acres to about 68 acres. In                 The state equalized value of residential
           contrast, the average parcel size in these            and commercial land in the Peninsula has in-
           four townships fell nearly 68% from 1960 to           creased 178% and 139% respectively be-
           1990 down to 41 acres. The range of decline           tween 1980 and 1990 as compared to the
           varied from 59.1% to 64.6% for all but Kas-           30% increase in agricultural value for the
           son Township where it fell 81.6%. The per-            same time period.
           cent of total parcels 10 acres or less in size
           rose from approximately 2% in 1930 to about               Ten acre and smaller parcels, when used
           44% over the same period. There is no rea-            for residential purposes only, contribute to
           son to believe the same results would not             the inefficient use of land as agricultural
           hold true if the analysis were performed for          acreage is needlessly taken out of produc-
           all other townships in the County.                    tion, important open spaces and environ-
                                                                 mental systems are fragmented, and signifi-
              Another indicator of recent land division          cant acreage beyond the immediate needs of
           activity is the growth in the number of resi-         the residence are left vacant and excluded
           dential parcels on the tax rolls over the past        from more productive uses. Further, resi-
           10 years (see Figure 3-8). In 1980 there              dential development at such low densities
           were 11,151 residentially classed properties          can result in escalating public service costs,
           compared to 14,297 in 1991, an increase of            including police and fire protection services,
           28%. In contrast, agriculturally classed              as the service areas must be extended for a
           parcels fell by 583 for a 36.9% decline.              proportionally limited number of residences.
           Commercial properties increased by only 7%,           This circumstance may ultimately force resi-
           while the number of industrial parcels didn't         dents to accept lower levels of service
           change. Timber/cutover lands declined dra-            (longer emergency response times, as an
           matically from 900 in 1980 to only 289 in             example) or pay additional taxes or fees to
           1991, a two-thirds reduction.                         finance costly yet inefficient public service ex-
                                                                 tensions.
              Existing platted but unbuilt lots are also
           numerous throughout the County. These lots









                                                                                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 3-9






                                                                                   DRAFT

                                                                                Figure 3-8
                                           Total Residential Lots in Leelanau County From 1980 to 1991


                15,000

                14,500

                14,000

                13,500

                13,000

                12,500
                                                  .......                                                                               . . ...-
                12,000                        ...... ............

                11,500 -

                                              ......                  ...          .... .. .
                11,000 -
                                                                                                                                           ..       . . ... .. ...
                10,500 -                                                         ......
                                                                     ... .. ......

                                                                                                                ....             .. ....
                                                                                                               ...........
                10,000
                         1980                  1982                  1984                   1986                  1988                   1990                  1991
                                                                   Source: Leelanau County Department of Equalization





                                                                                Figure 3-9


                                                 Developed & Undeveloped Platted Lots 1991





               10000-

                8000-

                6000-

                4000-

                2000-

                                                 IF
                    O-Z
                                 Platted Lots                    Developed                      Platted Lots                     Remaining
                                                                 Platted Lots                   Not Ukely to                    Platted But
                                                                                               be Developed                   Undeveloped*
                                                              *Represents about 9,667people
                                                              Source: Leelanau County Planning Department






              Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
              Page 3- 10






                                                                      DRAFT

           The Leelanau Peninsula will witness a decline in agricultural acreage as farmland is
           converted to residential and other urban land uses.

               Agriculture in Leelanau County comprises                      . farm acreage and leads the regional area in
           approximately 84% of all active land use                           orchard acreage and orchard farms (see
           acreage. The Peninsula is unique in that it                        Figures 3-10 and 3-11).
           includes a vast orchard industry which ac-
           counts for nearly a third of the total Peninsula



                                                                      Figure 3-10
                                                   Number of Acres in Orchards                                        M Leelanau
                                                                                                                      El Benzie

                       18000.                                                                                         El Grand Traverse
                       16000-                                                                                        L

                       14000-
                                                ...                   .......                 ..... ..
                                                ...                   ..... ..                ..... ..                   ...
                                                                                              ..... ..                  ....
                                                                                              .... ..                   ....
                                                                      .......                 ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                                                              ..... ..                ..... ..
                       12000-
                                                                      .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..
                       10000
                                                                      .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..                ..... I .
                                                                      .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..                ..... I .
                                                *... ..               .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..
                        80001                   ..... ..              .......                 ...... ..
                                                .... ..               ..... ..                .... ..                 .......
                                                .... ..               .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..                .......
                                                .... ..               .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                ..... ..              ..... ..                ..... ..                .......
                                                .... ..               .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                                                .... ..               ..... ..                                        .......
                        6000-                                         .......                                         ..... ..
                                                                      ..... ..                .... ..                 .......
                                           ... .... ..                .......                 ..... ..                ..... ..
                        4000-
                                                                 ......... . . . . .
                                                                      ........                .....
                                                                 ......... . . . . .
                                                .. .... ..            .......
                        2000-                   . .... ..
                                             ...                  ........
                                                                                              - : - @ - 7
                             0-
                                         1974                    1978                   1982                    1987
                                                              Source: Census of Aqficufture, 1988



                                                                      Figure 3-11

                                                Number of Farms in Orchards                                           0 Leelanau
                               300-/                                                                                  EJ Benzie
                                                                                                                      El Grand Traverse
                               250-                                   ...


                                                                      .... ..           .......             ......
                                                                      ......            ......              ....
                               200-
                                                ......                .... ..           .......             ......
                                                                      ......            ......              .... *
                                                ......                .... ..           .......             ......
                                                                      ......            .... .
                                                                      .... ..           .......             ......
                                                                      ......            .... .              .... .
                                                                      ......            ......
                                                ......                .... .            ......              ......
                               150-
                                                                                        .......             ......
                                                                                        .......             ......
                                                ......                .... .            ......              ......
                                                                                        ......              ......
                                                ......                .... .            ......              ......
                               100-


                                                .... .                .... .                                ......
                                                .... ..               ......          . ....                ....
                               50

                                                .... ..               ......
                                                                                    X.
                                                .... ..               ......
                                 0
                                                                             Li































                                            1974                1978                1982                1987
                                                              Source: Census of Agriculture

                                                                                                       Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                                                 Page 3-11






                                                                              DRAFT


                                                                           Figure 3-12

                                     Total Land in Farms & Acres Enrolled in PA 116
                                                 80,000-/                                                             Total Land in Farms
                                                             ..... ..                           ..... .
                                                               .......                          .......
                                                   0,000.
                                                             ..... ..                           ..... ..
                                                 6                                                                    Acres Enrolled in PA 116
                                                               .......                          .......
                                                             ..... ..                           ..... ..
                                                               .......                          .......
                                                 40,000-
                                                              .... ..                           ..... ..
                                                               .......                          .......
                                                             ..... ..                           ..... ..
                                                 20,000
                                                        0        7:7 : 7
                                                             Leelanau           Benzie           Grand
                                                                                                Traverse

                                                          Source: Dept. of Agdcultured Economics, MSU, 1991



                                                                           Figure 3-13
                                     Percentage of Land in Farms Enrolled in PA 116


                                                    25
                                                    20
                                                    15
                                                           .............
                                                    10
                                                                     . . . . . . . . . .


                                                      0
                                                          Leelanau           Benzie          Grand
                                                                                            Traverse

                                                      Source: Dept of Agricultured Economics, MSU, 1991




                                                                           Figure 3-14

                                                            Acres Enrolled in PA 116



                                                                                                                               El 1980
                                                        20,000
                                                                                                                                    1985
                                                        15,000                    .......
                                                        10,000
                                                                                                 ....... ...                    111111990
                                                          5,000
                                                                                                                1990
                                                                 0                              .. ........
                                                                                                           1985

                                                                 Leelanau                              1980
                                                                             Benzie
                                                                                       Grand
                                                                                     Traverse
                                                                  iiv




                                                                                                                                 198J
                                                                                                                                         0


                                                                                                                                    1985


                                                                                                                                    1990









                                                 Source: Dept of Agricufture
                                                  Economics, MSU, 1991


             Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
             Page 3-12






                                                         DRAFT

          The Peninsula's farmland and agriculturally           a program providing for strong agricultural
          related activities are the foundation for much        preservation, and the County rates high
          of its unique charm and character. Economi-           within the region in its involvement in this
          cally, agriculture is a cornerstone of the            program, only 21.5% of the local farmland is
          Peninsula and rivaled only by the tourism in-         actually enrolled in the program with an av-
          dustry. The market value of agricultural prod-        erage of 114 acres per contract. Trends sug-
          ucts sold in the County in 1987 was approxi-          gest the rate of enrollment may be leveling
          mately $15 million. Still, the role of agriculture    off (see Figures 3-12, 3-13 and 3-14).
          has, and can be expected to increasingly              Though the average farm size in the Penin-
          decline in importance as witnessed by a               sula has remained fairly constant during the
          nearly 33% drop in the market value of farm           past twenty years (see Figure 3-15), the
          products sold between 1978 and 1987. As               Peninsula has already witnessed a 48.5%
          the population growth of the region contin-           drop in the total number of farms between
          ues,    land    development       pressure      will  1954 and 1982 from 833 to 429.
          heighten.

             Though the Farmland and Open Space
          Preservation Act, PA 116 of 1974 established



                                                       Figure 3-15

                                           Average Size of Farms                                Michigan
                                                                                                Leelanau
                    250-11                                                                      Grand Traverse

                                                                                             El Benzie
                    200 -



                    150-1,                      .... ..... ..
                E


                                                                              X
                                                                              X:
                                                                                            X
                    100-1,

                V)


                     so-
                                                                             X.
                                  ....         .....           XX
                                                                  JA

                      0-
                             1969           1974            1978          1982            1987
                                                Source: Census of Agriculture, 1988










                                                                                    Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                         Page 3-13






                                                                                              DRA T




                                                                                            Figure 3-16


                                                                   Total Buildout Population for Leelanau County

                   Suttons Bay Vill.
                   Suttons Bay Twp.
                          Solon Twp.
                      Northport Vill.
                         Leland Twp.
                     Leelanau Twp.
                       Kasson Twp.
                   Glen Arbor Twp.
                          Empire Vill.
                        Empire Twp.
                     Elmwood Twp.
                    Cleveland Twp.
                   Centerville Twp.
                     Bingham Twp.

                                             0        10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000
                                                                                    Source: Leelanau County Planning Department




                                                                                           Figure 3-17

                                            Leelanau County Percent Population Change Between 19SIO and Total
                                                                                              Possible Buildout


                   Suttons Bay Vill.

                                                 ...........
               Suttons Bay Twp.               :'-*@--.-.-.-.-.-......-.-....... ......
                                                   ..........................
                                                 ..................

                                             ....... ...
                         Solon Twp.              . ... ....   ... ......
                      Northport Vill.

                                                      . ...............                                                       ...........
                                                              ........                                                        ..........
                        Leland Twp.
                    Leelanau Twp.

                                                              ..........
                      Kasson Twp.
                                                                        ................
                                                                        ...............
                   Glen Arbor Twp.
                         Empire Vill.
                                                   . . ........            x@x@ ...... .
                       Empire Twp-
                                                                                 ...........
                                                                                 .........                          ... ........
                                                                                                                     .. ........
                                                                                                                     .. ........
                    Elmwood Twp.
                                                       ......... ...
                                                              . ... ..........
                   Cleveland Two
                                                                                                                                                 ............
                                                 . . ............ .... .
                   Centerville Twp.                                                                                                                         ................
                                                                                                                                                                      ............. .
                                                                                 .. . ....... ..........
                                            t
                    Bingham Twp.
                                            . . ... ......
                                          0.00                500.00        1,000.00           1,500.00           2,000.00           2,500.00          3,000.00           3,500.00
                                                                                   Source: Leelanau County Planning Department


                   Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                   Page 3-14






                                                          DRAFT

          Community unrest and political pressures will heighten as local and county gov-
          ernmental entities grapple with diverse community attitudes in their independent ef-
          forts to better manage growth.

              The market forces behind sprawl, once              78,750, it would still be nearly 5 times the
          started, are considerable. Unfortunately, they         present population and would represent an
          are fueled in Leelanau County by local plans           enormous impact on farmland, water re-
          and zoning ordinances that encourage them.             sources, public services, sensitive lands and
          This may seem unlikely since most land is              open space. In fact, unless the new devel-
          zoned for low density single family use, either        opment were very compact, taxes would
          as the primary use (as in a residential district)      have to rise dramatically to pay for the same
          or as a permitted use (as in an agricultural           level of service offered today (but especially
          zone). However, if all land is developed at            with regard to traffic, it would not be possible
          the maximum permitted density, as tends to             to maintain the existing service levels espe-
          occur over time (provided there is an ade-             cially during the summer tourist season).
          quate market for the land) then even a low
          density development pattern results in a                  With sixteen separate, uncoordinated
          large population.                                      zoning ordinances in the County, no agree-
                                                                 ment on how to handle issues of greater then
              Last year, the Leelanau County Planning            local significance, and no common concen-
          Department conducted a buildout analysis of            sus on a growth management plan for the
          all zoning then in place in the County. A              Peninsula, it is unlikely that the forces of
          buildout analysis calculates the total number          sprawl will  be managed. While each com-
          of households and total population of a juris-         munity has its own zoning ordinance, and
          diction if all undeveloped, but buildable land,        some have a current comprehensive plan,
          is developed at the maximum density permit-            each plans    its future with a focus that does
          ted "by right" under the zoning ordinance.             not extend    beyond its jurisdictional bound-
          The results are presented in Figures 3-16              aries. Yet the character and daily living pat-
          and 3-17.                                              terns of each individual community are
                                                                 greatly shaped by Peninsula-wide trends and
              Despite strong statements supporting               forces.
          preservation of farmland and open space in
          most of the zoning ordinances in the County,               As sprawl continues, the Peninsula can
          none have regulations which effectively pro-           be  expected to witness increases in commu-
          tect these resources. If the current population        nity unrest and frustration both within and be-
          per household is maintained, at buildout, the          tween local jurisdictions as conflicting devel-
          County's population would be about 315,000             opment policies evolve. Solutions will be diffi-
          people. This is 18 times the current popula-           cult to achieve as the necessary mechanisms
          tion and would, if it were the population to-          for conflict resolution will be limited and those
          day, rank Leelanau as the fifth largest county         that may exist will not focus on the "big pic-
          in the State. It would result in an average            ture" but rather on the provision of "bandaid"
          population density of 914 persons per square           answers. A marked decrease in the quality of
          mile (compared to 48 persons per square                life as perceived by both Peninsula residents
          mile today).                                           and tourists will evolve. As a result, local
                                                                 elected and appointed officials will spend
              Now there are many legitimate reasons              more and more time reacting to growth pres-
          why a population this large is not likely at           sures and addressing constituent concerns
          buildout, but even if it is one-quarter of that or     but with fewer and fewer options available.

                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                           Page 3-15






                                                       DRAFT


                                                      Chapter 4

                                             PUBLIC FINANCE


         INTRODUCTION

             The ability of Leelanau County and the local jurisdictions which comprise the Peninsula to
         provide adequate services and address day-to-day community needs is directly tied to public
         finances. Public financing includes the collection of revenues and allocation of funds for com-
         munity and administrative needs. As state and federal assistance has declined for a wide
         range of community development and improvement projects, communities have had to shoul-
         der additional financial burdens in an attempt to merely maintain current levels of services.
         Growth and development in the Peninsula has placed both additional strains on and benefits
         to local revenues. However, the continuation of current trends (especially of sprawl) suggests
         the long term outlook for the Peninsula will be a losing struggle to meet the day-to-day service
         needs of residents and tourists and maintain the current quality of life unless taxes are
         dramatically increased.

             Emerging patterns regarding public finance on the Leelanau Peninsula include the
         following:

             ï¿½ The tax base is growing with new development.
             - While there are significant differences in millage rates among local units of government
               in the County, all are generally increasing.
             ï¿½ On a per capita basis, the County receives lower than state average allocations from
               most state departments.
























                                                                                 Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                       Page 4-1






                                                                        DRAFT




                                                                       Figure 4-1

                                     State Equalized Valuation Percentage Change By Class
                                                               Between 1980 and 1990




                                 1.8-

                                 1.6-

                                 1.4-                                                            . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                          . ...  ... ..
                                                                                           ...........
                                                                                             .........
                                                                                           .............
                                                                                           ........ . ..........
                                 1.2-

                                                                                              ......      .......

                                                                                              .. ...           ...........
                                                                                           . . . . . . ........

                                                                                                               ..........
                                                                                                               ...........
                            2    0.8-
                                                                                                               ..........
                                                                                                               ............
                                             ...........................
                                                ................
                                 0.6-           ...............
                                              .............
                                                       .........
                                         ...............        .....................
                                                                               . .. .. .....
                                 0.4-

                                 0.2

                                   0
                                        Agriculture          Timber           Residential        Commercial          Industrial
                                                                    Source: Michigan Dept. of Treasury





                                                                      Figure 4-2

                                                   State Equalized Valuation: Real Property
                                 ED Agriculture
           $450,000,000
                                 El Timber
           $400,000,000
                                 ED Residential
           $350,000,000

                                     Commercial
           $300,000,000
           $250,000,000              Industrial                                               0.
                                L
           $200,000,000

           $150,000,000
                                                         W
           $100,000,000
                                                                                              NO
             $50,000,000

                         $0
                                     1980              1982              1984              1986                1988             1 990

                                                                     Source: Michigan Dept of Treasury



             Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
             Page 4-2






                                                          DRAFT

          New revenues from development will eventually fail to pay for associated costs of
          community services because development is too spread out.

             Land values and taxes associated there-             Because the pattern of development is of
          with have been steadily increasing within the          such a low density sprawled character, the
          Peninsula. Between 1980 and 1990, all                  relative cost of service delivery is that much
          classes of lands experienced an increase in            higher. Services must be provided to large
          state equalized value (SEV) ranging from               geographical areas though limited popula-
          approximately 10% for industrial lands to              tions exist within these areas. This is ex-
          178% for residential land (see Figure 4-1).            tremely costly. It is questionable whether the
          Increases in SEV among the five land                   revenues collected from the rural areas of the
          classes resulted in a total SEV increase for           Peninsula equal or approach the actual cost
          the entire Peninsula between 1980 and 1990             for the delivery of services to these areas.
          of nearly 150%, from approximately $225
          million to $550 million. Similarly, sales tax             Generally, residential land uses produce
          collections have witnessed a dramatic in-              the greatest strain upon public finance be-
          crease as well although the principal area of          cause of the abundance of services associ-
          increase was in family restaurants.                    ated with this land use including education,
                                                                 police and fire, social, health, and emergency
             Although these increases in SEV have led            services. The extreme increases in SEV val-
          to increases in tax revenues, their impact             ues for residential property compared to
          upon the Peninsula's ability to provide ser-           other land classes over the past ten years
          vices to property is limited. First, most prop-        (see Figure 4-2) illustrates the Peninsula's
          erty taxes support schools. The amount to              growing dependence upon residential land
          support roads, sewer, water, police, fire,             uses for revenues. However, it is this same
          emergency, parks, recreation and other gen-            land use that is most costly to service even
          eral government services is very low. Sec-             when developed in a compact fashion.
          ond, inflationary forces have had severe im-
          pacts upon the cost of community services,                The continuing low density, sprawled de-
          especially in the areas of education, trans-           velopment pattern throughout the Peninsula
          portation, and health services. Also, the ag-          will slowly choke the finances of local juris-
          ing infrastructure of many communities is in-          dictions and the Peninsula as a whole, espe-
          creasing maintenance and improvement                   cially if new roads, public sewer, and water
          costs and absorbing a growing proportion of            services are needed. The level of public ser-
          available service delivery funds.                      vices will decline and certain services will
                                                                 have to be terminated unless taxes were to
             In the Leelanau Peninsula,       however, the       be raised dramatically.
          land development pattern has       and will have
          as dramatic an effect upon service costs as
          inflation and increasing maintenance costs.










                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 4-3





                                                            DRAFT




                                                          Figure 4-3

                          Millage Rates of Local Governments in Leelanau County
                                                Between 1980 and 1990
                                                                                                   El Lowest

                             50                                                                       Average
                             40                                                                       Highest
                             30
                          Cn
                              20

                              10



                                             ... ...          ....
                                   00
                                  0'1      C14
                                           00
                                               CO
                                               @2   00  LO
                                                                                              Highest
                                                    @2
                                                             00                             Average
                                                             @2   CO   CO
                                                                  @2   co    C"           Lowest
                           Source: Leelanau County Equalization Department @2 00
                                                                                   C"
                                                                                  @2
                                                                                                   L
                                                                                                      Lowestj
                                                                                                          r
                                                                                                      Ae age
                                                                                                        v

                                                                                                      Highest
















































           Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
           Page 4-4






                                                     DRAFT

         Millage rates will become more disparate as more developed, wealthier communities
         increase millages at a higher rate than communities of modest or low incomes in order
         to meet growing service burdens.

            The future will bring increased shortages      will continue and the gap will widen as the
         of revenues as service delivery costs rise        residents of the wealthier communities ac-
         and communities struggle to maintain exist-       commodate tax increases to assure the con-
         ing levels of service to existing populations     tinuation of services they have come to ex-
         as well as accommodate the needs of new           pect. As this scenario evolves, the Peninsula
         development and seasonal populations. This        will become increasingly divided along com-
         continuing and increasingly difficult struggle    munity economic lines and the income levels
         will lead to greater pressure for increases in    of the households in various jurisdictions.
         tax millages among the local jurisdictions.
                                                               This condition will serve to alienate com-
            Already there is considerable variation in     munities from one another and greatly impact
         the tax millages being levied throughout the      the ability of the Peninsula to move into the
         Peninsula (see Figure 4-3). The past ten          21st century as a unified and proactive force.
         years has witnessed a disproportionately          The tourism industry will undoubtedly re-
         large gap between the average millage rate        spond to these conditions by frequenting the
         among all jurisdictions and the highest mil-      more established communities and thereby
         lage rates. The highest millage rate in 1990,     making the wealthier more wealthy and the
         43.7965, was almost 42% higher than the           poorer more poor.
         lowest rate during the same year. This trend





























                                                                               Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                    Page 4-5






                                                                                  DRAFT




                                                                                Figure 4-4

                                     Per Capita Allocations by State Departments to Leelanau County for
                                                                              1985,1987 & 1989

               800.00                                                                                                              County Average
               700.00
               600.00                                                                                                         E3 State Average

               500.00

               400.00

               300.00

               200.00

                                                                                   X
               100.00
                              .. .. ..                   .. .. ..
                  0.00                                                                                                               -mo-Nolon..,
                                     U)                         Cn                                                                                M
                                     Q)
                                  E-u
                                                            V) CL)                                                                           W
                                     CU
                                     Cn                        C/)

                                                                                                                  =E
                                          Source: Center for the Revitalization of Industrialized States (CRIS), Michigan State University, 1991



                                                                                Figure 4-5

                                         Per Capita Allocations by State Department to Leelanau County
                                                                         for 1985,1987 & 1989

               80                                                                                                  County Average
               70
                                                                                                               El State Average
               60

               50

               40

               30   -

               20

                  0                                                                                                                                 ...      ...
                  0                                                                                                                            +=

                                                                                                                                                   Cn
                                                                                                                                                  .0

                                                                                                            M
                                                                                                            =E
                                                                                                                                                   0
                          fl









































                                        Source: Center for the Revitalization of Industrialized States (CRIS), Michigan State Universio,, 1991




               Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
               Page 4-6






                                                          DRAFT

          While public service needs will increase, state and federal aid will not proportionately
          increase.


             Funding to Leelanau County has in-                 ages. While increases have been realized,
          creased for several state programs over the           the increases are not keeping pace with the
          past few years. However, on a per capita              rise in costs of providing such services (see
          basis, Leelanau County receives less than             Chapter 6). Additionally, given the state's cur-
          the state average per capita for revenue              rent fiscal constraints and federal shifts in lo-
          sharing, Department of Management and                 cal assistance, the County can anticipate
          Budget-Aging Program, human service, so-              relatively less revenue from state and federal
          cial service, public health, and corrections          programs in the future. Assistance dollars will
          (see Figures 4@4 and 4-5). On a per capita            be spread thinner and thinner and, ultimately,
          basis, transportation and agriculture pay-            those needing the services the most will
          ments are generally higher than state aver-           suffer the most.





































                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                           Page 4-7






                                                        DRAFT


                                                       Chapter 5

                                           TRANSPORTATION


         INTRODUCTION

              The ability to travel by vehicle from one community to another is essential to life as we
         know it. The automobile dominates our daily activities and households must be able to access
         a number of communities to meet their employment, schooling, shopping, and associated
         needs. Along with urban development and rural sprawl, congestion and additional mainte-
         nance needs have grown. This is as true for the nations superhighways as it is for local pri-
         mary and secondary roads. Traffic on the Peninsula is growing with the rise of the permanent
         and seasonal populations. The quality of life on the Peninsula will be negatively impacted if the
         transportation facilities are not upgraded to meet new demands. However, improved facilities
         may facilitate even more sprawl.

              Emerging patterns regarding transportation in the Peninsula include:

              ï¿½The automobile will remain the dominant mode of transportation and is increasing faster
               than the population.
              ï¿½Traffic levels are increasing Peninsula-wide, although the rates are higher along tradi-
               tionally lower volume roadways.
              -The increases in travel time, congestion, and traffic hazards spurred by growth and de-
               velopment are exacerbated by the circuitous roadway network in the County.
              ï¿½The need for major roadway improvements is increasing while available funds are de-
               creasing.
              ï¿½Road ends are increasingly serving as public access sites to the area water resources.
              ï¿½Congestion is most apparent in urban and activity centers where seasonal residents
               compete with permanent residents for parking.


















                                                                                  Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                        Page 5-1






                                                                                 DRAFT


                                                                               Figure 5-1

                                                      Leelanau County Vehicle Registration
                                                                               1984-1990


                                                                          Vehicle Type

                      Year            Motorcycle              Commercial               Passenger                    Other                  TOTAL

                      1984                  372                     2603                     7661                    206                     12703


                      1985                  356                     2752                     8150                    2274                    13532


                      1986                  351                     2873                     8565                    2412                    14201


                      1987                  332                     3043                     8842                    2604                    14821


                      1988                  311                     3251                     9225                    2708                    15495


                      1989                  288                     3356                     9381                    2698                    15723


                      1990                  286                     3459                     9602                    2745                    16092
                                                          L

                                                    Source: Michigan Secretary of State. Data issued October 1 of each year.




                                                                              Figure 5-2


                                                   Total Valid Vehicle Registrations: 1984 - 1990



                              30.00%-


                              25.00%-                                                                  El State 1984-1990

                                                                                                           County 1984-1990
                          2"  20.00%-

                         C -'4
                              15.00%-


                                                   .............
                                                   ..........
                              10.00%-

                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   .......   .....
                                5.00%-
                                                     ............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                                   ..............
                                0.00%-


                                                                           Source: Department of State



              Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
              Page 5-2






                                                         DRAFT

          The number -of single occupancy passenger vehicles will continue to, grow at a faster
          rate than the population.

             16,092 vehicles were registered on the             tively limited total population of the Penin-
          Leelanau Peninsula in 1990 (see Figure 5-1),          sula, the limited populations of the villages
          an increase of 27% since 1984. In contrast,           scattered throughout the Peninsula, and the
          the same time period witnessed an approxi-            current employment patterns, do not support
          mately 10% increase in population growth              the feasibility of extensive ride-sharing and
          and only an 11% increase in state-wide ve-            public transit.
          hicle registrations (see Figure 5-2). Approxi-
          mately 60% of all registered vehicles in 1990             In addition, the automobile offers tremen-
          were passenger vehicles.                              dous opportunities for flexibility and privacy in
                                                                fulfilling one's transportation needs. This
             The factor most supportive of a vehicle-           convenience, in addition to the relatively low
          dependent Leelanau Peninsula is the low               cost of operation, has positioned the auto-
          density sprawl development which has and              mobile as the foundation of contemporary
          will continue to dominate. The low density            transportation in this country and has dramat-
          development pattern, characterized by per-            ically shaped transportation attitudes.
          sons living on rural land but working else-
          where, limits practical opportunities for ride-           Forces both nation-wide and those spe-
          sharing or comprehensive public transit ser-          cific to Leelanau Peninsula will fuel the auto-
          vices. The success of these modes of trans-           mobile's continuation as the dominant mode
          portation are dependent upon large numbers            of transportation throughout the Peninsula
          of persons in close proximity and with com-           and well into the next century.
          mon daily transportation needs. The rela-


























                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                           Page 5-3






                                                                              DRAFT




                                                                            Figure 5-3

                                          Annual Vehicle Miles on State Trunkline in Leelanau County
                                                                          (in millions of miles)


                  100

                   90

                                                                                                                         .......... ......
                                                                                                                                 ..........
                   80                                                                                                      . . ...
                                                                             . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                             .............
                                                                            . . ........
                   70

                   60

                                                                                    ..............................
                                                                                                                          ...............
                   50
                                                                                                                  .... ..... ..
                   40

                                              .............
                   30

                                                                                                           ..............
                   20
                                                                                  .............
                   10
                                                                                                         .............
                                                               . ....      .. . ............
                                                                                                                           ........... .
                     0
                                           1970                                         1980                                        1990

                                                              Source: Michigan Dept of Transportation, HPMS Program



































              Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
              Page 5-4






                                                            DRAFT

          Significant decreases in the level of service of both primary and secondary roadway
          corridors will be experienced as traffic volumes continue to increase.

              As growth and development continues,                 requires an urban level of service. The instal-
          increased demands will be placed upon the                lation of the first traffic light in the County in
          Peninsuld's roadway network. Annual vehicle              Greilickville this summer is indicative of this
          miles traveled on state trunklines in the                need. Traffic counts of 4,000 to 6,000 vehi-
          Peninsula have steadily risen since 1970                 cles daily along stretches of M-22 further
          (see Figure 5-3) and increased by 15% be-                northward greatly impact the corridor's level
          tween 1980 and 1990. This trend can be ex-               of service and threaten the character of that
          pected to continue.                                      scenic area.

              Of the approximately 125 average daily                   Though M-22 commands the greatest
          traffic counts recorded along the Peninsula's            levels of traffic in the Peninsula, it is not ex-
          roadway network between 1988 and 1990,                   periencing the greatest percent increases in
          just over half were recorded at levels of                traffic volumes and herein lies a critical
          1,000 vehicles per day or less. These levels             dilemma. Many of the roadways which are
          are relatively low. These low volume paved               experiencing some of the greatest rates of
          roadway segments will most likely be able to             increase in traffic volumes are not designed
          accommodate additional increases in traffic              and constructed to accommodate these in-
          without significant losses in levels of service.         crease. For example, the traffic volumes
          However, gravel roads cannot tolerate this               along Lee Point Road, a local road in Bing-
          level of daily use without frequent road grad-           ham Township have increased by more than
          ing.                                                     300% since 1987. Numerous primary road-
                                                                   ways are experiencing similar increases yet
              On the other hand, key roadway seg-                  are not designed to accommodate the ap-
          ments on state highways are at or approach-              proaching volumes.
          ing levels of service which seriously under-
          mine the efficiency of the corridors as well as              Roadways in the Peninsula Which have
          public health and safety. M-22 clearly illus-            traditionally experienced low traffic volumes
          trates this circumstance. Average daily traffic          will begin to witness increased flows. Road-
          counts approached nearly 22,000 in the                   ways currently experiencing high traffic vol-
          proximity of Traverse City in 1989. Con-                 umes will become more and more congested
          sidering the lack of passing lanes along M-              and the level of service will decline.
          22, its curvilinear nature and limited sight dis-
          tances in selected areas, this level of traffic















                                                                                         Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                                 Page 5-5





                                                          DRAFT




                                                        Figure 5-4


                                         Leelanau County Traffic Accidents




                  700-

                  600-

                  500-

                  400-





                                                ................ ....

                                                           ...................

                                             ... ...........
                  100-

                     0-             ...
                    1970                1975               1980                1985                1990

                                                   Source: Michi
                                                            gan State Police





































           Worldng Paper #5 - Trend Future
           Page 5-6





                                                          DRAFT

          Travel time will lengthen and traffic safety will become increasingly threatened at rates
          proportionally higher than area population growth.

             Though the Peninsula's population in-               sulting increases in traffic volumes. Additional
          creased by approximately 18% between                   roadway      intersections      serving      future
          1980 and 1990, traffic accidents within the            subdivisions will further interfere with the ef-
          Peninsula increased by nearly 46% over the             ficient movement of traffic on primary roads.
          same time period (see Figure 5-4). This dis-           Additional driveways providing ingress and
          proportionate increase in accidents will con-          egress to strip residential and commercial
          tinue as traffic volumes and congestion con-           development will further threaten declining
          tinue to heighten. The increased volumes of            safety levels.
          traffic on the roads will contribute to higher
          rates of accidents as maneuvering within the              Safety hazards will not be restricted to
          traffic flows becomes more difficult, driver           vehicle passengers. Bicycling is growing in
          stress levels rise, and stop-and-go move-              popularity in the Peninsula. The limited width
          ment patterns increase.                                of many of the Peninsula's roads and shoul-
                                                                 ders already creates safety hazards for bicy-
              However, increases in traffic volumes will         clers, joggers, and walkers. Increased traffic
          not be the sole reason for increased rates of          volumes will further intensify these hazards.
          accidents in the Peninsula. The hilly terrain,
          curvilinear road alignments, limited sight dis-           Travel time will noticeably lengthen even
          tances and narrow roadway shoulder widths              with marginal traffic increases in some areas,
          on many of the road segments in the Penin-             since many roads are very hilly and full of
          sula will exacerbate increased traffic volumes         curves with slow speed limits and few options
          and safety hazards.                                    for passing slow moving vehicles. While this
                                                                 does not pose a serious problem for tourists,
             Also, increased land development will fur-          it does for commuters and commerce.
          ther impact roadway safety beyond the re-























                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 5-7






                                                                                                                                 DRAFT

                                                                                                                            Figure 5-5




                                                       PRIMARY 'ROAD MAP
                                                     LEELANAU COUNTY
                                                                   MICHIGAN


                                                                                            Sold


                                                              Rout@ Markers
                                                      (D           U.S. Numbered Highermy
                                                   0               blich.liart state ".9hospy                                                             X-
                                                       [IM         LooloAGU Counly Route

                                                              Political Boundaries                                                                                                                                  Lignilloom..
                                                   -------         County aoundo y
                                                                   Tmashlor Boundary                       j
                                                   I:zz=           Vdiarg. Cor:wol- Lisnit                 N
                                                   aw-mmila        UninCOrPw led T                                                                          CL                      VU,x

                                                    This map was Prepared by Tsmothy J. Dolohonty,
                                                    Cartographer, Lasionou County Planning
                                                    Department, Leland. falrAISGn.
                                                                                                                                                                                                       a
                                                                                                                                                                                                       a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        N.,Ikp.,t
                                                                                                                                                                                                                          point
                                                              Revised to July 1. 1986.                                                                                               1-1-              llolorlh.pwt
                                                                                                                                                                                     T-ship 22


                                                                                                                                                                                                                     adult
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       island


                                                                                                                                                                                                  *so

                                                                                                                        110


                                                                                                                                                                                                                      New mile.mon
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         loolft

                                                                                                                                              Leland                                                       rommkorkest"A
                                                                                                                                                                 Township
                                                                                            0*0                                        Carp Al..f                                    Silawa
                                                                                                                                       pPoial                 64                     to
                                                                                                                                                          0                          T"nhip
                                                                                                                                           Due                                                  Soillauss
                                                                                                                                           Lak                                                             9.194.
                                                                                                                                                                                                 also,      Pal.1
                                                                                                                                                               L.A.
                                                                                                   Point                                                                     Sultans
                                                                                                                                                                               Bay
                                                                                                  id an
                                                                                                  L.A.         4%, harbor        Dal
                                                                                                   short
                                                                                                    &a"
                                                                                                                                                                                                               lovest
                                                                                                           21       Lifor To ..'a
                                                                      Sleeping                             .he                                                              Tlltrp"                         Arin
                                                                       fill-                               A-0
                                                                        say                                L.A.
                                                              N an                      6     F=           i                                                                                            Grand
                                                                                                                 T....wp
                                                                          L   Al I
                                                                                                                                 Llm.
                                                                   T    ip 22                                                    L.A.,      lead                                                       Traverse
                                                                                                                                                                                     91 he
                                                                                                                                               14l,                          4
                                                                                                                                                                                                       Day
                                                                             take                                          Meet
                                                                                                                           City                     4                                    22                         Wand
                                                        North
                                                        as,                17     6         4 dickvia.                                       c.d..
                                                         take
                                                       Soulh:ar                   i-                           Ko-                                                 fouch
                                                         Los                 T-                                                              V.-hip
                                                                                    to
                                                                                                                                                                            kao.h..
                                                                                                                                                                           cloW.9
                                                                                                                                 igmo                     Sol a         fiss-d
                                                                   12                                                            L...                                   T.-hip c.d.,                                   to
                                                              E mpire                                      Arl*                                                                      "A.
                                                                                         Gila                0 ITZ.,,o*
                                                                         a D                L. A           Cli     D.W.      12        Shill.,                                                                                .81
                                                              2                                   Wells                                oil                                                      G1.1lick.40.                 A-
                                                                                                           ..!     '...     H.,f
                                                                                                   Lose                     Lee*                                                                                           Glenn
                                                                                                                                                                                  12                             cii- r     .....
                                                                                                                                 cook       Grand Traverse             County                             Area
                                                                                Benz   Is                     County             take                                                                  T      j
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       "on












                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Cl,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                     to






                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                      Page 5-8






                                                     DRAFT

         Future transportation funding will not be sufficient to resolve the inadequacies of the
         Peninsula's roadway network.

            Though detailed solutions to the problems      (especially on M-72), provision of adequate
         facing the roadway network are far from be-       shoulders for vehicular and bike use, and
         ing identified, it is clear that the solutions    general maintenance of pavement surfaces.
         must be comprehensive in nature and in-
         clude both maintenance initiatives as well as         The County is currently experiencing fi-
         major new improvements.                           nancial problems in its attempt to maintain
                                                           the current roadway network. Increased road
            At present, the Peninsula's primary road-      improvements, particularly those that are
         way network is based upon the peripheral          most needed, will require massive amounts
         corridors of M-22 and M-72, providing access      of money for engineering studies, land ac-
         into the Peninsula to the north and west re-      quisition, and construction. While the alloca-
         spectively (see Figure 5-5). The network of       tion of transportation dollars to the Township
         interior roads is inconsistent and does not       has been steadily increasing, it is not suffi-
         permit efficient and timely east-west or north-   cient to offset the tremendous financial costs
         south passage. Traveling across the interior      associated with such projects. Without in-
         of the Peninsula requires following an awk-       creases in local taxes in conjunction with en-
         ward, circuitous, and stop-and-go route. The      tering into long term debt service, the County
         tremendous costs associated with making           may not be able to effectively address the
         improvements to address future needs will         Peninsula's transportation needs in the time
         make their likelihood very small.                 frame necessary. Without a significant in-
                                                           crease in the state gasoline tax very soon,
            Other major road improvements neces-           the likelihood of such resources is very lim-
         sary to resolve critical transportation needs     ited.
         include realignment of key intersections
























                                                                              Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                   Page 5-9






                                                              DRAFT


                                                            Figure 5-6



                   PUBLIC ROAD-END
             WATER ACCESS POINTS
                    LEELANAU COUNTY, MICHIGAN


                                                                                                  got LAT


                    PUBLIC ROAD-END
                    WATER ACCESS POINT                                                               NO;'TWW
                                                                                                       BAY










                          ME

















                                                 QXV MWOR my




                                               LIME TR4 RSf*
                                                       r
                     SLEEPING 8EM                    AWK,
                         BA Y




                      GL        LVE                                                                 NEST ARm


               *A@RrH BAR LAKE                                                                  aW TRA WRSE 84 Y







                                       -----------









           Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
           Page 5- 10





                                                          DRAFT

          Parking and congestion problems will increase in the urban centers and key activity
          centers as tourism grows.

              The existing urban centers (mostly vil-            parking practices, hazardous conditions to
          lages) throughout the Peninsula are compar-            the public health, safety, and welfare, and in-
          atively small. Parking is generally limited to         creases in traffic volumes and noise along
          the streets with few parking lots situated in or       neighboring residential streets.
          near the retail areas. At present, parking
          within these downtown areas can be difficult               As tourism grows and year round devel-
          during the warmer months of the year and               opment continues, these conditions will
          particularly during special events. This situa-        worsen.
          tion not only adds to the congestion in these
          communities but often results in illegal


          Increased conflicts will evolve between visitors and waterfront property owners along
          road ends.

              The Leelanau Peninsula abounds with                along the waterfront adjacent to the road
          inland lakes. Though there are numerous                ends.
          public access points to most of the lakes
          throughout the Peninsula, public access is af-             For many such property owners, these
          forded to many residents and visitors by road          road ends contribute to increased noise lev-
          ends (see Figure 5-6). Allowing for public ac-         els, invasion and/or destruction of property,
          cess via these road ends is a policy strongly          and the loss of privacy. As the Peninsula's
          upheld by the Leelanau County Road Com-                population and tourism industry grow, this
          mission. Along with the merits of such a pol-          conflict will only heighten. Yet it is clearly in
          icy come negative impacts to those residing            the public interest to maintain these public
                                                                 access sites.

























                                                                                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                           Page 5-11






                                                    DRAFT


                                                   Chapter 6

                                     COMMUNITY SERVICES


         INTRODUCTION

            Community services in Leelanau County are currently limited. Given the growth and
         change in structure of the County's population, need and demand for services will increase.
         Service needs may range from additional public safety to a wider variety of human services.
         An issue in future service provision includes accessibility; linking those with service needs to
         the service providers. Emerging patterns in community service provision include:

            ï¿½ Community leaders and the citizenry are recognizing potential needs for additional com-
              munity services (e.g., education, health, recreation).
            ï¿½ An older population is becoming established in the County that is accustomed to urban-
              ized levels of service.
            ï¿½ Demand on fire and police services is rising.
            ï¿½ Youth services are limited in the County and needs for them appear to be increasing.
































                                                                             Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                  Page 6-1





                                                     DRAFT




                                                    Figure 6-1


                                       Select General Fund Expenditures

                       Substance Abuse

                    El Mental Health Board
        120000
                    El Social Services

        100000
                    El Commission on Aging

        80000 -        Parks and Recreation


        60000


        40000


        20000

                     IN
                              77
             0.- @L  ....;  :,:,
                  1984       1985      1986       1987       1988       1989       1990       1991

                                          Source: Leelanau County Planning Department
                                                     MOM!











































          Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page 6-2






                                                          DRAFT

          While the need for additional community services is recognized, the financial support
          to provide them is not there.

              Results of the Leelanau County citizen                  - Need for affordable accessible health
          survey, leadership survey, the Leelanau                       and emergency care services.
          Children's Report, and growth management                    - An increased number of individuals
          forums all recognize the potential need for                   "falling through the cracks" of human
          more community and human services in the                      service programs (e.g., health care,
          County. Additionally, it is recognized that fis-              public assistance) because of reduc-
          cal and technical resources are limited to                    tions in state and federal support.
          provide such services, given budget con-
          straints at the state, county and local level.              - Transportation problems of the needy
                                                                        and the inability for them to reach ser-
              Some of the recurring issues found in                     vice centers.
          these reports and discussions with human                    - Lack of affordable housing and a need
          service providers include:                                    to rehabilitate older housing stock, par-
              ï¿½ Economic disparity in the County-the                    ticularly rental housing.
                widening margin between the more af-                  - Need for more activities for teens.
                fluent in-migrants and less affluent resi-            - Perceived lack of law enforcement. In-
                dent population.                                        creasing crime rates, but not crack-
              ï¿½ Need for more public recreational and                   downs.
                cultural opportunities.                               With the increase and change in profile of
              ï¿½ Lack of good job opportunities for those         the County's population, sophisticated ser-
                graduating from high school.                     vice needs and demand will likely outstrip the
              ï¿½ Family breakdown (e.g., single parent            professional and fiscal capabilities of local
                households) and parental substance               units of government. Even now, several re-
                abuse.                                           gionally-based human service agencies and
                                                                 churches are relied upon to provide for hu-
              ï¿½ Cultural and social barriers to accepting        man service needs in the County. It is likely
                assistance (i.e., failure to link those in       that intergovernmental cooperation will play a
                need with available help because of              critical role in future community service pro-
                negative perceptions associated with             vision.
                taking advantage of assistance pro-
                grams).















                                                                                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                             Page 6-3















                                                                                                                                          0     cn     0 cn       0
                                                                                                                                Bingham
               CbN                                                                                                              Township
                                                                                                                                Centerville
                                                                                                                                            . ......   ...
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                                Cleveland
               cx
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                                Elmwood
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                                Empire
                                                                                                                                Township    .....
                                                                                                                         Empire Village
                                                                                                                                            .........................
                                                                                                                                            .................... . .
                                                                                                                                Greilickville
                                                                                                                      co                    .....
                                                                                                                                CPD         ...... .

                                                                                                                                Glen Arbor
                                                                                                                                                             . . .......
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                                Kasson
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                                Leelanau
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                                Leland
                                                                                                                                                       ............. ........
                                                                                                                                                       .............
                                                                                                                                                       ................
                                                                                                                                            ..................................
                                                                                                                                Township    ... .........-...... . .......
                                                                                                                                Northport
                                                                                                                                                       ....... ...
                                                                                                                                Village
                                                                                                                                Solon
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                           Suttons Bay
                                                                                                                                Township
                                                                                                                           Suttons Bay
                                                                                                                                            . . . ...........
                                                                                                                                             .. ...........
                                                                                                                                             . ...........
                                                                                                                                                 ..............
                                                                                                                                Village

                                                                                                                                                            ............
                                                                                                                                                            .............
                                                                                                                                               ..      . . ............
                                                                                                                                                       ,: . ............
                                                                                                                                                       ...... ... ............
                                                                                                                                                            ............
                                                                                                                                                            ............
                                                                                                                                                       X: .... .............
                                                                                                                          Traverse City






                                                         DRAFT

         An older population will place more             demands on community service systems, in
         particular, health care and emergency services.

             Because of its small size, rural nature and     - etc.) and they will Jikely expect to receive
         limited budget, Leelanau County and its local          such services, since similar results have oc-
         units of government have not provided a high           curred in many other northern counties.
         level of services to residents. Demand for
         more sophisticated services will likely result            An aspect that should also be considered
         because of the magnitude and character of              when dealing with an older population is that
         population changes in the county. The major-           of school support. Oftentimes school districts
         ity of the County's population increase can be         have trouble garnering political support for
         attributed to in-migration. Many new resi-             school taxes from households who do not
         dents are retirees relocating from urban ar-           have children in the school system.
         eas that provide a relatively high level of
         services (police, fire, health care, recreation,





























                                                                                    Working Paper #5 - TreZ Future'
                                                                                                          Page 6-5





                                                                            DRAFT


                                                                          Figure 6-3

                                          Human Service Agencies in Leelanau County

              American Red Cross                             Leellanau County Probate Court                Northport Senior Mealsite
              County Road 616, Route 1, Box 12               Courthouse                                    Trinity Church, 105 Warren
              Glen Arbor, MI 49636                           Leland, MI 49654                              Northport, MI 49670
              (616)334-4261                                  (616)256-9803                                 (616)946-2720

              Child and Adult Protective Services            Leelanau County Youth and                     Peshawbestown Senior Mealsite
              102 S. Madison                                 Substance Abuse and Leelanau                  Immaculate Conception Church
              Suttons Bay, M1 49682                          County Probate Court                          M-22 Peshawbostown
              (616)271-3442                                  Courthouse                                    Suttons Bay, M 149682
                                                             Leland, MI 49654                              (616)271-3018
              Grand Traverse Band of                         (616)256-7783
              Ottawa/Chippewa Indians                                                                      St. Rita's Church
              Route 1, Box 135                               Leelanau Memorial Hospital                    8707 Hill Street
              Suttons Bay, MI 49682                          213 S. High Street                            Maple City, MI 49664
              (616)271-3538                                  Northport, MI 49670                           (616)228-5823
                                                             (616)386-5101
              Holy Rosary Church                                                                           Suftons Bay Airea Schools
              3919 Gatzke Road                               Leland United Methodist Church                P.O. Box 367
              Cedar, MI 49621                                106 N. Fourth Street                          Suttons Bay, M11 49682
              (616)228-5429                                  Leland, MI 49654                              (616)271-3846
                                                             (616)256-9088
              Lake Leelanau Mealsite                                                                       Suttons Bay
              Lake Leelanau Fire Hall, Old 204               Maple City Senior Mealsite                    Congregational Church
              Lake Leelanau, MI 49653                        Lion's Club                                   Madison & Lincoln, P.O. Box 70
              (616)256-9611                                  County Road 616                               Suftons Bay, M11 49682
                                                             Maple City, MI 49664                          (616)271-6036
              Leelanau County 86th District Court
              P.O. Box 578, Courthouse                       Maple Valley Nursing Home                     Suffons Bay Senior Mealsite
              Leland, MI 49654                               of Maple City, Inc.                           Suttons Bay-Birigham Fire Hall
              (616)256-9931                                  Route 2, Box 7                                St. Mary's
                                                             Maple City, MI 49664                          Suftons Bay, MI 49682
              Leelanau County                                (616)228-5895                                 (616)271-3520
              Commission on Aging
              209 St. Mary's, P.O. Box 192                   MSU-Cooperative                               United Methodist Church
              Lake Leelanau, MI 49653                        Extension Service                             106 North Fourth Street
              (616)256-7590                                  116 Phillips                                  Leland, MI 49654
                                                             Lake Leelanau, M 149653                       (616)256-9088
              Leelanau County Department                     (616)256-9888
              of Social Services                                                                           USDA-Agri. Stabilization
              P.O. Box 427                                   Northport Evangelical                         & Conservation Service
              Suttons Bay, M 149682                          Covenant Church                               Old 204
              (616)271-3442                                  409 Shabwasung, P.O. Box 367                  Lake Leelanau, MI 49653
                                                             Northport, MI 49670                           (616)256-9791
                                                             (616)386-7362









              Woddng Paper #5 - Trend Future
              Page 6-6
              j






                                                       DRAFT

         Needs of those with low incomes will increase as cost of living rises inthe County.

             As indicated previously, the percentage of       recruited or served because of transportation
         the County's population receiving public as-         problems.
         sistance is generally low, approximately 6%              Accessibility and transportation problems
         (see Figure 1-21 in Chapter 1). The number           are recurring issues in Leelanau County hu-
         of recipients have fluctuated between 1982           man service provision. As with many rural
         and 1990 from a low of 812 in 1986 to a high         communities, identifying and reaching those
         of 924 in 1990. While the percentage of total        in need is more difficult because of cultural
         population below poverty level has de-               barriers and the dispersed nature of rural
         creased, consistent numbers of individuals           populations. Many of the service agencies in
         on public assistance suggest that this per-          the region are actually based in Traverse
         centage is lower only because additional             City, or other counties, where they may have
         persons of affluence have migrated into the          limited utility to Leelanau County residents
         County.                                              because of accessibility problems. Of the 238
                                                              service agencies listed for the 10-county re-
             Northwest Michigan Human Service                 gion, 24 are located in Leelanau. Many of
         Agency, Inc. (NWMHSA) acts as an umbrella            these are churches (see Figure 6-3).
         agency for Leelanau County human service
         needs. The agency serves nine other coun-                Department of Public Health, Community
         ties as both a service provider and regional         Mental Health, Commission on Aging and
         liaison for a variety of human service groups.       United Way are operated on a multi-county
         NWMHSA's primary programs are Head                   level. The County Department of Social Ser-
         Start, meals on wheels, home weatherization          vices (DSS) often turns to multi-unit service
         and food distribution. In general, needs and         agencies based in Traverse City for client
         demand for these services run high. For ex-          assistance. Red Cross and Salvation Army
         ample, the Head Start program has a contin-          have local contacts in the County and often
         ual waiting list. This year they will increase       coordinate with DSS and other service
         the class size from 20 to 30 and run two             providers to stretch limited resources. Sev-
         classes a day, rather than one. In addition to       eral churches also provide vital assistance
         the waiting list, many children are simply not       through food banks.



         Child care and child service needs for households in poverty will increase.

             According to the 1991 Leelanau Chil-             holds and/or widows who may be in need of
         dren's report, there is a need to increase           assistance. In 1980, nearly one-fifth of all
         services to youth in the county. Changing            families (19%) were comprised of a female-
         family structure ( i.e., increases in single par-    headed householder with no husband pre-
         ent households) and increasing economic              sent. Data for 1990 is not yet available.
         and domestic pressures of those with low in-
         comes puts increased stress on youth. Hu-                Investment in the County's youth is seen
         man service providers are concerned with             as  a critical need to head off some of the
         the number of female-headed households               more critical social problems of the chroni-
         with no husband present. This generally in-          cally underprivileged.
         dicates the number of single-parent house-


                                                                                 Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                       Page 6-7





                                                        DRAFT




                                                       Figure 6-4


                             Leelanau County Warrant Statistics
                                                                                       El Felony
                300                                                                       Juvenile Felony

                250                                                                       Misdemeanor
                        Im!
                                                                                          Juvenile Misdemeanor
                200
                                75
                                                                                          AbUse/Neglect
                150 -


                100 - -



                 50 -
                                                                            .771 L-4
                  0
                      1981    1982    1983    1984   1985    1986    1987    1988
                                     Source: Leelanau County Sherilfs Dept



































          Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
          Page 6-8






                                                          DRAFT

          Fire, emergency response, police calls and public annoyance crimes (trespassing, dis-
          orderly conduct and vandalism) will increase with additional seasonal population in-
          creases,


             As can be seen by Figure 6-4, crime                    Currently, jail capacity is 19 persons. The
          statistics in the County have fluctuated con-          jail has had days over capacity every year
          siderably since 1981. There is no real trend           since 1982. In 1990, there were a total of 158
          pointing toward increases in reported crimes.          days that the jail was at or over capacity
          However, community surveys and growth                  (43% of the time). While this is the most seri-
          management forums reflect a perceived in-              ous overcrowding recorded, there have been
          crease in crime and an associated lack of en-          75, 87 and 47 days over capacity in 1985,
          forcement in the County. As seasonal popu-             1986 and 1987 respectively. This condition
          lations increase, however, crimes such as              has now been persistent enough, for long
          vandalism, trespassing and disorderly con-             enough that additional jail facilities will likely
          duct will increase.                                    need to be constructed soon.










































                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 6-9






                                                        DRAFT

                                                       Chapter 7

                                            INFRASTRUCTURE


          INTRODUCTION

             The extent to which infrastructure exists within a geographic region can have a dramatic
          impact upon the current and future character of the area. Community infrastructure may in-
          clude nothing more than basic private services such as electricity, gas, and phone service. On
          the other hand, and where funds are sufficient to meet the cost, public sanitary sewer, water
          and storm sewer infrastructure may be introduced. Such infrastructure can resolve or prevent
          public health problems and foster economic development. The unplanned expansion of in-
          frastructure can also dramatically and negatively change the character of a community and
          region. At present, with the exception of roads (see Chapter 6) the infrastructure on the Lee-
          lanau Peninsula is quite limited though the future is in question.

             Emerging trends include the following:

             ï¿½ The current sprawl pattern of land development minimizes the pressure for new or ex-
               panded public infrastructure systems.
             ï¿½ New public infrastructure systems to serve existing developed areas are relatively costly
               due to the small population centers and limited cost sharing opportunities.



























                                                                                  Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                       Page 7-1






                                                                                                    DRAFT
                                                                                                 Figure 7-1




                                                                                                                     "aw. Pays a,"*
                                         INFRASTRUCTURE

                                         Map Source:

                                                                                                                              ".T.1 was I&L"o
                                         Leelanau Coudty Poad MaO





                                                                                          %11

                                                                                                                                                             433
                                                                       Of                                                                                                                 %6
                                                                                                04410 w"dow,11L."s                                L 9
                                                                                                1. LMd I.*.
                                                                                                                                                                                             w
                                                                          %






                                                                                                                      L.N.
                                                                                                                                                                                             Ic
                                                                                                                                                                                             I.-



                                                                                                                                                                                   N         z


                                         Sam N&WM GLAW,


                                                                                                                             6-2


                                                                                                                        an-
                                                                           99    L    9                   a
                                              lot                                                                a a v a a     v                                                       -0e



                                                                                                  441                   a          "I
                                                                                                                                                  -7  A7,g
                                                                                                    a"" a"
                                                                                                     ,an
                                                            a's                                                     a..                                XK
                                                                                                                                            "K.X.
                                                                                                                                                   MIN,
                                                                                                                                             V
                                                                                      "a


                                                                                                                           L      0    a
                                             9-6.
                                                                                                                                                                                   S
                                                                                                  Fj
                                                                                                 I'at                                                                      0     1     2     3

                                                                                                                                                                             M I    L E S
                                      LEGEND                                     LEELANAU COUNTY
                                                      AREAS WITH NATURAL GAS SERVICE                                                S      EXISTING SEWEKSYSTEM
                                                            from Michigan Consolidated Gas Co,                                      S*      NEW-SEWEFt-S`YSTEM
                                                      diff(ts W-IT-H-- P-U-B----L, IC WATE--R
                                                            -WH-OLV COUNTYIS SERVED BY
                                                            ELECTRIC: Cherry Land Rural Electric Corp. or Consumers Power
                                                            TELEPHONE: Century or Michigan Bell




                  Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                  Page 7-2






                                                        DRAFT

          Infrastructure will play a limited, but increasing role in the Peninsula as urbanization
          continues.

             The Peninsula is only partially served with      tion of public infrastructure in the near future.
          basic infrastructure. Only electrical and           The reasons include:
          phone service are available throughout all
          areas of the Peninsula. Gas service is avail-             Though     urbanization    is increasing
          able in the eastern one-third of the County.              throughout the Peninsula, the predomi-
          Municipal water systems serve Empire,                     nant low density sprawl development
          Northport and Sutton's Bay. Public sewer                  pattern minimizes the current need for
          system is available in Suttons Bay, and                   public infrastructure (except roads).
          Leelanau    Township      expects to        begin
          construction of a public lagoon system in the             The cost of providing infrastructure to a
          fall of 1991 to primarily serve Leland (see               low density development pattern is very
          Figure 7-1).                                              high while public financial resources are
                                                                    quite limited.
             As urbanization increases, pressures to
          introduce or -expand existing infrastructure              Current local land use planning and
          usually also increase. For example, with ur-              zoning programs do not systematically
          banization comes significant increases in                 link new development with the planned
          concentrated water runoff flows. Stormwater               expansion (or introduction) of public in-
          infrastructure is necessary to control flooding           frastructure.
          and protect water resources from runoff
          laiden with sedimentation and other impuri-               The seasonal variation in population
          ties. Higher densities of development may                 throughout the Peninsula, and the re-
          preclude the use of on-site facilities for                sulting abbreviated period when infras-
          sewage disposal or potable water. Public                  tructure improvements may be per-
          sewer, water, and stormwater infrastructure               ceived as most beneficial, and who
          are often both the prerequisite for increased             should pay for those benefits, may de-
          levels of urbanization and solutions to                   lay decisions to commit to a public in-
          evolving public health risks.                             frastructure system.

             The Leelanau Peninsula presents circum-
          stances which will strongly limit the introduc-
















                                                                                  Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                        Page 7-3






                                                      DRAFT


                                                     Figure 7-2




















                              ..........



































                           Unplanned Growth                          Planned Growth







         WorWng Paper #5 - Trend Future
         Page 7-4






                                                          DRAFT

          The provision of new infrastructure in existing villages will be more costly, and hence
          less likely, than the provision of new facilities as a part of new large scale develop-
          ment.

              The irony of the above projection may not          of the new tax base to the local government
          be apparent. Digging up existing streets to in-        often outweighs the identified costs, because
          stall sewer lines or storm drains is often more        they are born by other governmental agen-
          costly than sinking them on virgin land as             cies who have little or no say in the decision.
          part of a new development. Yet incremental
          expansion of existing villages generally has              However, at some unknown point, the
          far less negative impacts on the environment,          density of development in various areas will
          roads, and other public services (such as              either warrant or require public infrastructure,
          police and fire) and usually results in a              but the number of users served will still be so
          smaller loss of valued open space. New large           low that the cost will be very high per user.
          scale development, when located apart from             This will occur first with roads (see Chapter
          existing developed areas on the other hand,            6), next with sewers around inland lakes and
          generally can be serviced by on-site                   in existing villages. Though new facilities may
          'Package" private sewer and water systems,             not be built, the issue of infrastructure ex-
          in a cost effective manner, but secondary im-          pansion will evolve as a significant planning
          pacts on roads, the environment and the in-            consideration and, at least indirectly, have an
          troduction of a major new activity center in a         increasing impact on local planning decisions
          low density area become public costs not               and programs.
          typically borne by the developer. The allure





























                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 7-5






                                                       DRAFT

                                                      Chapter 8
         INTRODUCTION                          ENVIRONMENT

             It is the splendor of the natural environment on the Leelanau Peninsula that annually at-
         tracts scores of tourists as well as a growing number of retirees and commuters to establish
         permanent residence. Yet, as the permanent and seasonal populations increase, the risk of
         environmental degradation also increases. The abundance of fish and wildlife and the vitality
         of vegetation is only as great as the surrounding environment will support. While many mea-
         sures have been taken to protect the environment of the Peninsula, and many more are pos-
         sible, the quality of the air, land and water is also impaired by human activities many hundreds
         of miles away.

             The future quality of the environment on the Peninsula must not be taken for granted.
         While it currently is among the best in the state, it has a fragile foundation. The soils are
         largely sandy (and hence porous)-easily susceptible to surface contamination and a ready
         conduit for pollution of groundwater from hazardous chemicals. The air supply is heavily influ-
         enced by land use activities in the Lake Michigan Basin and increasingly includes pollutants
         carded from hundreds of miles away. Lake Michigan continues to serve as a dumping ground
         for a wide variety of chemical pollutants which make their way into fish and other wildlife far-
         ther up the food chain--4ncluding humans.

             Specific patterns which are emerging include:

             ï¿½ Air quality continues to decline due largely to land use activities hundreds of miles away
               within the Lake Michigan Basin.
             ï¿½ Sprawl-like development is the leading threat to the quality of land and water resources.
             ï¿½ Surface waters are vulnerable to contamination due to the lack of a coordinated
               stormwater management program.
             ï¿½ New sites of groundwater contamination are being discovered.
             ï¿½ Significant losses of sensitive environments (wetlands, sand dunes, floodplains, high risk
               erosion areas, shorelines) are continuing from many small incremental encroachments.
             ï¿½ Solid waste disposal is not the huge problem it is in most counties for the foreseeable
               future, but is likely to be later unless a stronger multi-county solid waste disposal alliance
               is created.












                                                                                  Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                        Page 8- 1






                                                      DRAFT


                                                    Figure 8-1
           -KFY

                 HAVE V-EC-ENTLY EXC-ZZPLD
           EEOZOMM SMANDAWS                                    CAAK


                                                                anistique
                                                                           cA. I"ce

                                      MENO                                Petoskey
                                                                   chavievol
                                                                                  LVI Ix


                                                               Leland





                         Greenecy
           WISCONSIN





                                                                       MIC-1-116AN






                                    till%ftukee
                                                   Grand No

                                                              OTTA%,v,,


                                    0 Kcicane
                                                 ILJ              MIAN

             ILLIN015




                                        CmIcAtto            EN
                                                        j@

                                           ckuly






         Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
         Page 8-2






                                                          DRAFT

          Air quality levels will remain high throughout the Peninsula, though pollution from
          hundreds of miles away will continue to lower air quality.

              The most extensive public air quality.             local air quality. Preliminary results of a multi-
          monitoring program in Michigan, operated by            state air pollution study suggest that major
          the Air Quality Division of the MDNR, does             concentrations of smog are crossing Lake
          not maintain a permanent monitoring site for           Michigan from the Greater Chicago area and
          Leelanau County. As a result, no long term             significantly heightening ozone levels along
          air quality statistics are available for the           shoreline areas of Michigan. The preliminary
          Peninsula. However, this attests to the exist-         results of a temporary ozone monitoring sta-
          ing high air quality in the County as monitors         tion established as part of this study near the
          are usually only placed in counties containing         Village of Empire, suggest federal standards
          significant air pollution sources. Counties            were exceeded three times between June
          without a monitoring station are presumed to           and August of 1991. The Garden Peninsula,
          be in compliance with air quality standards            northwest of Leelanau Peninsula in the Up-
          (except ozone, which is a regional pollutant).         per Peninsula exceeded federal ozone stan-
          The nearest counties to Leelanau which have            dards during the summer of 1991 as well
          been monitored, though not regularly nor for           (see Figure 8-1). Federal sanctions can be
          all pollutants, are Charlevoix and Grand               levied upon communities which exceed
          Traverse and findings there have always at-            ozone standards in excess of one violation
          tested to high air quality levels.                     per four year average.

              Industrial and vehicular emissions are the             Ozone is a pollutant formed when certain
          principal causes of air pollution. Thus, the           vehicular and industrial pollutants react in the
          biggest threat to future air quality in the            presence of heat and sunlight. The ozone
          Peninsula come from three possible sources:            gas is an irritant and causes respiratory
          1) a new large heavy industrial complex or             problems in humans.
          incinerator in or near the County, 2) many
          more vehicles using the roads and/or 3) air                Acid rain may also pose a future threat.
          pollutants which migrate long distances.               Acid rain refers to rainwater which is acidic
                                                                 because of air pollutants. It can damage
              Though the future extent of industrial de-         forests and increase the pH in surface waters
          velopment in or near the County is unknown,            to the point that fish cannot survive. Little is
          vehicle emissions can be expected to in-               presently documented about the extent of
          crease with population growth, tourism, and            damage if any, caused by acid rain in the
          expansion of retail and commercial services            Peninsula. However, data gathered on
          (increasing the number of vehicle trips, vehi-         Beaver Island shows a nine year average pH
          cle miles, and congestion). Reductions in the          of 4.2 and a 1989 (most recent year) average
          permitted level of vehicular emissions which           of 5.0. "Pure" rain water has a pH value of
          may be brought about by new federal stan-              approximately 5.6, precipitation with a pH
          dards (currently being developed) may be               below that number is considered to be acidic.
          offset by an increasing number of vehicles in          The source of acid rain is suspected to be in-
          the County.                                            dustrial activities, often burning low sulphur
                                                                 coal, hundreds of miles away.
              At this point, it appears it is industrial
          emissions from urban centers outside of the
          state which pose the greatest threat to the


                                                                                      Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 8-3





                                                                          DROT
                                                                        Figure 8-2



             MAJOR WATERWAYS
             LEELANAU COUNTY, MICHIGAN


                                                                                                                       Ciallread
                                                                                                                         A3y
                                                                                                                  A. Mud Lake
                                                                                                             Xthl Lake




                                                                                                      Garthe Pond
                                                                                                                        Nothport        Grand Twerse Bay
                                                                                                                          Bay

                                                                         Lake michigan
                Perennial Rivers, Creeks and Streams                                                                         Ingalls
                                                                                                                              Bay
                                                                                                           1,ake
                                                                                                      Ban
                  Intermittent Creeks and Streams                                                                          & mou
                                                                                                                           \j gey Lake
                                                                                                                          Omena
                                                                                                                           Bay



                                                                                   Lake Leelonau
                                                                                                                  A.%
                                                                               Duck LIalte@PPV-mofff Pond
                                   Hidden Lake          Good Harbor
                                                            Bay
                                       Skff Lake                                                          r

                                    Narada Lau
                   Sleeping Bear
                                           Bass Lake                                                 Sdmal Lake       HendlYX Lake
                        Bay                                        Lode Traverse Lake
                                                                           .411 1                                  Cherry
                                       Tucker Lake School Lake                                                     Cove
   Day MIMI P0                         FIsher Lake          #LIM La.b.1
                       Glen I             Brooks 14ke
                                                                                                                       West Ann
                                                                                                                  Grand Tmyerse Bay
             North Bar Lake                     Dow Lake
             South Bar Lake    j

                                                               'Bright Lake
                Taylor Lake   Gilben Lake     Pollack Lake                        .1\                         Cedar Lake
                                Wells Lake! %      0
                                                        Hart Lake
                                     -Armstrong Lake              I Shisler Lake
                                                                  Cook Lake
                                                         Davis La*e
                                                                                                                    @Nb\,41po,.l
                                                                                                                             Inj









































              Work Paper #5 -Trend Future
              Page 8-4






                                                          DRAFT

          The existing high surface water quality of inland lakes and streams may be reduced as
          new development occurs in the absence of a coordinated stormwater management
          program.

              Though comprehensive programs of wa-               segments not designated as trout streams
          ter quality testing have only recently been            include Shalda or Sucker Creek at the
          initiated, data generated over the past 15             Narada Lake outlet and the Crystal River be-
          years document relatively high water quality           tween Fisher Dam and Glen Lake. No rivers
          levels throughout the Peninsula. This is par-          or streams in the County have lost "trout
          ticularly true in the Peninsula's inland lakes.        stream" designation.
          Of the eight major Peninsula inland lakes
          evaluated by the MDNR since 1982, all but                 There are no health advisories against full
          one have been classified as oligotrophic-              body contact in Peninsula waters, nor any
          highest of three quality ratings attainable.           advisories against eating fish caught in any
          The majority of these lakes are, however, in           lake or stream within the County. There are
          the upper range of this classification and are         health advisories against consumption of
          near or at borderline mesotrophic conditions.          lake trout and salmon caught in Lake Michi-
          School Lake is the only lake evaluated which           gan or Traverse Bay, but these apply to all
          received a mesotrophic rating. The more eu-            Lake Michigan waters.
          trophic a lake, the more nutrients (and hence
          plant life) it has. A mesotrophic lake has                There are only four entities presently dis-
          more nutrients than an oligotrophic lake, and          charging treated liquid waste via approved
          a eutrophic lake the most of all.                      NPDES permits. All discharges are to Lake
                                                                 Michigan or Grand Traverse Bay.
              Current conditions of the Peninsula's
          streams do not uniformly suggest the same                 The future quality of the Peninsula's water
          high quality. Studies prepared during the past         resources will be impacted by pollutants dis-
          ten years and as recently as 1990 have iden-           charged directly to surface waters. Concerns
          tified streams of high quality, including the          for and threats to these water resources will
          Crystal River, as well as streams of lower             heighten as future residential development
          quality such as Houdek Creek which are car-            escalates the use of lawn fertilizer and pesti-
          rying elevated levels of nutrients such as ni-         cides. These pollutants and others from agri-
          trates and phosphorous.                                cultural operations could damage Peninsula-
                                                                 wide ecosystems, as well as the continued
              However, relatively speaking, the water            marketability of the Peninsula as a tourist
          quality of rivers and streams in the Peninsula         destination. Pressure upon lake and stream
          is very high. Nearly all the streams and major         shoreline areas for future development will
          tributaries are designated trout steams.               compromise area water quality unless very
                                                                 carefully designed and sited in accordance
              Trout require clean, cold, oxygenated wa-          with coordinated stormwater management
          ter to survive and are a good indicator                regulations.
          species of water quality. The only stream







                                                                                     Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                            Page 8-5






                                                                                   DRAFT


                                                                               Figure 8-3



                                                SITES OF
                                       ENVIRONMENTAL
                                       CONTAMINATION                                                                   23
                                     LEELANAU COUNTY, MICHIGAN                                               19



                                                                                                              0404
                                                                                      7


                                                                                                         3

                                                                                                18



                                                                                             9
                                                                                              13           2
                                                                                                      t2
                                          21                                                         6           17 24
                                                                        11 5                         15            22
                                                                                                                     8



                                                                           LIST OF SITES OF
                                                               ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION



                                     1    Commercial wells - Cedar                         13.     PeplinskiFarrn
                                     2.   Elmwood Township Dump                            14.     Residential well - Maple City
                                     3.   Frigid Foods Farms                               15.     Residential well - Elmwood Township
                                     4.   Fuel Oil Spill - Leelanau Twp.                   16.     Residential well - Centerville Twp.
                                     5.   Glen's Sanitary Landfill                         17.     Speedway Station
                                     6.   Grand Traverse Overall Supply                    18.     Standard Gas Station
                                     7.   Groundwater Contamination - Leland               19.     Stowe Oil Co.
                                     8.   Holiday station                                  20.     Sunoco Quick Mart
                                     9.   Konieczka Cottage                                21.     Taghon's Service
                                     10.  Leelanau County Road Commission                  22.     Total Pet, Inc. Marine Terminal
                                                  Maple City                               23.     Vulcan Cincinnati, Inc.
                                     11.  Leelanau County Landfill                         24.     Zephyr, Inc.
                                     12.  Leelanau County Road Commission -
                                                  Suttons Bay

                                     S
                                     ume. Afkfton Sftw of Ent,*onmental Contandhadon
                                     o                                            Act 307, EnWromnonto/ Raspons* Divbkn, Mchigan Dopeftmetit of
                                     Natural Resources March, 199 YJ




              Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
              Page 8-6





                                                       DRAFT

        The identification of new sites of groundwater contamination will result In new efforts
        to clean up existing sites of contamination and to prevent future ones.
    *
            All residents and visitors of Leelanau            ered daily in Michigan. With the largely sandy
        Peninsula are dependent upon groundwater              soils on the Peninsula and the ready conduits
        resources for their potable water supply. The         sandy soils present for groundwater contam-
        vast majority of the population reside in sin-        ination, it is unlikely that all existing sites of
        gle family homes and each household de-               contamination have as yet been discovered.
        rives its potable water by an on-site private
        well. This condition, in the face of increasing           The highly vulnerable soils of the Penin-
        land development and natural soil conditions,         sula require the use of careful measures
        will present growing challenges for the               when establishing new facilities using haz-
        assurance of a quality groundwater resource.          ardous chemicals. Similarly, other potential
                                                              pollutant sources, such as septic systems,
            Annually the DNR publishes a list of              need to be carefully sited and regularly ser-
        known sites of surface soil and -groundwater          viced and inspected.
        contamination in Michigan. Known as the 307
        list (from PA 307 which requires compiling                Likewise, existing contamination sites
        the registry), it is the leading record of sur-       need to be cleaned up to prevent the spread
        face and subsu     'rface contamination. As of        of pollutants over a wider area and to prevent
        March 1991, there were 24 sites in Leelanau           the eventual contamination of surface water.
        County on the 307 list (see Figure 8-3). While        Unfortunately, the low density sprawl and lin-
        this is only 0.0085% of all the sites statewide       ear development patterns along County
        (2837), one of these sites is on the federal          roads which characterize the Peninsula, cre-
        CERCLA list of the top 79 in Michigan (Grand          ate cost prohibitive conditions for the estab-
          raverse Overall Supply, a dry cleaning es-          lishment of more sophisticated public sewage
        tablishment). While many of these sites in-           treatment facilities which could reduce the
        volve pollution from old industrial activities,       threat of groundwater contamination.
        gas stations and facilities using hazardous
        chemicals, new sites are still being discov-



















                                                                                   Woddng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                         Page 8-7






                                                        DRAFT








                  SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS
                       LEELANAU COUNTY, MICHIGAN










                             Wetland Areas


                             Critical Dune Areas






































                                     -------------













         Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
         Page 8-8
          z






                                                       DRAFT

         Decreases in the quality and quantity of sensitive environments, including wetlands,
         woodlands, shoreline and dune areas, will likely occur with future growth.

             Sensitive environments such as sand             decreased by nearly _. While this loss of
         dunes and shorelines are often areas highly         wetlands may not be wholly attributable to
         attractive for development, or in the case of       the urban development trend, it does illus-
         wetlands (and sometimes floodplains or high         trate the pressure which the growing Penin-
         risk erosion areas), unrecognized for the val-      sula is placing upon sensitive and irreplace-
         ues that they possess (see Figure 8-4). State       able natural environments. As development
         laws regulate, but do not prohibit, develop-        continues, whether it be of a low or high
         ment in many sensitive environments. State          density character, wetlands and similar
         laws have their greatest beneficial impact on       sensitive environments will increasingly find
         large projects. Some activities which are de-       themselves being encroached upon, de-
         structive in sensitive environments are ex-         stroyed, and degraded.
         empt from most regulation, such as agricul-
         ture and forestry.                                      These special resources play critical roles
                                                             in the character and quality of life in the
             However, the   greatest threat to sensitive     Peninsula. Water purification and animal
         environments comes from the cumulative ef-          habitats provided by wetlands and wood-
         fect of many small actions over a long period       lands will be diminished as will scenic vistas
         of time. These include small fills for beach,       of hillsides, shoreline and dune areas, and
         land shaping for views, or drainage modifica-       tourist generating features. It will take a well
         tions. Over time, significant amounts of sen-       coordinated effort by all jurisdictions in the
         sitive environments can be lost. For example,       County to protect these sensitive environ-
         preliminary figures indicate that while urban-      ments.
         ized land acreage increased by nearly 38%
         between 1977 and 1990, wetland acreage
























                                                                                 Working Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                      Page 8-9





                                                  DRAFT

                                                 Figure 8-5

                                            Leelanau County
                                        Projected Waste Stream
                                                (Tons/Day)

                                                                                    Unit Waste
                                     1982        1987       1992        2007        Generation
                                                                                       Rate
                                                                                  (lb/capita/day)
         Permanent Population        14,143     151428      16,525     20,300
         Seasonally Adjusted         18,723     30,000      32,000     39,000
         Population
         Organics
           Newsprint                  0.9         2.2         2.3        2.         -0.1
        -Office Paper                 0.5         0.7         0.7        0.9            0.0
        -Corrugated                   2.7         6.3         6.7        8.3            0.4
        -Yard Waste                   0.8         0.7         0.8        1.0           -0.0
        -Textiles                     1.0         0.6         0.6        0.7            0.0
        -Plastic                      1.9         3.2         3.4        4.2            0.2
        -Maaazines                    0.0         1.6         1.7        2.1        -0.1
        -Food Waste                   2.4         3.8         4.0        5.0            0.3
           Wood                       1.0         2.0         2.1        2.6            0.1
        -Fines                        0.0         1.1         1.2        1.5            0.1
           Other Organics             5.9         6.4         6.9        8.5            0.4
         Inorganics
           Glass                      0.9         1.3         1.4        1.7            0.1
        -Ferrous                      2.0         2.6         2.8        3.4            0.2
        -Non-ferrous                  0.2         0.3         0.3        0.4            0.0
           Other Inorganics           0.5         0.3         0'.3       0.4            0.0
         Total                        20.6        33.0       351.3       43.3           2.2















         Wofkng Paper #5 - Trend Future
         Page B-10





                                                        DRAFT

          The Peninsula's solid waste disposal needs for the foreseeable future will be ade-
          quately addressed by Implementation of the County's current solid waste management
          plan. However, long term needs will require a stronger multi-county alliance.

              The disposal of solid waste is an issue          tons a day in 2007 based upon projected
          which all communities must address. In               population growth.
          1989, Leelanau County adopted a solid
          waste management plan under Act 641                      The Five Year Plan calls for Glen's Land-
          which provides for the solid waste disposal          fill (in the south central region of the Penin-
          needs of the Peninsula as well as regions be-        sula along M-72) to serve as the principal
          yond. The plan was approved by the DNR in            solid waste disposal site and has a estimated
          1989.                                                life expectancy of 50 years based upon
                                                               current population growth rates of the
              Solid wastes currently produced in the           Peninsula. The Plan also provides for pro-
          Peninsula originate from residential, com-           grams in the area of solid waste recycling,
          mercial, and industrial sources. Approxi-            composting, collection of household haz-
          mately nine solid waste haulers operate              ardous wastes, and solid waste source re-
          throughout the Peninsula; no municipality            duction. The Twenty Year Plan includes rec-
          within the County provides collection ser-           ommendations for the continuation of private
          vices. Nearly all solid waste collected, except      sector waste disposal responsibilities and the
          that which is subsequently recycled or col-          expansion of recycling as the primary
          lected by the National Park Service, is dis-         methods of meeting disposal needs.
          posed of at Glen's Landfill, a private landfill
          operation.                                               The sandy soils in the County and rising
                                                               standards for environmentally safe disposal
              The Plan estimated approximately 33              will require greater regional cooperation in
          tons of sclid waste were produced in 1987            the future. A strong multi-county alliance will
          and that this quantity would increase to 43.4        likely be necessary to meet long term re-
                                                               gional disposal needs.






















                                                                                   Workng Paper #5 - Trend Future
                                                                                                        Page 8-11






                                                         DRAFT


                                                     POSTSCRIPT




              The trends described in this working paper are the result of patterns and pressures that
          have been building for decades. They are stimulated in large part by powerful market forces.
          Unfortunately, these forces generally respond to short term considerations, and fail to consider
          either long term or broader public interests. Unchecked, these forces present the potential to
          "kill the goose that laid the golden egg. " The natural beauty and unique natural environment of
          the Peninsula is what attracts both permanent and seasonal residents. "Too much" develop-
          ment, or the "wrong kind" of development, or development in the "wrong place" will greatly
          damage the natural environment and hence the two key economic bases of the Peninsula--
          tourism and agriculture.

              There used to be a careful balance on the Peninsula between resource based industries,
          like agriculture and forestry, and the tourist industry. The balance has dramatically shifted in
          the last two decades with the introduction of a third land use whose primary job creation bene-
          fits are related to the one time construction of year round houses.

              Permanent and seasonal residents who live outside of established villages, away from in-
          land lakes and are not engaged in activities related to resource use of the land or water, re-
          side in the homes which comprise the bulk of the sprawl development taking place on the
          Peninsula. The more nonfarm residential construction that occurs, the less able resource
          producers can operate because of the basic incompatibility between nonfarm residences and
          farming. As agriculture declines, the rural character of the area--one of its strongest assets--
          will also erode. The process is slow and initially invisible, because the land fragmentation
          greatly precedes the actual construction of the house in most cases. As the balance shifts, the
          opportunities to protect and enhance rural character, and the natural environment dramatically
          decline. First the goose dies, eventually the last golden eggs are lost, broken or tarnished.

              If current trends continue, this is the future of the Peninsula. The goose won't die in the
          next twenty years at current rates of change. But the number of options (eggs) that are left to
          work with will dramatically decline. By then, our children will have far fewer choices than we.


          The Trend Future Does Not Have to Happen

              Because the trend future will happen merely by the continuation of existing trends, neither
          citizens nor governmental agencies have to do anything different than they are presently doing
          for it to occur. Thus the trend future is perhaps the truest form of self-fulfilling prophecy.

              However, that does not mean it must occur. In fact, there are many private and public ac-
          tions that could be initiated to alter the trend future. These could range from efforts to try to
          hasten new development of some types in some areas, to slowing it in others. They could in-
          clude measures to import new jobs or develop new skills and thereby reduce unemployment
          and reliance on public assistance. They could include the initiation of new infrastructure to at-
          tract growth in some areas and keep it away from others. They could involve incentives to



                                                                                     Working Paper #5- Trend Future





                                                        DRAFT

          farmers and -other large land owners to keep resource productive lands - in resource use.
          These and many more options exist.

              However, all such options depend on:
                    1. consensus about a common future for the Peninsula,
                    2. on the ability to establish effective public-private partnerships, and
                    3. on the degree of commitment of all local governments within the County to use the
                      planning, regulatory and incentive tools at their disposal in a coordinated fashion
                      to achieve common ends.

             These are the three purposes of the planning process being employed to produce the
          Leelanau General Plan.

              Following the preparation and analysis of more technical information, and the completion
          of many maps, a series of alternative futures for the Peninsula will be prepared. These will be
          based on the draft goals and objectives presented in Working Paper #6. The alternatives will
          have a strong physical development/e nvi ro n mental protection orientation. One of the alterna-
          tives will be based on a continuation of existing trends. Each option will be analyzed in light of
          its implications on the carrying capacity of the Peninsula, on the environmental impacts it im-
          plies, and on its ability to provide a sustainable future compatible with identified quality of life
          considerations. This analysis will be submitted to the Steering Committee and the general
          public for review and comment. Eventually, one alternative will be selected as the basis for
          organizing the Leelanau General Plan.

             Thereafter, success in implementation of the Plan will depend on the degiree of consensus
          on the plan and commitment to its implementation by both the public and private sectors. The
          degree to which all local governments in the County coordinate their local planning and zoning
          efforts with County efforts will in the end, probably be the single most important factor in the
          success of the Plan.



























          Wor;dng Paper #5 - Trend Future







                                                                                                                               NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY



                                                                                                                            1 3 6668 14111901 8