/prepared for the Ludington Harbor Commisssion, the City of Ludington, Pere Marquette Charter Township and Mason County in cooperation with MNDR, Coastal Management Program. Michican Coastal Management Program. Williams & Works. Grand Rapids, Mich.:Williams & Works,[1982?] Urban renewal Michigan. Harbors Michigan Planning. Regional planning Michigan. Land use Michigan Planning. I q MICHIGAN OCZM GRANT #NA-80-AA-H-CZ151 SUBTASK Port Development Study Prepared for the ... Ludington Harbor Commission The City of Ludington Pere Marquette Charter Township and Mason County In cooperation vAth ... MDNR, Coastal Management Program -Y. 0 r A I L-A r 7 CIF= 17 MA 'r C 6- WUJUAMS VvKXtKS GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN Engineers, Architects, Planners Surveyors, Geologists, Ch TABLE OF CONTENTS LUDINGTON PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY Page CHAPTER I - GENERAL DATA BASE INTRODUCTION I-1 A. GENERAL INFORMATION I-1 1. Regional Location I-1 2. Local Setting I-2 3. Topography/Hydrography I-2 a. Topography I-2 b. Lake Hydrology I-2 c. Currents I-3 d. Erosion and Sedimentation Patterns I-3 e. Harbor Maintenance Depths I-4 f. Flood Hazard Areas I-5 4. Geology/Soils I-5 a. Geology I-5 b. Soils I-6 c. Groundwater I-7 5. Climate/Weather Conditions I-7 a. Climate I-7 b. Winds and Wave Heights I-8 c. Ice Conditions I-8 6. Zoning I-9 7. Existing Land Use I-9 8. Utilities and Infrastructure I-10 9. Demographics I-10 a. Historic Profile I-10 b. Population Projections I-12 10. Transportation I-12 a. Roads and Regional Highways I-12 b. Waterborne Transportation I-13 c. Railroads I-13 d. Air Transportation I-14 11. Cultural/Historic Elements I-14 12. Recreation/Tourism I-14 B. ECONOMIC CONDITIONS I-15 1. Regional and Local Markets I-15 a. Overview I-15 b. Market Areas I-15 c. Specific Market Sectors I-16 2. Employment and Salaries I-20 a. Regional Employment I-20 b. Local Employment I-20 3. Industry I-21 4. Labor Market I-23 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) Page C. WATERBORNE COMMERCE I-24 1. Commodity Flows I-24 a. General I-24 b. Regional Flow of Foreign Imports and Exports I-25 c. Major Commodity Flow Patterns I-25 d. Volume of Commodity Flows Through Ports on the Great Lakes I-28 e. Commodity Flows Through Ludington I-31 f. Cross-Lake Passengers I-32 CHAPTER II - EXISTING HARBOR FACILITIES INTRODUCTION II-1 A. EXISTING HARBOR FACILITIES I-1 B. ON-SITE REVIEW OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL FACILITIES II-2 1. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Car Ferry II-2 a. Car Ferry Slip 2 II-2 b. Car Ferry Slip 1 II-4 c. Car Ferry Slip 3 II-5 d. Sheet Pile Dock 1-1/2 II-5 e. Sheet Pile Docks 2-1/2 and 3-1/2 II-6 f. Site Considerations II-6 g. Functional Viability II-6 2. The Dow Chemical Company II-7 a. Area East of the East Dock Face 11-7 b. East Dock Face II-8 c. Area Between East and West Dock Face II-8 d. West Dock Face II-8 3. Mohawk Transportation II-8 a. Facilities and Conditions II-8 b. Functional Viability II-9 4. Western Concrete Products II-9 a. Facilities and Conditions II-9 b. Functional Viability II-10 5. Sand Products II-10 a. Facilities and Conditions II-10 b. Functional Viability II-11 CHAPTER III - LAND USE ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION III-1 A. RESIDENTIAL III-1 B. COMMERCIAL III-2 C. PUBLIC FACILITIES III-3 D. CONCLUSIONS III-4 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) Page CHAPTER V - FEASIBILITY DETERMINATION INTRODUCTION V-1 SCOPE V-1 KEY ISSUES V-1 A. PERSPECTIVE ON FEASIBILITY V-2 1. Industrial Location Theory V-2 2. Traffic Management - Shipping Operations V-3 a. Functions of Traffic Management V-3 b. Major Shipping Operations V-3 B. METHODOLOGY V-4 1. Criteria for Defining Case Parameters V-4 a. Local Plant Development V-4 b. Regional Shipping Terminal Development V-4 c. Inter-Regional Shipping Operations V-5 2. Data Source V-5 3. Judgments V-5 4. Equations V-5 a. Local Plant Development V-5 b. Regional Terminal V-6 c. Inter-Regional Shipping V-7 5. Cases Investigated V-7 C. RESULTS V-8 1. Local Plant Development V-8 a. Cement Manufacturing V-8 b. Pulp/Paper Production V-11 c. Fertilizer Production V-12 d. Steel Fabrication V-13 e. Ship Building and Repair V-14 f. Power Generation with Wood Fuels V-15 2. Regional Distribution V-16 a. General Cargo Terminal V-16 b. Dry Bulk Terminal V-17 c. Bulk Petroleum Terminal V-18 3. Inter-Regional V-19 a. Railroad Traffic V-19 b. Truck, Trailer, Container Traffic V-20 c. Passengers V-21 CHAPTER VI - DRAFT LAND USE ALTERNATIVES FUNCTION AND PURPOSE VI-1 ALTERNATIVE LAND USE OPPORTUNITIES VI-3 Alternative A-1 VI-4 Alternative A-2 VI-5 Alternative A-3 VI-6 .Alternative B-1 VI-7 Alternative B-2 VI-8 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) Page- CHAPTER VII - HARBOR LAND USE PLAN INTRODUCTION VII-1 A. GENERAL PLAN CONCEPTS VII-1 B. THE CITY OF LUDINGTON: PLAN ELEMENTS VII-2 1. Residential VII-2 2. Commercial VII-@ 3. Mixed Commercial VII-3 4. Industrial VII-4 5. Marine Transportation/Terminal VII-4 6. Public Uses VII-5 7. Transportation VII-5 C. PERE MARQUETTE TOWNSHIP: PLAN ELEMENTS VII-5 1. Residential VII-5 2. Commercial VII-6 3. Industrial VII-6 4. Public Use VII-7 D. PORT PLAN FEATURES VII-7 1. Regional Terminals VII-7 2. Inter-Regional Terminal VII-8 3. Harbor Improvements VII-9 E. IMPLEMENTATION VII-9 1. Port and Terminal Management Options VII-9 a. Ludington Harbor Commission VII-9 b. Port Authority V11-10 c. Independent Public Action/Private Development VII-11 d. Pere Marquette Lake-Council VII-12 e. Economic Development Authority/Economic Development Corporation VII-13 2. Agency Responsibilities VII-14 a. Local Agencies VII-14 b. State Agencies VII-15 c. Federal Agencies VII-16 3. Funding Sources, Land Acquisition Methods, and Development Incentives VII-17 a. Funding Sources VII-17 b. Land Acquisition Methods VII-20 c. Development Incentives VII-21 4. Zoning Ordinance and Map Review VII-23 a. City of Ludington VII-23 b. Pere Marquette VII-24 5. Implementation Program VII-25 a. Overall Strategy VII-25 b. Lead Agency VII-26 c. Development Coordinator VII-27 d. Marketing Strategy VII-28 F. RECOMMENDATIONS VII-29 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont-d.) Page CHAPTER VIII - DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES INTRODUCTION VIII-1 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MAJOR HOTEL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-2 A PROSPECTUS FOR CONDOMINIUMS AND RECREATION ORIENTED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-6 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MAJOR OFFICE COMPLEX IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-10 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MANUFACTURING FACILITY IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-14 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MARINE PETROLEUM BULK TERMINAL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-18 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A (PHASE I OPERATION) MARINE DRY BULK TERMINAL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-23 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A (PHASE II OPERATION) MARINE DRY BULK TERMINAL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN VIII-27 LIST OF APPENDIX A - Ludington Commodity Flow Survey B - Feasibility Data & Calculations LIST OF FIGURES Follows Figure Page Regional Location I-1 2 Topography 1-2 3 Soils Interpretation 1-6 4 Existing Zoning 1-9 5 Generalized Land Use 1-9 6 Transportation Facilities 1-13 7 Distances to Regional Market Areas 1-15 8 Total Commodity Movement by Water 1-24 9 Coal Movement 1-26 10 Crude Petroleum Movement 1-26 11 Refined Petroleum Products Movement 1-26 12 Iron Ore Movement 1-26 13 Iron and Steel Products Movement 1-27 14 Grain Movement 1-27 15 Industrial and Agricultural Chemicals Movement 1-27 16 Harbor Structures and Channel Dimensions 11-2 17 C&O Site Plan 11-2 18 Cross-Section View of Long-Wing Fender (Car Ferry Slip No. 2) 11-2 19 Cross-Section View of Turning Pile Cluster (Car Ferry Slip No. 2) 11-3 20 Auto Ramp Support Piling at Slip 2 11-3 21 Lining Cluster Pile and Opposite Pile at Slip 2 11-4 22 Slip 3 - Long-Wing Fender 11-5 23 Dow ChemicalCo. Site Plan 11-7 24 Photo from East of East Dock at Dow Chemical Co. 11-8 25 Mohawk Transportation Site Plan 11-8 26 Mohawk Transportation Existing Pilings 11-9 27 Western Concrete Products Site Plan 11-9 28 Sand Products Co. Terminal Site Plan II-10 29 Alternate Land Use Opportunities III-1 30 Michigan Bulk Petroleum Terminals V-18 31 Alternate A-1 VI-4 32 Alternate A-2 VI-5 33 Alternate A-3 VI-6 34 Alternate B-1 VI-7 35 Alternate B-2 VI-8 36 Harbor Land Use Plan VII-1 37 Implementation Strategy VII-25 38 Location of Development Opportunities VIII-1 Chapter I General Data Base I - CHAPTER I GENERAL DATA BASE INTRODUCTION, The Data Base for the Ludington Area Port Development Study is organized into three parts: A. General Information B. Economic Conditions C. Waterborne Commerce The Data Base is assembled from reliable, published sources, and focuses pri- marily on transportation facilities and economics. Secondary emphasis is on harbor area land use, especially unused and under-utilized land. A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Regional Location The City of Ludington is located on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan in Mason County, Michigan. Figure 1 shows the regional location of Ludington. It is approximately 200 miles northeast of Chicago, Illinois; 240 miles northwest of Detroit, Michigan; and 250 miles southwest of Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. The closest neighboring deep draft harbors are in Manistee (30 miles north) and in Muskegon (60 miles south). 2. Local Setting Ludington, the largest city in Mason County and the county seat, had a popula- tion of 8,937 in 1980. This was approximately 34% of the total 1980 Mason County population of 26,365. Ludington and its harbor are located on Pere Marquette Lake. Pere Marquette Lake is approximately two miles long and drains the Pere Marquette River. Its outlet to Lake Michigan is protected by the harbor. I-1 LAKE sup Pion e CANADA ..3-41 MAROUETTE ....... . ........... . SAULT STE. MARIE M.2 .1 .......... ......... ....... U US-2 ESCANABA C7 Ey MENOMINEIE :TR 0): STUFtQI9ON N: cli Y SAY WISCONSIN GREEN BAY 0 4ANisrEm CADILI.A7C Q \,M UDIN07N ITIOWOC .... ....... BAY orry c MUSKEjqN M-21 MIL%VAUKEZ GRAND :.*.!!APIC)S '60 FLINT ................... C BATTLE CREEK.-` 1-94 1-94 i ..... .... .......... DETROIT ......... ARBOR' ...... ILLINOIS KALAMAZOO :c: .0 r4 LAKE ......... ERIE CHICAGO SOUTH TOLEDO BEND OGARY INDIANA OHIO Figure I REGIONAL LOCATION CITY OF LUDINGTON PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY 11Q@ll 0 10 20 30 40 50 'WILLIAMS Ek WORKS _MILES___ 3. Topography/Hydrography a. Topography Picturesque sand dunes occupy much of the Lake Michigan shoreline in Mason County. Elevations vary from approximately 850 in the southern portions of the county to approximately 580 at Lake Michigan. A combination of gently rolling moraines and fairly level, poorly drained lands comprise much of Mason County. In addition to the larger lakes near the shoreline, numerous smaller lakes are located inland. South of Ludington to a distance of six or seven miles, moraine hills and ridges extend westward to Lake Michigan from approximately six miles inland. North of Ludington, sandy lake bottom lowlands extend inland several miles. The characteristically gentle slopes are interrupted occasionally by abrupt moraine hills. Topographic characteristics in the immediate vicinity of Ludington Harbor are shown in Figure 2. Directly east of the harbor, the land slopes fairly uniformly toward Pere Marquette Lake. Lowlands and marshes are located at the south end of Pere Marquette Lake and along the lower reaches of the Pere Marquette River. b. Lake Hydrology Water levels across Pere Marquette Lake are predominately controlled by Lake Michigan levels and to some extent in the southern reaches by inflow from the Pere Marquette River. The river at its mouth drains a watershed area of 740 square miles covering portions of four Michigan counties. The river's average springtime flow varies from approximately 700 to 900 cubic feet per second, as recorded at the USGS gauging station in Scottville (ten miles upstream from Ludington) As part of the Great Lakes system, Lake Michigan levels fluctuate in three ways: long-term, seasonal, and short-rise. Long-term fluctuations are caused by the varying response to changing conditions of water input 1-2 . .. ....... N. N L-@KE OL@ Goo L-ING .. ... Goo. - A A ............ .. .... ......... 3f r % ........... :-tk(30 NQ ......... r Figure 2 K E L- NCOL-@ 60(> TOPOGRAPHY CITY OF LUDINGTON SOURCE: US GS LUDINGTON QUADRANGLE PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY to MINUTE SERIES CONTOUR INTERVAL - 50 FEET WILLIAMS a WORKS MILas (principally from precipitation within the lake's basin) and to water output due to evaporation and outflow. A net surplus in this water supply balance resulted in the highest recorded monthly mean lake level of 581.1 (International Great Lakes Datum - IGLD) in July, 1974. Seasonal fluctua- tions produce high levels in summer and low levels in winter. These changes are the direct result of natural seasonal patterns. Spring run- off from snow melt and low evapotranspiration (the loss of water from land areas through plant growth and soil evaporation) produce higher lake levels. In late summer, the opposite is true and lake levels begin to fall. Short-rise fluctuations of lake levels are c aused by differeinces in atmospheric pressure and winds blowing over the lake surfaces. The result of these forces is a rise of the water surface in one area of the lake with a 'concurrent drop in level in another area. Generally, Lake Michigan levels have an average seasonal variation of about 1.2 feet, from 577.7 in February to 578.9 in July. Over the past two years, the lake levels have been approximately one foot above long- term average levels and are gradually declining. C. Currents There are no known studies or documentation of significant currents in Pere Marquette Lake or the harbor area. The most likely producer of currents is the Pere Marquette River, which causes a net flow of water through Pere Marquette Lake to Lake Michigan. However, the features of Pere Marquette Lake are not supportive of strong currents. Occasionally, wind drift currents may be generated within Pere Marquette Lake and storms over Lake Michigan will produce currents of short dura- tion. d. Erosion and Sedimentation Patterns The Lake Michigan shoreline in the vicinity of Ludington is erosional. Steep slopes without significant beach zones typify the shoreline several miles to the south of Ludington and indicate encroachment and land remov- al. Lowlands surrounding the lakes north of Ludington are less obviously 1-3 marked by erosion because of their original low elevation and low relief. Longshore transport of sand occurs in the zone of swash and backwash where waves interact with the shore most energetically. The dominant direction of transport of sand along the Lake Michigan shoreline near Ludington is southward, as determined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Identification of high-risk shore erosion sites was made in 1970 under the supervision of the Mi chigan DNR under contract with a private organiza- tion. The method used was one of comparing aerial photographs of 1970 with those of 1938. Follow-up by the Bureau of Water Management was undertaken in 1971 and 1972 with field studies to determine more recent trends. Results of the study in the Ludington area indicated a general pattern of considerable erosion with some sedimentation occurring in isolated areas. Michigan's Demonstration Erosion Control Program has three projects in the vicinity of Ludington for the purpose of monitoring and evaluating low cost shore protection measures. These projects are a seawall at Big Sable Point (seven miles north of Ludington), two steel groins at Ludington State Park (just south of Big Sable Point), and a pre-cast concrete break- water system in Pere Marquette Township (one mile south of the harbor entrance). Only the steel groins at Ludington State Park have remained stable and provide protection against erosion. As mentioned previously, Lake Michigan levels are gradually declining at present. Reduced lake levels tend to result in reduced erosion since adjacent lands are less likely to be inundated or subject to wave attack. e. Harbor Maintenance Depths Project depths are maintained at 29 feet at the harbor mouth, 27 to 29 feet within the breakwaters, and 27 feet through the entrance channel. The average depths along the northern central portion of Pere Marquette Lake vary from 33 to 43 feet. Southern portions of the lake become in- creasingly shallow and-swampy. Most recreational anchorage is at 5 to 15 feet, While commercial docking facilities maintain depths of 20 to 25 feet. Figure 16, "Harbor Structures", also shows the authorized harbor depths. 1 4 Flood Hazard Areas Lake Michigan flood levels have been determined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in a 1977 study. The 10-year and 100-year flood levels at Ludington are 581.3 and 582.5 (IGLD), respectively. The City of Ludington, built almost entirely on land with an elevation of 600 or above, has no special flood hazard areas, as identified by the National Flood Insurance Program, and does not have a history of signifi- cant flooding. 4. Geology/Soils a. Geology The City of Ludington lies- on the east/west axis of Lake Michigan proper, midway between the north and south ends of the lake. The recent geologi- cal history of the Ludington area has involved events common to other regions on the west shore of Lake Michigan. The Pere Marquette River Valley and its evolution are convenient points of focus for descriptions relevant to the Ludington Harbor area. The Ice Ages, especially the latest one which terminated 9,500 years ago in Michigan, and post-glacial times until 2,000 to 3,000 years ago were the times of establishment of the present day prominent features of the area, especially topography, land forms, and the extent of surface water. Following the final disappearance of ice from the Lake Michigan shore region, the Pere Marquette River was larger and swifter and flowed in a narrower valley than exists today. Neither Pere Marquette Lake nor the Buttersville bar, which separates Pere Marquette Lake from Lake Michigan, existed. The Pere Marquette Lake site could have been a narrow embayment at that time. A period of rising Lake Michigan water level culminated approximately 4,000 years ago. That period saw flooding of the Pere Marquette River 1-5 Valley floor and channel. A long and narrow embayment may have extended eastward to Scottville and even further inland during this period. Lake Michigan covered the site of the City of Ludington. Falling Lake Michigan levels followed and levels were generally stabilized by 2,500 years ago. During that interval (4,000 to 2,500 years ago), Ludington was uncovered as the Lake Michigan shoreline receded. The Buttersville bar was uncovered to form Pere Marquette Lake. These glacial actions have resulted in the Ludington area being underlain by glacial drift material up to several hundred feet deep with no outcrop- pings of bedrock. The morainal areas south of Ludington are hilly with bold detached ridges. Outwash areas to the north and east are relatively flat, undulating plains, except where cut by stream channels. b. Soils A detailed soil survey has been conducted in Mason County by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 1939. The soils were found to range from dry sands of the lake dunes to dark-colored, poorly drained silt loams, mucks, and peats. Over the greater part of the county, the association of areas of soils with different textures and colors is complex and the areas are of irregular shapes. Sands and loamy sands predominate in total area, occupying about 58% of the land surface of the county; organic soils occupy about 9%; and the remaining 33% is divided among sandy loams, loams, and silt loams, which are the important agricultural soils. Soils in the Ludington area are shown on Figure 3, "Soils Interpreta- tions". The Lake Michigan shoreline in the immediate area of the harbor is composed of'dune and coastal beach sands. Areas along the north shore of Pere Marquette Lake have been filled with sand and other material to form building sites and are thus classified as manmade land. Rubicon sand underlies most of the City of Ludington with Weare fine sand in the sur- rounding area. 1-6 9@ 2 1 5 2 5 5 5 6 5 9 2 10 2 10 5 10 5 AMLI 10 7 r 2 LAK 5 7 FOUNTAIN 3 15 10 3 10 2 1- I - - 5 9 5 10 10 COTTVIS I or 7 5 L-i 1 10 5 L A K E 10 6 6 MICHIGAN 9 6 10 1 3 3 9 10 10 2 9 9 2 4 2 9 10 10 7 4 5 5 3 10 4 L 7 4 I DUNE SANDS 2 RUBICON - GRAYLING 3 KALKASKA - RUBICON 4 RUBICON- GRAYCAJ_M 5 ROSCOMMON - AU GRES -CROSWELL 6 ALLUVIAL SOILS 7 CARLISLE -CARBONDALE -RIFLE a NESTER -KAWKAWLIN -SIMS Figure 3 SOILS INTERPRETATIONS 9 MONTCALM - MC BRIDE -KALKASKA CITY OF LUDINGTON 10 KENT -SELKIRK - BERGLAND PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY SOURCE: USDA SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE 0 1 a 3 Wil I IAMS Ba WORKS MILK* In the harbor area, soil borings were taken in connection with the harbor and channel modification project in 1966, and off-shore north of the harbor in conjunction with the Ludington water intake project in 1967. These data reveal that soils in the inner harbor turning area are dominant- ly fine sands of ve ry loose to dense consistency. Sand with gravel admix- tures is subordinant in amount, and no clay is present. Soils in the inner channel area are composed primarily of fine to coarse sands with subordinate admixed gravel. The degree of density is mostly medium to dense. Hard, sandy clay appears at depths of 17 feet below the bottom in the north side of the channel. Soils from off-shore locations north of the harbor consist in the upper levels of medium to fine sand. The sand is underlain with blue, sandy clay. C. Groundwater Because of the glacial history of the Ludington area, the hydrological conditions of the area are not uniform. This non-uniformity is due to the thick bands of glacial drift.interwoven with deposits of clay. The actual drift material varies from sand to silty sand to silt. Water is normally found lying between the clay deposits in the glacial drift. Because of the non-uniformity of the drift, groundwater in the Ludington area is unpredictable, and supply capabilities within short distances may vary from as much as 50 to 1,000 gallons per minute. 5. Climate/Weather Conditions a. Climate The Lake Michigan region is moderate in temperature and precipitation, due to westerly winds across Lake Michigan. Average temperatures on a year- round basis are close to 50'F. Average temperatures in the Ludington area are close to 470F. The winters are long; the summers are short and warm. The difference between the average summer and winter temperatures is approximately 40'. Rainfall averages just under 30 inches per year, with about 20 inches occurring from April to October. Snowfall is a bit higher than inland areas, with about 70 inches per year. 1-7 . b. Winds and Wave Heights The Great Lakes Region lies in a-path of frequent high and low atmospheric pressure 'cells which move west to east across the North American continent at more or less regular intervals of about three to five days. Wind storms over Lake Michigan are normally caused by frontal passage of low pressure centers along with the movement of extensive areas of high pres- sure. The more severe wind storms normally occur where these features meet. The general direction of low and high pressure movements across Lake Michigan is southwest to northeast. The more sustained and vigorous wind storms generally occur during the winter-spring seasons when the air mass contrasts are the greatest and pressure fields most intense. The summer months are the calmest periods of the year, although short duration storms such as those associated with squall lines or thunderstorms do occur. The minimum wind speed theoretically effective in promoting fully devel- oped sea conditions on Lake Michigan is 40 mph or*less. Maximum recorded wave heights in the Ludington Harbor prior to construction of navigational improvements in 1977 were 10.0 feet inside the harbor entrance, 6.2 feet at the entrance to the inner channel, 5.0 feet at the inner channel turn into Pere Marquette Lake, and 1-3 feet along the northern reaches of the lake. Construction of the harbor improvements have not significantly affected wave heights. C. Ice Conditions Winter conditions usually produce only minor ice problems for commercial navigation interests. The harbor between the breakwater entrance and the inner channel piers is usually free of ice, but westerly winds occasion- ally cause ice to drift into the outer harbor and then between the inner channel piers. Car ferries and commercial vessels break through the ice masses, pushing them aside. With time, the ice piled laterally along the channel margins becomes too heavy to push aside. 1-8 The City boat launching facility, midway between the north breakwater and the north pier, is frequently in need of repair due to erosion. Some of the damage to the facility may be attributed to ice jamming. 6. Zoning Figure 4 shows the existing zoning districts in the harbor and Pere Marquette Lake area. The City of Ludington's zoning ordinance has been in effect since 1966. This zoning ordinance provides for five classes of residential zoning, four classes of commercial zoning, two classes of industrial zoning, and four classes of special zoning (parking, river valley, motel resort and government service). Pere Marquette Township adopted its current zoning ordinance in 1977. The ordinance provides for two classes of agricultural zoning, two classes of residential zoning, one class of commercial zoning, one class of industrial zoning, and three classes of special zoning (airport, conservation, and harbor industry). Generally, lands adjacent to the harbor are zoned commercial and industrial districts, while outlying areas are zoned residential districts. An exception is the Buttersville Bar which separates Pere Marquette Lake from Lake Michigan, and which is a zoned residential district. 7. Existing Land Use The pattern of existing land use, shown in Figure 5, fits well with zoning of the area. There is very little room for industrial expansion along the north- east shore of Pere Marquette Lake. Conversely, the southwest shore (Butters- ville Bar) consists of fairly low density residential development. The low- lands at the southernmost shores of Pere Marquette Lake in Pere Marquette Township are zoned the "Harbor Industry District" to provide areas for loading, unloading, shipping, receiving and storage of materials as a water port facility. Currently, these areas are undeveloped. 1-9 io Ito lu @w iww, 0 A U IrZ'- 40 PN' W, lAw J k1s. uk d, 'A WILLIAMS & WORKS is C '4 ME*""A C @, I .A ir PLANT CIT* J,- WATeR Fn - @f @, @@-i ". i - e REATIVIENT T 4k, PAR R@ A .0. 0 Dow 41, CITY MOM PARW, CITY N PARK oow@ F'l, PE IR E: 3t@R DOW R I DOCKS MARQUE-rrt LAKE -@q 4LF- 'FAM RESI NON FATHElk MAR001ST"M SHRINM WF-TL A"I@-, R T A@l tj T 1,0A :!o 0 .-., mk@, OFE Acl WILLIAMS ek WORKS 8. Utilities and Infrastructure Properties within the City of Ludington enjoy the availability. of utilities including water, sewer, electricity, gas, and telephone service. Michigan Consolidated Gas Company and Consumers Power Company are the largest suppliers of natural gas and electricity, respectively, in the Ludington area. Water and sewer services are provided by the Ludington water plant and wastewater treat- ment plant. With few exceptions, areas outside the city limits have-only electricity and telephone service readily available. 9. Demographics a. Historic Profile The permanent population of an area supports the primary labor force and requires goods and services on a year-round basis. The population of Mason County has been increasing steadily since 1930, and has seen an increase of 16.6% over the past tenyears. The population of the City of Ludington, meanwhile, has fluctuated between a 1 ow of'8,810 in 1920 to a high of 9,506 in 1950. Over the past ten years, Ludington"s population has decreased 0.9%. Table 1 shows the population of Ludington and Mason County from 1890 to the present. TABLE 1 POPULATION MASON COUNTY AND LUDINGTON Mason County Ludington 1890 16,385 1900 18,885 - 1910 21,832 9,132 1920 1-9,831 8,810 1930 18,756 8,898 1940 19,378 - 1950 20,474 9,506 1960 21,929 9,421 1970 22,612 9,021 1980 26,365 8,937 Source: U.S. Census of Population I-10 Ludington has an average density of 2,700 people per square mile and 2.3 people per dwelling unit. Age, years of schooling, and family income for Mason County are shown in Table 2, "Population Characteristics". This information is not yet avail- able for the 1980 census. Table 3 shows the age distribution for the City of Ludington in 1970. TABLE 2 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS MASON COUNTY Age by Percent of Total Population 1960 1970 Under 15 years 31.3 28.5 15 to 24 years 12.1 14.8 25 to 39 years 16.6 15.3 40 to 65 years 27.3 28.3 65 + years 12.7 13.1 Years of School Completed by Persons Over 25 Years by Percent of Total Persons 8 or under 42.7 27.4 1 to 3 high school 17.0 20.1 4 high school 27.9 36.0 I to 3 college 7.5 9.5 4 college 4.9 7.0 Median years completed 10.3 12.1 Family Income by Percent of Total Families Less than $3,000 25.2 10.9 $3,000 to $5,000 25.0 10.6 $5,000 to $7,000 27.4 14.5 $7,000 to $10,000 14.9 26.4 $10,000 to $15,000 6.0 25.7 $15,000 + 1.5 11.9 Median income $6,270 $8,476 Census of Population TABLE 3 AGE DISTRIBUTION LUDINGTON, 1970 0 to 4 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661 5 to 14 years . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,715 15 to 24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,348 25 to 44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,854 45 to 64 years . . . . . . . 2,068 65 + years . . . . . . . . . 1,375 ---------- Source: U.S. Census of Population b. Population Projections Population projections through the year 1997 are given in Table 4 for Ludington and Mason County. These trends predict an average yearly increase of approximately 1% for Mason County and 0.9% for the City of Ludington. TABLE 4 POPULATION PROJECTIONS MASON COUNTY AND LUDINGTON Mason County Ludington 1982 27,050 10,850 1987 28,440 11,350 1992 29,800 11,850 1997 319230 12,350 ------------ Source: 208 Study for Mason County 10. Transportation a. Roads and Regional Highways The Ludington area is served by US-31 (north-south) and US-10 (east-west). M-116 connects Ludington to Hamlin Lake and the Ludington State Park, five miles north. US-31 is an arterial of statewide importance. The Michigan 1-12 portion begins at the Indiana border and continues through to the Mackinac Bridge. In the procels, it provides access to every major community along the eastern shore of Lake Michigan. At present, US-31 is 4-lanes from Muskegon (where it connects with 1-96) to a few miles south of,Ludington. Transportation plans call for US-31 to be 4-lanes to Ludington in the future. b. Waterborne Transportation The Ludington Harbor is a natural deep-draft, year-round harbor serving both commercial and recreational needs. Waterborne commerce has averaged about 3,000,000 tons annually ove'r the past ten years. Roughly two thirds of this is, car ferry traffic to and from the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad docks. Most of the balance of commerce consists of limestone receipts by The Dow Chemical Company, moved in self-unloading bulk carriers. Detailed information on commodity flows and types is discussed in Part C, "Waterborne Commerce", page 1-24. C. Railroads Ludington is served by the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad, with through trains daily to the principal cities of Saginaw, Bay City, Port Huron, and Detroit. The railroad also operates a car ferry which transports train cargo across Lake Michigan to the Wisconsin port of Kewaunee. Figure 6 shows the railroad locations in the Ludington area. Numerous railroad spurs extend to the northeast shores of Pere Marquette Lake, primarily to the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad's car ferry docks and to The Dow Chemical Company. M ain tracks are also located in close proximity to other commercial docks on the northeast shores of Pere Marquette Lake. Additional spurs could be constructed in these locations if necessary. 1-13 LAKE /N MASON CITY No, Rr COUNTY AIRPORT LUDINGTON U. S. 10 slo CHESAPEAKE 8k OHVO R. R. 1-p "I Oak0 L A K E PER@E; Af.4 MICHIGAN HOPKINS LAKE Figure 6 TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES CITY OF LUDINGTON PORTDEVELOPMENT STUDY 1114@ 0 1/2 1 'WILLIAMS Ek WORKS MIL98 d. Air Transportation Mason County has a general utility airport located 1.7 miles east of the City of Ludington. The present northeast/ sou thwes t main runway is 5,000 feet by 75 feet and is paved. Plans have been made to increase its length to 5,400 feet. Figure 6 shows the location of the Mason County Airport.- The nearest airport with commercial service is Manistee County Blacker Airport, 25 miles northeast of Ludington. 11. Cultural/Historic Elements The earliest history of Mason County was recorded in the 17th and 18th cen- turies by the French, who explored the Lake Michigan shoreline and blazed trails through the forest of western Michigan, seeking fur pelts for trade. An explorer of this period was Pere Jacques Marquette, a French Jesuit missionary. The Pere Marquette Shrine, located near the mouth of the Pere Marquette River, marks the location of his death in 1675. The shrine is on the State Register of Historic Plates. White Pine Village, located in Pere Marquette Township on the shore of Lake Michigan just south of the Buttersville Bar, is operated by Mason County. The village consists of original and reconstructed buildings and a museum. Because of its many outstanding natural values, the Pere Marquette River has been included under the State of Michigan Natural River Act of 1970 (PA 231 of 1970) and the National Wild and Scenic Rive'rs Act (PL 90-542). This designa- tion serves to protect the natural qualities of the river's mainstream and its significant tributaries upstream of US-31. 12. Recreation/Tourism The climate and location of Ludington provide a year-round multitude of rec- reational activities. The Ludington Municipal Marina, completed in 1981, has 150 berths to provide for recreational boating on a large scale. 4,156 acres of natural wooded and dune areas are located five miles north at the Ludington State Park.' 1-14 Recreational\ fishing is very popular in the Ludington area. Between April 1 and mid-November, both the north and south breakwaters are used extensively by fishermen and sightseers. Coho and chinook salmon enter Pere Marquette Lake from Lake Michigan. Panfish, walleye, and northern pike also populate both lakes. Since 1972, Ludington has sponsored an annual coho fishing derby, an event which spans two weeks and is well received. The high quality of sport fishing in the Ludington area is a strong attraction for both tourists and seasonal residents. A substantial portion of the area's economy can be directly or indirectly related to the sport fishing activities. Winter sports are also very popular, and local activities include winter festi- vals, cross country Wing, and dog-sled and snowmobile races. Because of the recreational and historic elements of the Ludington area, tour- ism brings a significant increase in activity and business volume in the area. The peak tourist season is between Memorial Day and Labor Day. B. ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 1. Regional and Local Markets a. Overview Michigan has three major assets for economic development. Its central location on the Great Lakes and in the Midwest provides transportation and trade advantages. Its diverse natural resources include iron ore, petro- leum, natural gas, fertile soil, abundant water, and forests. Most impor- tantly, its heterogenous population with comparatively high level of education and trade skills provide the labor supply and managerial ability for the state's variety of industries. b. Market Areas Major metropolitan areas provide the largest markets for consumption of goods, distribution points for shipment to smaller markets, and the pro- duction points for goods for shipment to other areas. As Figure 7 indi- cates, Michigan and the Ludington area are near the center of the distri- bution network of major midwest metropolitan areas. Large cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and St. Louis are within 1-15 500 400 CANADA Dulut 300 200 Minneapolis 00 Gre 8 Albany LUDINGTON Buffalo Milwau *,ee Lansing Detroit Chicago Toledo Clev an DesMoines Ft. -Wav-ne 71 Pittsburgh Washington D. C. Springf ield Indianapolis Cir@cinnati Kansas City St. Louis Louisville Figure 7 DISTANCES TO REGIONAL MARKET AREAS (MILES) CITY OF UJOINGTON WILLIAMS EN WORKS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY a day's drive of north central Michigan, and are easily accessible by truck and rail transportation. Basic raw materials such as iron ore, coal, petroleum and limestone are economically moved on the Great Lakes to major industrial centers such as Chicago, Toledo, Detroit and Buffalo. Since the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959, the region has direct waterborne access to all foreign ports and markets of the world, although the seaway has some functional limitations due to the draft requirements of modern ocean-going vessels. C. Specific Market Sectors The major market sectors presented herein roughly equate with the major classes of port traffic. (1) Agriculture - Grains and Fertilizers The midwest is, by far, the major producer of U.S. grain, with Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Nebraska, and Kansas the leading states. Minnesota and North Dakota are also large producers, selling over 10 million short tons each in 1976. While much of this grain is shipped overseas, a large portion is moved to markets in the eastern seaboard and sunbelt states. Table 5 shows the production of major crops for midwestern states in 1974. Dairying, with corn, grain, and hay as crops, is the dominant farming type in Michigan. It is most developed in the interior parts of the southern lower peninsula, but is found throughout the state. Fruit - particularly cherries, peaches, apples, plums and blueberries - is grown just inland from Lake Michigan from Berrien County to Grand Traverse Bay. Michigan is a major supplier of dry edible beans for the U.S., grown on the fertile, flat lake-bottom soils of the Saginaw Valley. Michigan also exports beets. Most other agricultural products are imported to Michigan, including soybeans, wheat, corn@ and potatoes. Table 6 shows cash receipts from Michigan's farm markets. 1-16 TABLE 5 1974 PRODUCTION OF SELECTED CROPS IN THE MIDWEST (by state) Irish Potatoes Sweet Corn Soybeans Wheat (hundred Potatoes Hay Crops State (acres) (bushels)- (bushels) wei ht) (bushels) (dry tons) Illinois 9,550,090 205,382,348 50,,646,729 289,310 10,364 2,821,607 Indiana 5,311,243 94,724,611 44,246,255 1,481,941 7,964 1,831,874 Iowa 12,706,571 190,916,604 1,794,494 453,734 4,570 5,896,261 Kansas 1,975,682 18,634,381 299,416,699 93,847 33,621 4,032,977 Michigan 2,378,301 12,080,412 81,891,280 8,500,560 63,474 2,956,963 Minnesota 6,050,574 73,735,439 74,728,537 17,190,968 3,432 6,512,436 Missouri 2,817,492 87,981,623 34,764,459 96,966 51,377 5,080,402 Nebraska 6,436,708 25,528,000 90,599,286 2,347,664 561 5,805,323 North Dakota 495,926 2,509,507 209,162,432 20,932,659 85 @4,567,783 Ohio 3,421,942 81,392,887 56,715,928 3,078,651 4,003 2,744,427 South Dakota 3,634,336 6,876,227 55,621,567 375,341 0 5,284,209 Wisconsin 3,451,232 3,813,422 2,871,897 13,778,777 4,680 10,168,458 ---------- Source: Regional Environmental Energy Data Book, 1978 TABLE 6 MICHIGAN CASH RECEIPTS FROM FARM MARKETS (in thousands of dollars) item 1974 1976 1978 Livestock and products $ 687,857 $ 812,249 $ 997,659 Field crops 963,932 908,828 1,129,132 TOTAL $1,651,789 $1,721,077 $2,126,791 Source: Michigan Statistical Abstract, 1980. In 1969, almost 600,000 tons of commercial fertilizers were used in Michigan at a cost of over $53 million. These fertilizers were applied on roughly 40% of the state's 8.5 million acres of cropland, and averaged more than 400 pounds per acre. The amounts applied per acre were highest in the Upper Peninsula and northwest part of the Lower Peninsula to offset poor soils. In 1978 in Mason County, commercial fertilizers were applied to 40% of the farmland (35,300 acres), herbicides were applied on 28% (24,800 acres), and pesticides on 15% (12,900 ac'res). The current trend in agriculture.of a sharp increase in yields, yet less overall land in farms, is causing an increasing demand for commercial fertilizers. (2) Manufactu-ring - General Cargo and Bulk.Chemicals The Great Lakes Region is characteristic of a broadly diversified manufacturing base, but one dominated numerically by heavy industry. These tend to be relatively well paying industries, but are very susceptible to adverse trends in the national economy. Transport equipment, primarily automobiles and trucks, produce more than half of the value of Michigan manufactured products. The next most important manufacturing category is the production of machinery, including electric machinery, which accounts for about one-fifth of the goods produced in Michigan. The third category in importance, primary and fabricated metal industries, is closely related to the first two and is often found in association with the automotive industry. 1-18 Production of chemicals and allied products, located in salt- and br ine-producing areas such as Midland-Saginaw-Bay City, Muskegon, and around Detroit, accounts for about 5 percent of the manufactured goods in Michigan. Manistee and Mason counties are also major producers of brine in Michigan. Three other categories account for about 1.5 to 2 percent each of the value of products by industry groups; namely, food and kindred products, apparel and related products, and lumber and wood products. The locations of these industries are widespread but have some relation to the distribution of the raw material sources or market areas. Some industries are concentrated in one regional center, such as furniture in Grand Rapids, paper in Kalamazoo, breakfast cereals in Battle Creek, and baby food in Fremont., (3) Construction - Sand, Stone and Cement The Midwest is a major producer and consumer of construction mater- ials, including stone and clay products, sand, gravel and cement. Table 7 shows the value of t hese products sold in 1975 in the Midwest states. TABLE 7 VALUE ADDED* BY MANUFACTURE FOR STONE, CLAY AND GLASS PRODUCTS 1975 (MIDWEST STATES) Value Added State (millions of dollars) Illinois 910.5 Indiana 563.7 Iowa 203.3 Kansas 231.6 Michigan 551.9 Minnesota 232.7 Missouri 302.5 Nebraska 85.1 North Dakota 11.9 Ohio 1,439.4 South Dakota 23.4 Wisconsin 214.0 ------------ *The value of goods sold, less cost of necessary materials and power, expressed in 1958 dollars to account for inflation. 1-19 Construction in Mason County displayed very substantial increases, both net and competitive, during the 1970's, compared to both the state and the region.- Much of the gains in construction can be attributed to the building of summer homes and retirement homes and could fluctuate substantially during downturns in the business cycle. (4) Energy - Coal and Petroleum Fuels There has been increased activity in petroleum industries in Michigan in recent months. A number of petroleum companies are purchasing mineral rights from area residents, and natural gas and oil have been found southeast of Mason County in Newaygo County near Hesperia. Continued price increases in petroleum products are forecasted for the future (despite recent short-term declines') and are expected to further stimulate local energy production. 2. Employment and Salaries a. Regional Employment On a Great Lakes regional basis, employment is predominantly in the agri- cultural and heavy industry areas. While Michigan ranks first among the states in production of motor vehicles and parts, employment is also predominant in other manufacturing and processing lines, including pre- pared cereals, machine tools, airplane parts, refrigerators, hardware, steel springs, and furniture. b. Local Employment Local employment in the western half of Michigan and the Ludington area has become substantially more stable in the past ten years in terms of employment, when compared to the rest of the state. This indicates a somewhat stronger and more stable economy than that seen state-wide. 1-20 3. Industry Ludington has a solid and diversified industrial base. It is the dominant industrial center in Mason County and the area. The Ludington area supports a variety of industries and employers, including: Company Main Business/Product Atkinson Manufacturing Company Tool & Security Boxes, Closet 502 S. James Street Accessories Anna Bach Candies, Inc. Candies 413 S. James Street Brill Manufacturing Company Pine Furniture 713 S. James Street Chadwick Memorials, Inc. Cemetery Memorials, Building Stone, 401 W. Ludington Avenue Structural Marble, Concrete Urns, Patio Slabs CDR Industrial, Inc. Screen Printing - Meta'l Fiberglass 236-1/2 Dowland Street Custom Foam of Castle Industries Styrofoam 1001 N. Rowe Street Dow Chemical U.S.A. Chemical Manufacturing, Liquid S. Madison Street Calcite Foliage Company of America Fabrications N. Rowe Street Great Lakes Casting Corporation Gray Iron Castings 800 N. Washington Avenue Harbison-Walker Refractories Company Deadburned Magnesite US-31 Handy Things Manufacturing Company Christmas Tree Holders and 814 N. Rowe Street Housewares Harrington Tool Company Special Metal Cutting Tools 200 W. Ludington Avenue Industrial Tool Engineering Machine Products 1176-1/2 N. Jebavy Drive Jackson Vibrators, Inc. Railroad Maintenance & Industrial 200 S. Jackson Road Handling Equipment 1-21 Company Main Business/Product Kaines Manufacturing Company Wire Products 130 F. Dowlan d Street Ludington Concrete Products, Inc. Redi-Mix, Concrete & Light Weight 280 S. Pere Marquette Street Block, Face Brick Ludington Plastics, Inc. Plastics S. Jebavy Drive Ludington Industrial & Mfg Co. Electro Plating 901 N. Harrison Street Mason County Cold Storage, Inc. Fresh Fruits Route #1 Merdel Game Mfg Co. Wood Action Games 218 F. Dowland Street Mitchell Corporation Automotive Interior 185 S. Jebavy Drive Motyka Metal Products Tubing E. Ludington Avenue Nelson Packing Company Meat Packing Plant 5251 E. First Street Olmstead Orchards Wholesale Fruit Packing & Storage Route #1 Petersen's Furniture Specialties Custom Furniture 922 N. Washington Avenue Outstate Tool & Die, Inc. Progressive Dies, Tooling, Stampings, 526 S. James Street & Die Tryouts Savage Manufacturing Company, Inc. Fabricated Metal Products 211 E. Dowland Street Star Watch Case Company Watch Cases S. Rath Avenue Straits Steel & Wire Corporation Wire Products - Fabricated N. Rowe Street Thompson Cabinet Company Wood & Steel Equipment for Printing E. Lake-Street Trade Western Concrete - Ludington Division Concrete Products 802 S. Washington Avenue Whitehall Industries Precision Metal Machining 800 S. Madison 1-22 The occupational structure of Mason County is mainly blue collar (48.1%), followed by white collar-(36.1%). The,1970 occupational structure, by profes- sion, for Mason County and Michigan is shown in Table 8. TABLE 8 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE 1970 PERCENTAGES Occupation Mason County Michigan White Collar 36.1 44.9 Professional, technical, and kindred 10.5 14.2 Managers and administration (exc. farm) 7.8 7.0 Sales workers 5.7 6.8 Clerical and kindred 12.1- 16.19 Blue Collar 48.1 40.7 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred 18.2 15.4 Operatives (exc. transport) 19.3 17.5 Transport equipment operatives 4.6 3.8 Laborers (exc. farms) 6.0 4.0 Farm 4.0 1.5 Farmers and farm managers 2.9 1.0 Farm -laborers and farm foremen 1.1 0.5 Service 11.8 12.9 Service workers 10.9 11.9 Private household workers 0.9 1.0 S55FH77-O.S. Bureau o f the Census. Census of Population: 1970. 4. Labor Market In Mason County, the number of persons in the working age group has increased by 7.5% from 1960 to 1970. This is slightly greate r than the overall popula- tion increase for Mason County during the same time period. A partial explana- tion for this increase may be that the scenic and environmental quality of the region has a positive effect on the labor supply. The Mason County labor force (male/female) is given in Table 9, Total Labor Force. The percentage of females has increased by over 44% from 1960 to 1970. 1-23 TABLE 9 TOTAL LABOR FORCE (14 years and older) Mason County 1960 1970 % Change Total in Labor Force 7,875 8,792 +11.6 Male 5,737 5,700 - 0.6 % Male 75.1 70.9 Female 2,138 3,092 +44.6 % Female 27.5 36.2 S55FH7-G.S. Census of Population, 1960 and 1970. C. WATE-RBORNE COMMERCE 1. Commodity Flows a. General Total U.S. domestic waterborne commerce (internal, coastwise and Great Lakes) has shown a generally steady growth from 579 million tons in 1947 to 994 million tons in 1973, with a slight overall decline through the mid 1970's. The major component of this growth in domestic traffic during these 30 years has been the traffic on inland waterways designated as internal traffic. Coastwise traffic between ocean ports increased moder- ately over this period, while traffic on the Great Lakes shows a slight decline. Total U.S. waterborne commerce, both foreign and domestic, is dominated by the energy commodities of coal, coke and petroleum products which consti- tute over 60% of the total. Patterns of total commodity movement are concentrated on the northeast Atlantic Coast, the Gulf Coast, the Mississippi River, the Great Lakes, and the Pacific Coast. Waterborne commerce on the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway system (Figure 8) is a combination of domestic lakewise trade and foreign trade with Canada and overseas areas. The dominant commodity flow pattern through the Great Lakes originates in Minnesota and Michigan's Upper 1'-24 mm mm minx" m m m m v( ..... ...... SAULT MON TE VA-WTTJ4AL VAX TE OSWEGO JHRJJG IV LUDINGTON MANITC FALJO D Pl CHICA MITTA"NO X RON COLUMws INDLANAPOUS ........... RICHMOND ION WILLIAMS ek WORKS - Peninsula, moves through Lake Superior to Lake Huron, and flows inland through ports along lower Lake Huron and western Lake Erie. In 1976, this total commodity movement was in. the range of 60 to 80 million short tons annually between its origin and destination. A secondary pattern of flow across the Great Lakes originates equally from two areas -- the Minnesota and Michigan Upper Peninsula area and the Upper St. Lawrence Seaway. These two flows combine near the Straits of Mackinac and move south along Lake Michigan to enter ports along its southern reaches. In 1976, this total commodity movement inland was approximately 40 million short tons. b. Regional Flow of Foreign Imports and Exports The entire eastern half of the United States to the Great Lakes is very productive- as a producer of exports and as a consumer of imports. The bulk commodities, except for grain and crude petroleum, tend to be exported and imported through the ports nearest the state of origin or destination. The lower unit value bulk commodities do not withstand as much transportation costs as general cargo commodities and, hence, are produced or consumed near the port used for export or the port used for import. Foreign trade is distributed nationally throughout the United States with the ports of the U.S. ocean coasts and the Great Lakes serving wide multi- state areas, pa'rticularly in the movement of general cargo commodities. C. Major Commodity Flow Patterns The commodities which comprise the major portion of U.S. waterborne com- merce are discussed below, with particular emphasis on flow patterns through the Great Lakes system. (1) Coal The Great Lakes has substantial traffic moving from established coal shipping points on Lake Erie and Lake Michigan to U.S. and Canadian 1-25 Great Lakes harbors (Figure 9). A newly emerging pattern is created by the movement of coal from the Western Mountain states and Great Plains states to eastern, southern, and western markets. One of the new routes developed since 1974 is the movement of western coal from Montana by rail to the port of Duluth/Superior and from there by 1,000-foot ships, popularly called superlakers, from Lake Superior to the lower Great Lakes ports, such as Detroit and Chicago. The Great Lakes provide the means of transport for about 38 million tons of coal from ports in the western half of Lake Erie to U.S. destinations on all the Great Lakes, as well as to Canadian destinations in the previous pattern of movement. (2) Crude Petroleum The dominant water movement of crude petroleum in the U.S. (Figure 10) is its import into the New York/New Jersey/Delaware River area on the East Coast, and the Texas/Louisiana area on the Gulf Coast. Crude petroleum is not a waterborne commodity of major significance on the Great Lakes, since Michigan and Wisconsin have a well devel- oped pipeline network. (3) Refined Petroleum Refined petroleum commodity flows (Figure 11) show similarities to crude petroleum. However, pipeline flow is proportionately more significant than for crude petroleum. Refined petroleum products move up and down on the Great Lakes. On Lake Michigan, refined petroleum moves from Chicago to cities along the Michigan and Wisconsin coasts. (4) Iron Ore The waterborne transport of iron ore dominates the Great Lakes/ St. Lawrence Seaway system (Figure 12). Iron ore from mines and pel- letizing plants in the Lake Superior region is moved by lakeships to steel mills in the lower lakes region. High volumes of imported iron ore are moved from eastern Canada up the St. Lawrence Seaway to the 1-26 R 0 YL MONTREAL SAULT STE IE VA-*TFJ4AL osw MANTEF IV s LUDINGTON MANITOWOC LJFFALJD MUMAUKEE "% J DLx3kLx2tu md ELAND KITTWANG "P CAffJsIP0F;rr _ 41L R 0 C E RIA ..... ........... .. ... ....... ee ...... . ...... ST ........ .. F ON .............. X.: X. WILLIAMS &WORKS Vp R I O',@ SAUI.-T MONTREAL STE 19 q VA-VTF-HAL. WATIFF or4..ro, Ft0 OSWEGO *;HFT ALIN LUDINGTON ITCM0OC IPJFFALO 1.11 . . . . . . . . . .. UKEE . ............. . ............. VL DUBU@- TR LjrVELAND KITTANING IVIROC P4TTS8URGH SLA D . ..... . ...... sALn LIS 1150 IMPlarl CHARLESTON RICHMOND TINGTON ST F I- WILLIAMS Ek WORKS MEW== m F- R i A V( SAULT MONTREAL STE IE WI-11TERAL C) or4-r^FR 10 OSWEGO WATER LUDINGTON ALBA MANI BUFFALO M LXE w oLrTVKNT D c NO BUR A ISLAND PIE Maus LIS IP84ATI \A LESTON NGTON X..: X. X. .... 100, WILUAMS Ek VFORKS IF MONT ,@VINN --@,_gSCANA&A w:, WHITEHAL M WATEI OSWEGO *;H KLVAUM I VREJS DINGTON ALS MANI SUFFALO NJ-- -- ---OHIO - 5 . ......... __ ___PA Duel. . . . . . . . . . . CHI 0 KirrANING TR F4 PITTSBURGH %R CK ISLAND BALTI PEORIA BALTIMORE COLUMBUS IN --54 INDIANAPOLIS t*ATI fl RICHMOND INGTON ST LOUIS ./tDUISVILLIE CARO . . . ....... WILLIAMS Ek WORKS steel mills on and near the lower Great Lakes. Served by Great Lakes ports, this region accounts for about two-thirds of the steel produc- tion in the U.S. (5) Iron and Steel Products Large volume iron and steel movements occur on the St. Lawrence Seaway (Figure 13). Although movements occur as both imports and exports, imports are the major flow. The Great Lakes area, with its automotive, machinery and metal fabricating industries, is a heavy consumer of iron and steel products, both domestic and foreign. Here also is the largest concentration of steel production in the United States. With the exception of the Baltimore region, where exports of iron and steel products exceed imports, other coastal harbor areas are shown to be net importers of iron and steel products. (6) Grain Grain (Figure 14) moves from Minnesota, Montana, and North Dakota by rail and truck to the port of Duluth/Superior on Lake Superior for export shipment by the St. Lawrence Seaway, or to be shipped through ports such as Buffalo for domestic use. A secondary flow of grain from farms in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Illinois moves north from Chicago and Milwaukee along Lake Michigan to join this export flow. Grain from Ohio and Indiana moves through to Toledo. (7) Industrial and Agricultural Chemicals The waterborne movement of agricultural and industrial chemicals in the U.S. presents a complex pattern. Industrial chemicals manufac- tured in the Gulf area and from Texas to Louisiana are shipped up the Mississippi River and tributaries and to export. There is substan- tial movement of industrial chemicals from the Gulf to both east and west coasts of the U.S. In the Great Lakes system (Figure 15), the flow patterns for both industrial and agricultural chemicals are similar to those described for grain movement. 1-27 su IIIALLT STE 19 :ig MEN.` V*4rrXHAL OSWFXDO MAMTONOC FALD . ......... ftffJ4PORr ... ... ....... . URCIIH X ........... X. X % 17M WiK: RICHMOND ./,LOLJISVH g ...... ... ... p . . . . . . . . . . . PF e3a WILLIAMS a W RK su 5 11 SALAX MONTREAL- STE Iff SCAPAAWA WAIrTvj4m- OSwEoo vw@ I KLVkiVJN q;HlV As LUDNGTON IMANITOVJOC G MLMALWFX Dl9TR(XT 04.113L)OU CHI TF CL4. ILAM OUTTANING F31 PITTGARMCIN - - - - - - VIALn 10, 3 5 H@N RICHMOND INGTON ST CA WILLIAMS 8k WORKS lo SAULT MONTREA STE *04MENAL oswriao LiXV443TON AA-mm IIIII.WFALO MR-V^tJKIEE DKTRO % J.. CHI TR ELAND KITTAPONIG PHI CK TS am LAN akakLn COLUMmus INDLONAPOU1111 rl .............. RICHMOND .Z'V p ....... . . INDUS c WILLIAMS th WORKS d. Volume of Commodity Flows Throug h Major Ports on the Great Lakes The total freight carried through Lake Michigan ports in 1976 was 104,500,000 tons. Table 10 shows a breakdown of tonnage, by lake, for ports in the Great Lakes. Lake Michigan is seen to have approximately 30.7% of the total Great Lakes tonnage. Only Lake Erie carries a larger percentage - 38.5% (131,100,000 tons) - through its ports. TABLE 10 MAJOR U.S. GREAT LAKES PORTS WATERBORNE COMMERCE 1976 (in millions of short tons) Domestic Foreign Total Port Commerce Commerce Commerce Lake Michigan 104.5 (30.4%) Chicago/Calumet Harbor, IL 33.7 6.9 40.6 Indiana Harbor, IN 16.7 2.8 19.5 Buffington, IN NIA N/A 2.2 Gary, IN N/A N/A 9.9 Burns Waterway, IN 5.1 .4 5.5 Muskegon, MI 2.2 2.2 Ludington, MI 2.3 2.3 Port Inland, MI N/A N/A 3.4 Escanaba, MI N/A N/A 11.9 Green Bay, WI 2.1 2 2.3 Port Washington, WI 1.1 1.1 Milwaukee, WI 23 .9 3.6 Lake S@perior 71.0 (20.6%) Duluth/Superior, MN 28.6 4.0 32.6 Two Harbors, MN N/A N/A 8.3 Silver Bay, MN N/A N/A 11.0 Taconite, MN N/A N/A 12-'-2 Presque Isle, MI 5.7 1.2 6.9 Lake Huron 36.4 (10.6%) Port Dolomite, MI N/A N/A 3.5 Calcite, MI N/A N/A 11.3 Drummond Island, MI 2.1 .5 2.6 Stone Port, MI N/A N/A 9.8 Alpena, MI 2.7 .1 2.8 St. Clair, MI 3.1 .2 3.3 Saginaw River, MI N/A N/A 3.1 1-28 Domestic Foreign Total Port Commerce Commerce Commerce Lake Erie 131.1 (38.1%) Detroit, MI. 21.0 5.4 26.4 Toledo, OH 16.3 8.7 25.0 Marblehead, OH N/A N/A 1.4 Sandusky, OH 2.3 3.1 5.4 Huron, OH 2.4 .5 2.9 Lorain, OH 7.0 .5 7.5 Cleveland, OH 13.7 4.5 18.2 Fairport, OH 2.3 .4 2.7 Ashtabula, OH 6.1 5.6 11.7 Conneaut, OH 8.5 7.9 16.4 Erie, PA 1.0 .2 1.2 Buffalo, NY 8.6 3.7 12.3 Lake Ontario .9 Oswego, NY N/A N/A .9 TOTAL - MAJOR PORTS 343.9 (100%) ---------- Source: National Waterways Study, Part 3, The Great Lakes, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers N/A Not available on a domestic/foreign basis Less than 100,000 tons Table 11 shows total Michigan port tonnages for 1978. This table indi- cates that.activity on the Lake Huron side is concentrated in the areas of Detroit, Port Calcite, Stoneport, Saginaw, and Alpena. Conversely, acti- vity on Lake Michigan is fairly evenly distributed, with the exception of Chicago being a concentrated area. Total tonnage for many smaller Michigan ports has decreased since 1971, while medium to larger port activity has remained fairly constant. 1-29 TABLE 11 MICHIGAN PORT TONNAGES FOR 1978 Harbor 1978 Tonnage % of State Total Detroit (Port of) 25,881,508 25.5 Escanaba 13,207,490 13.0 Port Calcite 11,699,229 11.5 Stoneport 9,217,883 9.1 Marquette-Presque Isle 8,043,758 7.9 Port Dolomite 3,633,718 3.6 Port Inland 3,585,239 3.5 5t. Clair 3,319,786 3.3 Alpena 3,203,682 3.2 Saginaw River 3,173,573 3.1 Port Drummond 2,578,354 2.6 Ludington 2,397,920 2.4 Monroe 2,374,166 2.3 Muskegon 1,952,476 1.9 Grand Haven 701,717 0.7 Alabaster 683,104 0.7 Port Huron 647,097 0.6 Port Gypsum 631,274 0.6 Frankfort-Elberta 542,449 0.5 Marysville 529,920 0.5 Port Penn Dixie 428,934 0.4 Traverse City 426,212 0.4 Holland 419,916 0.4 Marine City 324,653 0.3 St. Joseph-Benton Harbor 320,635 0.3 Gladstone 298,847 0.3 Harbor Beach 253,711 0.2 Manistee 183,806 0.2 Charlevoix 163,212 0.2 Menominee-Marinette 137,417 0.1 Cheboygan 134,827 0.1 Keweenaw Waterway 131,689 0.1 Lime Island 95,301 0.1 Mackinaw City 90,251 0.1 Sault Ste. Marie 62,349 0.1 Algonac 23,844 0.1 Mackinac Island 14,917 0.1 Harrisville 7,104 0.1 St. James 6,898 0.1 Leland 924 0.1 101,529,788 100.0% S55FEK__Aichigan Port Needs Study, 1981. 1-30 e. Commodity Flows Through Ludington The historic pattern of waterborne commerce through the port at Ludington is shown in Table 12. TABLE 12 HISTORICAL PATTERN OF TOTAL WATERBORNE COMMERCE Year LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN Tonnage 1969 3,664,748 1970 4,643,609 1971 4,258,442 1972 3,368,015 1973 2,557,086 1974 2,178,835 1975 2,123,507 1976 2,338,774 1977 2,448,983 1978 2,397,920 1979 2,764,880 Mean Annual 2,976,799 Domestic freight traffic, by commodity for 1979, is shown in Table 13. Due to the overlap in categories, it is not possible to break out tonnages for individual shippers. TABLE 13 DOMESTIC FREIGHT TRAFFIC BY COMMODITY, 1979 LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN (short tons) Commodity Receipts Shipments Total Barley and Rye 2,426 2,426 Corn 160 160 Wheat 60 60 Hay and Fodder 80 80 Field Crops, NEC 6,110 6,110 Animals and Products, NEC 115 -- 115 Miscellaneous Farm Products 3,255 220 3,475 Copper Ore and Concentrates -- 1,308 1,308 Nonferrous Ores, Conc., NEC 80 853 933 Coal and Lignite 19,453 28,914 48,367 Limestone 924,735 -- 924,735 Sand, Gravel, Crushed Rock 18,700 375,550 394,250 Clay -- 510 510 Natural Fertilizer Mats, NEC 60 60 Sulphur, Dry 1-31 3,710 3,710 Commodity Receipts Shipments Total Nonmetallic Minerals, NEC 74 149,735 149,809 Meat, Fresh, Chilled, Frozen 2,173 2,173 Dairy Products, NEC 6,716 190 6,906 Dried Milk and Cream 370 172 542 Vegetables and Prep, NEC 12,906 3,372 16,278 Prep Fruit and Veg Juice, NEC 40 783 623 Wheat Flour and Semolina 41,301 41,301 Prepared Animal Feeds 23,031 23,031 Grain Mill Products, NEC 70,908 100 71,008 Sugar 860 860 Alcoholic Beverages 5,137 5,137 Miscellaneous Food.Products 7,745 2,051 9,796 Timber, Posts, Poles, Piling 200 200 Pulpwood, Log 13,221 23,358 36,579 Lumber 37,402 5,161 42,563 Veneer, Plywood, Worked Wood 13,876 60 13,936 Wood Manufactures, NEC 4,294 50 4,344 Furniture and Fixtures 298 298 Pulp 5,348 980 6,328 Standard Newsprint Paper 9,966 11,766 21,732 Paper and Paperboard 134,286 56,599 190,885 Pulp and Paper Products, NEC 1,590 32,037 33,627 Basic Chemicals and Prod, NEC 331,181 331,181 Miscellaneous Chemical Prod 7,180 101,873 109,053 Rubber and Misc Plastic Prod 18,640 4,312 22,952 Leather and Leather Products 2,543 2,543 Glass and Glass Products 1,188 1,188 Building Cement 11,195 11,195 Structural Clay Products 642 642 Slag 38,160 38,160 Iron and Steel Plates, Sheets 6,173 6,173 Iron and Steel Pipe and Tube 4,633 .4,633 Iron and Steel Products, NEC 2,655 215 2,870 Aluminum and Alloys, Unworked 190 190 Fabricated Metal Products 465 1,454 1,919 Machinery, Except Electrical 15,906 1,241 17,147 Motor Vehicles, Parts, Equip 27,124 27,124 Ships and Boats 175 175 Misc Manufactured Products 45,561 59,137 104,698 Iron and Steel Scrap 10,460 5,609 16,069 Paper Waste and Scrap 275 2,140 2,415 Waste and Scrap 106 106 f. Cross-Lake Passengers Cross-lake passenger traffic, for the eleven-year period of 1969-1979, is given in Table 14 for the Ports of Ludington, Frankfort, and Muskegon. The peak year for total cross-lake passenger traffic was 1970, and the peak year for Ludington's passenger traffic was 1971. Total passenger 1-32 traffic has averaged 204,569 people per year and has been generally declin- ing. Ludington passenger traffic has averaged 165,469 people per year and has also been generally declining. TABLE 14 CROSS-LAKE PASSENGER TRAFFIC 1969 - 1979 Year Ludington Muskegon Frankfort Total 1969 174,224 101,096 25,225 300,545 1970 177,353 111,594 22,577 311,524 1971 205,389 742 29,666 235,797 1972 176,598 - 21,614 198,212 1973 179,055 - 15,076 194,131 1974 188,426 - 13,021 201,447 1975 149,251 - 14,077 163,328 1976 156,218 - 13,410 169,628 1977 169,871, - 17,449 187,320 1978 110,006 - 28,451 138,457 1979 133,765 - 16,105 149,870 2,250,259 1-33 e v Chapter II Existing Harbor Facilities I . CHAPTER II EXISTING HARBOR FACILITIES INTRODUCTION The objective of this chapter is to present the information on existing commer- cial facilities in the Ludington Harbor gathered during an on-site inventory and review. This review consisted of field observations of the existing com- ponents of each facility with regard to structural condition and need for general repairs. An evaluation of the site was made to ascertain the need for, or availability of, land for expansion. This chapter also addresses the func- tional viability of related facilities and intermodal connections. Input from the operators of these facilities was requested regarding viability, and is included in this chapter. The intent of this information is to provide an overview of the quality of existing harbor facilities, to identify significant deficiencies, and to deter- mine the type of repairs and new construction that would be involved in an upgrading effort. The detailed information which is required beyond the plan- ning stage, such as structural analysis of specific components in order to design repairs or a replacement, is not included in this review. A. EXIS TING HARBOR FACILITIES An outer basin, formed by arrowhead breakwaters, protects the channel connect- ing Lake Michigan and Pere Marquette Lake. The breakwaters are 550 feet apart at the outer ends, diverging at a 90-degree angle. The north and south break- waters have lengths of 1,800 feet and 1,600 feet, respectively. The inner channel is 2,000 feet in length and has a navigable width of about 230 feet. The recently completed Ludington Municipal Marina occupies the northernmost shores of Pere Marquette Lake, just inside the inner channel. A rubble mound wave absorber and steel sheet pile revetment also have recently been construc- ted along the southern edge of the inner channel and turn into Pere Marquette Lake. These improvements were part of the project for modification of the harbor and channel at Ludington. II-1 The Ludington Yacht Club and Ludington Outboard Club have private docking facilities on the northeast shores of Pere Marquette Lake. Major commercial docks on the lake are operated by the C&O Railroad for ferry docking, by The Dow Chemical Company, and by Sand Products, Inc. Figure 16 shows the major harbor structures, along with harbor dimensions and controlling depths. B. ON-SITE REVIEW OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL FACILITIES 1. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Car Ferry A site plan of the C&O Railroad Ferry slips and docks are shown in Figure 17. The railroad currently operates one ferry run per day between Ludington and Kewaunee, Wisconsin, and is using only Slip 2. The steel sheet pile docks located between Slips 1 and 2, Slips 2 and 3, and south of Slip 3 are referred to as docks 1-1/2, 2-1/2 and 3-1/2, respectively. The long wing fender and pile clusters at Slip 1 were removed in 1982. Slip 3 is currently not in use due to damage and may be removed in the near future by a private firm under contract with the C&O Railroad. a. Car.Ferry Slip 2 The following information-is presented for this slip only as it is the only one in current use and may be the only remaining slip in the future. Significant differences in Slips 2 and 3, in addition to a discussion of their damages, follows: (1) Components and Materials of Construction The car ferry slip consists of a long-wing fender or pier, a hinged apron or bridge for loading railroad cars onto the ferry, a ramp for loading automobiles on the mid-level of the ferry, a passenger load- ing ramp, and several piling clusters for ferry turning and mooring. Figure 18 is a view of the end of the long-wing fender at Slip 2. It consists of three rows of creosote treated timber piling with a butt diameter of 18 to 24 inches. The pilings are separated by double rows of 3" x 12" creosote treated cross members. The vertical facing 11-2 "."m = cu m8 KOU) @77: -j, a) Y .7 qk In ji A: 4t§I 4 I WAX At I, , Ve v- 'r c Nw, A% V t ig Ak- "Ro OD 0 3: Z ou z 0 z M X r .4 m oz( -cl;u C 0 Z c 4 Ar It 0 Z ril 0 0 0 U) E 16 .................................................. . . M man mm mm mm m 0 v VL A DING R P SLIP Na 2 DOCK 1/2 AUT LOADIN RAMP sx-19 P -WILLIAMS Bt WORKS MARCH CATWALK- STEEL GRATING 18-24!1DIA. TREATED TIMBER PILING VERTICAL FACING UNTREATED OAK:3@'X 12"- REPLACED EVERY CROSS MEMBERS 10 to 15 YEARS MORE FREQUENT REPLACEMENT IN IMPACTAREAS FACING WHALERS PILING EMBEDDED IN SAND/GRAVEL BOTTOM Figure IS CROSS-SECTIONAL VIEW OF LONG-WING FENDER CAR FERRY SLIP No. 2 CITY OF LUDINGTON WILLIAMS 81 WORKS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY boards, which are in contact with the docked ferry, are 311 x 12" untreated oak. Along the top of the long-wing fender is a metal grating catwalk. The turning pile cluster is located at the end of the long-wing fender to facilitate maneuvering and turning of the ferry and to protect the fender from impact. Figure 19 shows a cross-section view of the pile cluster. The inner pile core and outer row of piling are separated by numerous wraps--of neoprene tubing, 6 inches in diameter, held in place with a steel cable through the center. This tubing functions as a shock absorber within the pile cluster. The cluster is wrapped on the outside with 3/4" steel cable. There are approx- imately 50+ creosote treated piles in this cluster. In addition to the turning pile cluster, the slip has a lining clus- ter of 25-30 treated piles located midway along the long-wing fender. An opposite cluster is located next to the apron and across from the fender to facilitate docking. The apron or bridge includes a wood platform which is hinged at the dock side and raised and lowered with a counter weight system. The bridge surface is constructed of treated 12" x 12" timbers, with rail tracks on each side to allow loading and unloading of-both sides of the ferry. During loading and unloading, the apron rests in a pocket at the stern of the ferry. The auto and passenger loading ramps are behind the long-wing fender near the apron area. The auto ramp is a wood structure supported by treated timber piling and cross members. Figure 20 shows a photo of the support structure of the auto loading ramp. The passenger ramp is a staircase supported by concrete-encased structural steel piling. (2) History of Repairs and Current Conditions of Components Most components of ferry Slip 2 are generally in good condition. The original date of construction of the slip is not known. It was 11-3 6" DIAMETER NEOPRENE TUBING (IMPACT ABSORBER) 3/4't STEEL CABLE WRAP INNER CORE PILING OUTER CORE PILING CAT WALK Figure 19 CROSS-SECTIONALVIEW OF TURNING PILE CLUSTER CAR FERRY SLIP No. 2 CITY OF LUDINGTON WILLIAMS Ek WORKS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY , ld oj@ xf 1, A4 if Figure 20 AUTO RAMP SUPPORT PILING CAR FERRY SLIP No. 2 CITY OF LUDINGTON WILLIAMS 84 WORKS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY completely rebuilt in the late 20's or early 30's. The long-wing fender is showing some signs of impact midway along its length and is beginning to lean slightly toward the shore. The oak facing along this fender is replaced as needed, usually every 10-15 years, and' more frequently in high impact areas. The turning pile cluster, which was completely rebuilt in the 1950's, is also in good condition. The original construction of this piling reportedly failed, breaking off at the point of penetration. The condition of the lining cluster pile is good, with slight damage to the exterior piling. Figure 21 is a photo of this piling. The oppo- site pile cluster, which can be seen in the background of the photo, is in fair condition and beginning to lean away from the docking area. The auto and passenger ramps are in generally good condition, with no visible signs of rot or decay. The bridge is also in good condition. Maintenance on this structure, involving timber replacement, is reportedly done on a regular basis to insure that rail alignment is maintained. b. Car Ferry Slip I Ferry Slip I has the same basic com ponents as Slip 2. However, it is lacking an auto and passenger ramp and has a shorter apron. This ferry slip was the original docking facility for ferry runs across Lake Michigan. In the mid 1970's, the slip was taken out of service when the bridge or apron was damaged by a ferry during unloading. It has not been repaired or used since that time. In 1982, the long wing fender and pile-clusters were removed at Slip 1. The long-wing fender of Slip 1 was not in good condition at the time of removal, leaning away from the dock area approximately 10'-15'. Reportedly, the configuration of Slip 1 has several inherent disadvan- tages. The orientation of the slip made docking difficult during strong northerly winds. The short bridge did not accommodate wide or long rail- road cars well and was less secure in the ferry pocket than the longer 11-4 I W -7 low- Figure 21 LINING CLUSTER PILE AND OPPOSITE PILE CAR FERRY SLIP No. 2 CITY OF LUDINGTON WILLIAMS Sk WORKS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY bridges at Slips 2 and 3. Finally, the railroad tracks leading up to the bridge are on a fairly sharp curve; occasionally, train derailments resulted. C. Car Ferry Slip 3 Slip 3 has severe long-wing fender damage and currently is inoperable. Figure 22 is a photo of the the long-wing fender taken from the bridge. This damage, which reportedly is the result of impact during docking, has caused the collapse of the long-wing fender and turning cluster piling. The original date.of construction.of Slip 3 is unknown. It was in service when two ferries were running per day up to a year ago, but was damaged and beginning to lean severely at that time. The components of Slip 3 are similar to those of Slip 2 with the exception that the auto ramp is con- structed of steel rather than wood. Other components of the slip, aside from the piling clusters and long-wing fender, are generally in fair to good condition. As mentioned previously, Slip 3 may be removed in the near future. d. Sheet Pile Dock 1-1/2 The location of this docking area is shown in Figure 17. It consists of steel sheet pile with a steel cap over the top of the piling. Rubber tires are attached along the face to provide some protection against impact. The dock has concrete-filled steel mooring bollards spaced approx- imately every 30 feet. Currently, this dock is used by a local asphalt firm to unload bulk sand and aggregate from self-unloading barges moored at the dock. The bu I k material is unloaded and piled approximately 50 feet from the dock face on the landward side of the railroad tracks. This dock piling was installed in the late 50's and is generally in good condition. Some of the steel plate across the top has become dislodged and bent in places. One of the mooring bollards has also been dislodged. 11-5 7 Figure 22 SLIP 3 LONG-WING FENDER CITY OF LUDINGTON WILLIAMS EN WORKS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY e. Sheet Pile Docks 2-1/2 and 3-1/2 Dock 2-1/2 is located between Slips 2 and 3 and is about half as long as Dock 1-1/2. Date of construction of the dock is not known. The dock is constructed of steel sheet pile with untreated wood whalers. The sheet pile is in good condition with the exception of the westerly 100 feet. The top 1 to 2 feet of this piling has been bent, probably due to impact. The wood whalers show evidence of impact damage along the length of the dock and are in fair condition. Reportedly, the whalers have been replaced as necessary in the past, usually every 10 years. Dock 3-1/2 is generally of the same construction as 2-1/2 and is in good condition, with some impact damage to the whalers. Currently, docks 2J and 3J are used for ferry mooring for maintenance and repairs. f. Site Considerations The Site Plan of the C&O property is shown in Figure 17. Aside from the land adjacent to dock 1-1/2, there is little vacant land. Rail spurs which extend to each of the slips occupy a major portion of the land. Buildings on the site are the marine shop, marine store, roundhouse, and fou r storage buildings. g. Functional Viability The general purpose dock (1-1/2) is adequate for small vessels and barges. It is presently being used by Laman Asphalt for landing and storage of bulk materials. Stockpiling of heavy materials is limited to the landward side of the railroad tracks due to the potential of seawall failure at this facility. This dock could be used, with substantial improvements, for lake ships. However, tugboat assistance would be necessary for leav- ing the dock during times of strong west winds. The general purpose dock has good rail access and limited over-the-road access. This dock is served by full utilities. 11-6 At present, only one slip (2) is functional for car ferry service and the other two sheetpile docks (2-1/2 and 3-1/2) are being used for vessels in layup. The car ferry terminal facilities are supported by the following: (1) Machine shop (car ferry maintenance and supplemental freight yard maintenance) (2) Marine storage (storage of supplies for car ferries, such as food, linen, etc.) (3) Roundhouse (eastbound and westbound railroad yard; no piggyback facilities) (4) Paint shop (supply and maintenance for marine structures) (5) Storage buildings (four individual storage buildings) The C&O Railroad considers the single serviceable slip as adequate for present use. 2. The Dow Chemical Company The Dow Chemical Company Ludington Plant was built during the war in the 1940's and produced magnesium. It was later converted to a commercial lime plant. Figure 23 shows the site plan of the Dow Chemical docking facilities. Liquid product transfer takes place on the east dock face, while dry bulk materials (primarily limestone) are unloaded on the west dock face. a. Area East of the East Dock Face The shoreline east of the east dock face was formerly used for mooring barges and loading bulk products through a conveyor system. This dock area no longer serves a functional purpose. The shoreline consists Of rock and slag on a 1:1 slope. Mooring pile clusters, 20 feet from the shore, are spaced approximately 200 feet apart. These pile clusters consist of approximately 15 untreated wood pilings wrapped with steel cable. Steel mooring bollards are spaced approximately 175 feet apart along the shoreline. The mooring pile clusters were installed 10 to 15 years ago and are in fair condition, with some visible signs of decay. The steel mooring 11-7 N MOORING BOLLARDS OPEN STORAGE AREA STEEL SHEET PILE WITH TIE BACKS DI RT ROAD HOPPER OVERHEAD PIPELINE 25-P PIL ,_- 1,, 7" -, CLUSTER MOORING BOLLARD SPACING 175 FT CONCRETE BUILDING SLABS FOR SLOPE LIQUI PROTECTION PRODUCTS EL OIL PILE CLUSTER STEEL SPACING SHEET 200 FT PILE PILE NO PERE CLUSTER DOCK FACE MARQUETTE LAKE LUDINGTON PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY Figure 23 DOW CHEMICAL CO. SITE PLAN WILLIAMS a WORKS MARCH, 1982 NO SCALE bollards are in excellent condition. Figure 24 is a photo taken from this area facing west. In the foreground is the bulk material loading equip- ment which is presently inoperative. b. East Dock Face The east dock is the area where bulk liquid products are loaded and un- loaded from barges. The date of construction of this dock is not known. The dock consists of steel sheet pile with two rows of horizontally placed untreated wood whalers bolted to the sheet pile. The general condition of the steel sheet pile is good. The timber whalers along this dock are in fair condition, with some impact damage which may necessitate repair. C. Area Between East and West Dock Face This area is undeveloped for docking purposes. The slope has,been pro- tected with salvaged concrete road slabs placed side by side. Two 25-30 pile clusters are located at the ends of this area. d. West Dock Face The west dock face is used by self-unloading vessels which tie to mooring bollards along the dock face and unload limestone to a bulk storage area. Harbison-Walker leases a part of this dock for product export. The dock face'consists of steel sheet pile protected by a double row of treated timber whalers. This sheet pile has tiebacks and is in good condition. A one-inch diameter pipe railing is attached to the top of the sheet pilei-- 3. Mohawk Transportation a. Facilities and Conditions The Mohawk Transportation docking facility site plan is shown in Figure 25. The site is located along the channel on the east side of Pere Marquette Lake. Current use of the facility is by shallow draft barges which self-unload and stockpile limestone on the site. 11-8 lea M ol@@ w @5 2M, arm A "Ca, --f --Z I* N pen 60 k; Figure 24 PHOTO FROM EAST OF EAST DOCK AT DOW CHEMICAL CO. CITY OF LUDINGTON PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY WILLIAMS a WORKS OPEN STORAGE AREA MUNICIPAL DOCKS MOORING MOORING BOLLARD, BOLLARD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WOOD WPOD PILINGS CATWALK DIAM. UNTREATEDOAK SIGNS OF DECAY ON TOP CONDITION - FAIR PERE MARQUETTE LAKE CHANNEL LUDINGTON PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY @wooo Figure 25 MC*-IAWK TRANSPORTAMON SITE PLAN L-WILLIAMS WORKS __j MARCH, 1982 NO SCALE 870291 Figure 26 is a photo of the facility, taken from the west. The facility consists of timber piling near the shoreline, mooring bollards, a bulk material storage area, and an elevated wood walkway along the shoreline. The timber piling, while providing shoreline protection, is basically nonfunctional, since barges remain in the center of the channel moored to bollards on either side of the channel. The wood pilings are untreated oak, with a diameter of approximately 15 inches and an approximate age of 10 years. Spacing of the piles is 20 to 25 feet. The one -mooring bollard on the Mohawk site is a 12-inch dia- meter, concrete-filled iron pipe. A second mooring bollard, located on the municipal dock site, consists of a 24-inch concrete-filled steel pipe. The wood walkway along the shoreline is also untreated wood and is about 50 feet in length. The condition of the piling along the shoreline is fair. Al 1 of the piling show decay of the outer edge and across the top of the piling. Condition of both mooring bollards is good, with no visible signs of displacement. The wood walkway is in fair condition.' b. Functional Viability The Mohawk terminal has minimum docking and material handling facilities. The space is extremely limited and there is no room for expansion without razing some existing buildings. This site has poor road/highway access. The use of this facility is limited to barges due to channel depth, width, and configuration. When the barges use this facility, they tie off to both sides of the channel and block it for use by recreational boaters. 4. Western Concrete Products a. Facilities and Conditions The Western Concrete Products facilities are located across the channel from the Mohawk terminal. Figure 27 shows the site plan of this terminal. 11-9 4L Figure 26 MOHAWK TRANSPORTATION EXISTING PILINGS CITY OF LUDINGTON PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY WILLIAMS 8k WORKS PERE MARQUETTE LAKE CHANNEL 111,00' SUBMERGED PILINGS 4 41, & OPEN STORAGE AREA LUDINGTON -6F--- MOORING OCK RIP-RAP-o@ BOLLARDS -49- PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY Figure 27 WESTERN CONCRETE PRODUCTS SITE PLAN L-WILLIAMS Sk WORKS MARCH, 1982 NO SCALE 87029 j The piling was installed over 20 years ago and consists of untreated, timber piling, 6 to 14 inches in diameter. Excessive decay has rendered the piling useless. The facilities are not in current use. Past usage involved self-unload- ing, low-draft barges that tied to concrete piling or mooring bollards on either side of the channel. The condition of concrete piling and mooring bollards is good. Future usage for other than this type vessel would require extensive reconstruction of the dock facilities and probable deepening of the channel. b. Functional Viability The Western Concrete terminal has minimal docking and material handling facilities. There is adequate room for the use of these facilities. However, there is minimal area for expansion. There is poor road/highway access to this site. The navigation facilities (channel depth, width-, and configuration) are adequate for current use. 5. Sand Products The site plan of the Sand Products docking facilities is shown in Figure 28. This dock is located on property leased from The Dow Chemical Company. The dock and bulk loading equipment is used to load sand brought by truck from Hart, Michigan onto vessels bound for Buffalo, New York, or Cleveland. a. Facilities and Conditions The dock face is steel sheet pile with a strong tieback system and is in good to excellent condition. The general condition of mooring clusters is fair. The timber piling for mooring clusters is untreated and some clusters are showing severe decay above the water line. General condition of the clusters in the area of sheet piling is fair to good. The clusters are constructed of 20± piles with wire wrapping 1.0 foot from the top and at the water line. II-10 PERE MARQUETTE LOADING LAKE CONVEYOR \.ISTACKER SHEET PILE - INTERLOCKING TIEP BACK 3.5 FROM VERTICAL TIE BACK EVERY 10' WOOD CATWALK STEEL/CEMENT MOORING M ORING DOLPHIN BOLLARDS GOOD/ EXCELLENT CONDITION WOOD CLUSTER OPEN PILINGS STORAGEi AREA 20t PILE CLUSTERS (TYPICAL) EXCESSIVE DECAY 60-70' 50' CATWALK (WOOD) 50 PILE CLUSTER NOTE: TIMBER PILING- MATERIAL- UNTREATED OAK OR OTHER HARD WOOD LUDINGTON rr 0' L S TACI EXPOSED WOOD SHOWS PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY SIGNS OF DECAY Figure 28 GENERAL CONDITION -FAIR SAND PRODUCTS CO. TERMINAL SITE PLAN L-WILLIAMS 8t WORKS MARCH, 1982 __ NO SCALE 870291 b. Functional Viability Sand Products maintains a dock, conveyor loader, and sand stockpile on land leased from Dow. The conveyor is generally in good condition and the dock condition varies from good to poor. There is adequate area for existing operations and limited area for future expansion. The navigation facilities (channel depth, width, and configuration) are considered adequate for current use. This facility is serviced by a private haul road. % U Chapter III Land Use Analysis CHAPTER III LAND USE ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The main focus of this study, port development and its related industrial development, must be balanced with other coastal land uses. The purpose of this section is to analyze the opportunities/1 imitations for other competing land uses around Pere Marquette Lake. It is focused on underdeveloped and undeveloped areas. This analysis reports land use opportunities/1 imitations for remarkable areas, large or small. Thus, not every parcel is discussed, but all areas of the lake are covered. Alternate land use opportunities, as discussed in this chapter, are shown in Figure 29. A. RESIDENTIAL Little of the coastal area within the corporate limits of Ludington is residen- tial. There is some residential development, with lake views on the bluff behind the Dow Chemical Plant. There is also some mixed residential develop- ment behind the C&O Railroad property. However, this development has neither lake views or access. In the vicinity of the new municipal marina, there is some limited residential development. There is also a new multi-family condo- minium development at the north end of the Buttersville bar. This development enjoys direct access and views of both Lake Michigan and Pere Marquette Lake. It has maximized this advantage by providing a swimming beach on the Lake Michigan side and private marina facilities on the Pere Marquette Lake side. Although residential development along the Ludington coastal areas of the Pere Marquette Lake is limited, the opportunities are not. An abandonment of the C&O Railroad facility would open many acres of waterfront property to develop- ment. The cost of removing the existing improvements, the railroad's general reluctance to sell land, and the cost of building the project would push the 7 4 'A Flo lz, -EXISTI 41 R E 'R V lk' POT-JVN T RED R&MENT W 7- AREA STEA%I4IS WE -`R94'CON(:RETF :STE! PAF;ftK DEw.. t NTIAL RESIDEt4TIAL, V@K PA OR'INDUSTRIAL USE EXISTING 041 L ROA'D C I T,'Y IAL PARK RC ION % DOW EN IT, NEW CONDO. DEVELOPMENT PERE MARQUETTE: L A K 1E 4`1 @j XV p SIN RESIDEN4 POTENJ I_ lCQ?lAMF-ff",T L A IAL AT USE A) POTENTIAI.@ (WARI \NEXUA ps it SAND PRODU ck @A K E M I C H I G A N R" 4@ @1,4 IJ A, tic WILLIAMS 8k WORKS cost of this project very high. Other industrial facilities, such as the Star Watch Case plant, may offer similar redevelopment opportunities at a more modest,cost. The Western Concrete Products area also could be developed for residential use. The mixed use areas along South Washington Avenue and East Dowland Street have limited coastal residential redevelopment opportunities due to the fragmented ownership and limited water access/views. In contrast to the City of Ludington, the Pere Marquette Township coastal areas have large open spaces. The area along the South Shore, between the Sand Products dock and the Dow disposal lagoons, is generally undeveloped. This area is characterized by steep slopes and a wetlands shoreline. Most of this area is owned by Dow and is zoned Harbor Industrial. It could be developed for multi-family (condominium), residential use if utilities are available to support it. The existing residential areas on the Buttersville Bar will continue to infill with the development of now vacant.lots. Due to the pattern of development and the fragmentation of ownership, no significant amount of multi-family develop- ment is anticipated. B. COMMERCIAL Commercial as used in this section refers to Commercial Recreational. Neigh- borhood Commercial and General Commercial is not considered in this section. Commercial Recreational includes all uses which are related to water uses or tourism. Examples of this include motels/hotels, marinas, charter fishing service, restaurants, etc. Within Ludington, there are a number of established commercial recreational areas. One is along West Ludington Avenue near the beach. As the new City Marina grows in popularity, the pressures on this area to grow in size will increase. The City has recently completed a plan for the area around the new marina. It calls for a mix of commercial and residential and a variety of streetscape improvements. Currently, the new municipal marina is at capacity and there is a demonstrated need for additional marina berths. The current trends of increasing tourism in the area will further add to this need. 111-2 The small channel , over which South Washington Avenue passes, supports several marinas and charter fishing services. At present, there is little room for expansion. However, there are a number of abandoned or under-utilized indus- trial structures in this area that could be recycled for commercial recreation- al use. A need for a large boat lift and boat repair facility has been identi- fied. The Pere Marquette Township coastal area has no existing commercial recreation- al land uses. Some marina facilities could be developed on either side of the Sand Products facility. C. PUBLIC FACILITIES The City of Ludington has several waterfront facilities, including the Lake Michigan beach/boat ramp, the new marina, the City dock, and the City Park (south of Western Concrete). Each of these facilities provides some waterfront contact. However, an integraied Pere Marquette waterfront park system is lacking. A promenade along the waterfront by the City Marina would be an attractive spot to watch boating and shipping activitioes. There is also an opportunity to expand the City Park (between Dow and Western Concrete) into the Western Concrete area. This would about double its land area and would permit it to be developed into a major park facility, thus providing the impetus for neighborhood redevelopment and giving some relief to Stearns Park. Such a facility could include boat rentals (private concession), food service (private concession), picnic areas, concerts, art/antique shows, and transient boat moorings. Pere Marquette Township has a park with Lake Michigan frontage. This facility probably serves the Township's current needs. If, however, there is signifi- cant residential development along the Pere Marquette Lake waterfront, then some land should be reserved for park usage. The wetland areas would make an excellent nature study area. A park, developed with boardwalks through the wetlands and offering guided natur; tours, could be a regional attraction. Currently, Pere Marquette Township is endeavoring to develop this type of park in the wetlands. TTT-3 D. . CONCLUSIONS Opportunities for all types of land use exist around the Pere Marquette Lake. Often, several opportunities exist for a single piece of property. Further- more, certain key properties can greatly influence a neighborhood's character or reinforce existing land use patterns. The opportunities discussed in this chapter must be integrated into an overall plan and balanced with industrial/port development. 111-4 Chapter IV Economic Analysis CHAPTER IV ECONOMIC ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION, The purpose of this chapter is to analyze and interpret economic base data and influences. This chapter covers a commodity flow analysis, based upon both the existing, published sources and the commodity survey prepared as part of this project. This chapter also includes an economic analysis of the harbor of the City of Ludington and the Ludington area. As a basis for determining future opportunities and limitations, an analysis of general national economic trends for specific commodity groups is provided. A. GENERAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 1. Economic Base a. The Harbor The basic economic purpose of the Ludington Harbor is twofold - commercial recreation and commercial shipping. As a commercial recreation facility, it supports various marinas, boat yards, and charter fishing services. It also provides an attraction for fishermen and sightseers who, in turn, purchase goods and services in the Ludington area. Although it is not possible to quantify the contribution of Pere Marquette Lake to the local economy, it is an important element to the local and regional economy. Commercial shipping usage of the harbor makes possible such facilities as the Dow plant, Harbison-Walker, and the C&O car ferry. It reinforces operations such as Mohawk Products, Western Concrete, Laman Asphalt, and Sand Products. In the past, it supported a commercial fishing industry. The harbor has the fiscal and economic potential to support other similar industrial/transportation uses/facilities. IV-1 b. Ludington The City of Ludington grew from the lumber industry of the last century. As this industry declined, the city diversified its industrial base. The city has,a variety of industries, the largest of which is the Dow Chemical plant which-was located here in the 1940's. The Dow facility has had a strong positive economic influence on the community. It is responsible for the attraction of the Harbison-Walker plant, which converts a Dow by-product into a saleable commodity. At present, the city is home to a wide variety of small and medium indus- tries. This tndustrial base has cushioned Ludington from some of the recent economic declines,,- however, some national trends are starting to take their toll on Ludington industries. Ludington, as the county seat, supports a variety of service firms. Ludington is also the wholesale/retail center for the area. C. The Area Ludington is the industrial and employment center for Mason County and the region. Nevertheless, Mason County and the region support several impor- tant industries - tourism, agriculture, and natural resource extraction. The second home market and tourism market has enjoyed marked success in Mason County and the region. Many smaller farms have been converted to vacation developments. Land in agriculture has been declining, and presently about one third of Mason County is devoted to agriculture. Total agricultural production has been increasing. This has maintained agriculture as an important. economic element in Mason County and the region. Mason County ranks seventh in natural resource extraction within the State of Michigan. It ranks second in natural saline production and fourth in industrial casting sand production. IV-2 2. Local Economic Growth Estimates Local overall economic development estimates are not available. However, growth is anticipated in several economic sectors. Even with a negative popu- lation growth rate, Ludington can contribute to the area's economic growth. o Ludington has a finite and limited supply of residential land. Thus, its population will stabilize based on available residential area. o Ludington's population will fluctuate in relation to the average number of people in a household. o Ludington's population will also vary as the density of housing in resi- dential areas changes. o As Ludington's industrial and commercial base (both water related and non-water related) expands, resident.ial areas may be lost and their popu- lation displaced to elsewhere in the county. Economic growth in Mason County and Ludington can be broken into several groups for purposes of analysis. Agriculture. Agricultural production in Mason County is increasing and is forecast to continue. Since the amount of farm land has been decreasing, increased agricultural production can be attributed to improved farming prac- tices, better farming methods, increased mechanization, improved seed stock, and improved/increased use of fertilizers/pesticides. Manufacturing. The forecast for local manufacturing is poor. Manufacturing has been decreasing in Mason County. Small and medium sized industries do not depend upon harbor availability, but may depend on rail service. Forecastable growth/decline is more directly related to these industries than to large basic manufacturing facilities which need waterborne commerce. The attraction of these basic manufacturers must be considered on an individual basis. They are not statistically forecastable in an economic unit the size of Ludington. Recreation/Tourism. Recreation and tourism in Ludington and Mason County has been increasing and is forecast to continue. , The continued development and improvement of recreation and tourism facilities will contribute to this increase. Likewise, the extension of the tourism season into the winter months will contribute to the increase. IV-3 Construction. The construction industry in Ludington and Mason County is driven by general economic expansion and the second home market. Currently these economic segments are depressed; however, a significant amount of deman; is building up. The long range prospect for the construction industry is good. Natural Resource Extraction. Several types of natural.resources are extracted from Mason County and the area. These include: oil and gas, foundry sand, construction sand and gravel, and brine. Oil and gas exploration and produc- tion will*vary according to local supply, national demand, and international economics. Foundry sand from the Ludington area is in competition with other sand mining areas along the western shore of Lake Michigan. It is directly related to Michigan dune mining laws and the automotive industry's need for foundry sand. The foreign manufacture of "domestic" automobile engine blocks could reduce the demand for'local foundry sand production. Construction sand is available locally to meet local demand. Construction aggregates and gravel are usually imported into the Ludington area. 3. Influences on the Local Economy a. State and National Ludington, and especially the car ferry traffic,,is economically dependent on the national and state economy. The state economy is in turn dependent on the' national economy and particularly the auto industry, although Ludington is less directly tied to the the auto industry than other areas of the state. The national economy, as related to Ludington, is discussed in depth in Part B of this chapter. b. Capital Supply Capital is necessary for industrial development, redevelopment, or expan- sion. It must be available at reasonable rates for local economic growth. Although Ludington cannot control the national capital supply or cost, it can, through municipal loans and bonds, make capital available to indus- try. Tit A Cl. Labor Supply Industry needs a source of labor to staff its facilities. Ludington, how- ever, can only indirectly influence the labor supply. In the recent past, Ludington has had a well-balanced labor supply of blue collar, white col- lar, farm, and service industry workers. Recent poor economic conditions, with closing factories and rising 'unemployment, may cause a surplus of certain types of workers and cause others with needed skills to leave the area. d. Land and Infrastructure Industry cannot grow without land and supporting infrastructure. Recent state statutes now permit cities to condemn and assemble land for indus- trial and commercial development. The ability to assemble large tracts of land adjoining existing industrial facilities is an important economic development tool. Lik@wise, industrial expansion is dependent on support- ing infrastructure such as roads, utilities, waste disposal facilities,. etc. These are services typically provided by the public sector. 4. Physical -Implications a. Land Available The industrial areas of Ludington's waterfron -t are crowded. Expansion area is needed. Some industrial areas are in conflict with residential and commercial land uses. A Non-industrial land uses along the north shore of Pere Marquette Lake are mixed and unconsolidated. In several areas, commercial, residential, and industrial land uses run together. Additional recreation and commercial facilities such as a major waterfront park, a large boat hoist, etc. are needed to enhance and reinforce the recreation/tourist industry. T V-9; b. Util i ties Adequate natural gas, water, and sewer are available on the north side of Pere Marquette Lake. Natural gas, water, and sewer are generally unavail- able on the south side of Pere Marquette Lake. Electricity and telephone are available to all areas. C. Transportation The Ludington downtown waterfront area needs a good over-the-road trans- portation link. It may be possible to develop a truck route along part of the railroad right-of-way. The completion of the US-31 four-lane through to Ludington is also necessary to provide good truck access to the down- state areas. Waterborne transportation in Ludington enjoys a year-round cross lake shipping season, a good natural turning basin, good wave protection, and an adequate anchorage area. The harbor entrance is maintained at the full St. Lawrence Seaway depth and provides access to a natural deep harbor. If the Seaway were ever to be deepened, then only the Ludington entrance channel would need dredging. Pere Marquette Lake in most cases would be of sufficient depth, although some dredging would be necessary at individ- ual berths. Several uses are available for the Western Concrete Products site. The site is well situated for receiving dry bulk and liquid bulk materials. In contrast, the Mohawk Transportation Terminal is too small for a major dry bulk operation. However, with some site development, it could be used as a liquid bulk facility by self-unloading barges. The structural condition of the C&O Railroad Slips No. 1-and 3 make them unusable at this time. At present, the C&O has one slip in usable condi- tion, plus the general purpose barge dock. Dock No. 2-1/2 presently has a vessel in layup and could be used as a ship's berth. T 11-r The Sand Products Terminal appears adequate for present use. L i kewi se, Dow Chemical indicates that their terminal facilities are adequate for present and anticipated future use. So long as the cross-lake car ferry continues, Ludington will be served by excellent rail service. Along the north side of the lake, there are rail sidings to several sites. The car ferry and Michigan's network of rail- roads gives Ludington excellent access to points east and west. d. Ownership The major landowners around Pere Marquette Lake are the C&6''Railroad and Dow Chemical. Dow Chemical owns most of the land from its facility south and east and along the south side of the lake up to and including the Sand Products facility. The C&O Railroad owns a large tract of land in close proximity to downtown Ludington. Other areas show a fractured and fragmented ownership pattern. Ownership on the Buttersville Bar is predominantly individual single family. Owner- ship along parts of the north side of Pere Marquette Lake is fragmented according to its use. e. Natural Limitations As noted, Ludington enjoys a year-round navigation season. The ice prob- lems in Pere Marquette Lake and the harbor channel are minimal if ice buildup is kept under control. The ability to use the Port of Ludington year-round is an asset which should not be understated. Along the north shore of Pere Marquette Lake, there are few large flat areas which are available for development or redevelopment. Among these few are the C&O Railroad site, the industrial area in the vicinity of the Mohawk Transportation terminal, and the Western Concrete Products site. The eastern end of the lake is characterized by shallow wa ter depths and wetlands. This limits the development potential of this part of the lake. IV-7 The topography along the south shore of Pere Marquette Lake is very rugged. The steep slopes and undulating terrain do not make this area suitable for intensive industrial development. However, residential development would be possible in this area if utilities were available. Except for the wetland areas, soils generally do-not constrain development around Pere Marquette Lake. Likewise, geology does not constrain develop- ment around Pere Marquette Lake. 5. Cross-Lake Ferry - Implications of Discontinuance The C&O Railway has filed for abandonment of the Ludington to Kewaunee route. The Ludington to Manitowoc route has already been abandoned. Cross-lake ferry service has been cut back from its peak of six round trips per day to the present one trip per day. The decline in ferry service was followed by a decline in cross-lake carloads carried. This decline continued through 1978 but was reversed for the year 1979. Kearny Management Associates, in their final report of June 1980, noted several reasons for the decline in car ferry traffic: o Rate structures, especially flag-outs on certain commodities o Car supply problems o Marketing efforts Nevertheless, all but one of the scenarios prepared by Kearny forecast a 1985 increase in cross-lake traffic. Since the car ferry accounts for an estimated 90%+ of the Ludington port traf- fic, its discontinuance would drop Ludington's importance as a Michigan port. Ludington yould have a special purpose port status, serving several specific users. Discontinuance of the ferry would have a variety of negative effects on the Ludington area. Among these are: a) the loss of a major employer; b) the IV-8 potential loss of rail service to Ludington; c) the potential loss of federal harbor improvements or priority status (thus delaying improvements); d) the loss of ferry passengers as area tourists; e) the potential loss of year-round navigation. These are serious adverse effects, especially when weighed against the cross-lake traffic potential for rail service and motor trucks. The full scope of direct and indirect effects of discontinued ferry service is beyond the scope of this analysis. However, it is evident that discontinuance of ferry service would have a major adverse effect on the local economy. B. NATIONAL ECONOMIC TRENDS 1. Pulp,_Paper, and Converted Paper Products This sector of the economy is strongly tied to the lumber industry through,the construction industry. If interest rates slow down the construction industry, this section will also be hurt. This industry is historicaily a solid performer. It is capital -intensive and generally modern. The United States paper industry is cost-competitive world- wide; however, the U.S. imports newsprint and pulp from Canada. The paper industry is a major water user. Pollution abatement and waste treat- ment regulations are considered an industry problem. Long-range growth is predicted to increase at 2.9% per year. Imports are expected to decline by about 4% due to increased plant capacity. Exports to Canada, Japan, and many western European countries will decline due to reces- sionary trends in these countries. Little growth in plant capacity is anti- cipated before 1985; therefore, operations are anticipated to continue at close to 100% of capacity. 2. Energy In general, energy usage is related to general economic activity. Utilities have been tending to convert from oil to gas to coal. IV-9 There seems to be some future in the production of gasohol based on coal-fired fermentation process. Biomass inputs for this process include: grains and starches, food processing by-products, wood chips, solid waste, and other sources of cellulose. 3. Cemenj Canada is the major supplier of cement to the United States. Continued growth is expected, but this depends upon the construction industry. Local shortages may exist through 1985 in certain geographical areas. 4. Lumber Exports to Japan and Europe are expected to continue at a high level. Canada the United States' second largest market for export, is anticipated to increase by 10% through 1985. 5. Agricultural Chemicals In general, agricultural chemicals fall into two' groups fertilizers and pesticides. Fertilizers are based upon a mixture of nitrogen, phosphates, and potash. Nitrogen, in particular, must be renewed yearly. Research is pres- ently underway to find a cost-effective vehicle to hold nitrogen in the soil. Likewise, new technology is being developed to extract potash from low-grade ore. Nitrogen is forecast to rise in production'by 3% per year and in consumption by 4% per year through 1985. World consumption is forecast to increase by 6% per year through 1985. Plant capacity probably will not expand due to the present cost of natural gas and the pricing structure of ammonia. In 1980, the U.S. imported ammonia (as nitrogen) in excess of 700,000 tons. Major exporters of ammonia are Mexico, Canada, and Trinidad-Tobago. Phosphates production con- siderably exceeded domestic consumption in 1980 due to strong export demand. This situation is forecast to continue through 1985. IV-10 The United'States imports over 70% of its potash from Canada. Canadian produc- tion capacity increases, now in progress, will ease the current tight supply. United States consumption is forecast to increase 2% per year through 1985. World consumption is forecast to increase 5% per year through 1985. No single or small number of companies account for a major share of pesticide production. Likewise, production is not limited to one or more definable geographic areas. The industry is mature and little growth is expected; however, due to high domestic consumption and expanding exports, production should remain high through 1985. Individual pesticide consumption has generally been decreasing due to environ- mental regulations and integrated pest management programs. 6. Mining Long-term domestic production is uncertain, and imports are increasing due to the lack of United States production facilities. Nevertheless, the short-term picture is good. The U.S. is a net exporter of non-metallic minerals and has just recently become a net exporter of metal ores and concentrates. In recent past years, about 25% of available capital has been put into making existing f@cilities comply with environmental regulations. There is now a need for production modernization which is being frustrated by the lack of capital. Several "cash rich" oil companies have taken advantage of this situation and become involved in mining operations. They have the cash to make the necessary capital improvements. Much of the once readily available federal lands are now closed to mining. Currently 42% of the federal lands are closed to mining, 16% are severely restricted, and 10% are moderately restricted. Thus, mining operations on private lands are expected to increase. IV-11 7. Primary Metals Demand for raw materials (mineral and non-metallics) is expected to increase about 2.7% per year through 1985. The primary steel industry is directly related to the general economy, especially durable goods such as the auto industry and the construction industry. Slow growth of about 1% per year is anticipateJ through 1985. Copper is a volatile and unpredictable primary metal economic component. It is, in part, related to the general economy and federal regulatory actions. It is also related to market speculation and precious metal fluctuations. Consumption is expected to increase about 3% per year through 1985. Changes in the auto industry (especially electric cars) and solar energy systems could increase this growth rate significantly. 0 AMAX Exploration Inc. has recently identified a major new deposit of copper- nickel, This deposit, known as the Duluth Gabbro Copper-Nickel Deposit, is thought to contain 9.9 million tons of recoverable nickel. At present, Canada is the world's largest single nickel producer. Canada provided 44% of the U.S. imports in 1980. Nickel consumption is-projected to rise at about 2.9% per year through 1985. The development of an effective battery (e.g. zinc nickel) for the electric auto could substantially increase nickel consumption. 8. Shipbuilding and Repair In general, there is a surplus of world shipbuilding capacity. Shipbuilding orders are badly needed by shipyards to avoid layoffs and dispersal of skilled work force. The Reagan Administration's military expenditures will provide some relief. Additions to the dry bulk fleet are a prime source of future commercial ship orders. The U.S. Flag Fleet has only 15 dry-bulk vessels. The Maritime Admin- istration estimates that a 10% market share could be achieved by the year .2000 if existing operating restrictions are dropped. A 10% market share could sustain a 172-ship fleet of various size dry-bulk vessels. IV-12 The market'for off-shore drilling rigs is booming along the Caribbean, Pacific and Atlantic coasts. If oil and gas exploration is permitted in the Great Lakes, a significant market could open up. The forecast for shipbuilding of inland vessels is strong. A 24% growth rate through 1990 is projected for inland vessels and barges. 9. Freight Movement The future of railroad freight traffic, especially unit trains, is solid. Class I railroad freight traffic is projected to increase 2.5% through 1985. Truck traffic is expected to increase about. 3% per year through 1985. Renewed econ,$Inic growth and increased coal production are expected to increase inland waterway traffic about 3% per year through 1985. Economic growth and rising petroleum consumption are expected to result in increased pipeline movement of crude oil and products through 1985. A growth rate of 3% per year is expected. The cost-effectiveness of coal slurry pipe- lines is now approaching competitiveness with unit trains and bulk movements. C. SHIPPERS SURVEY 1. Ludington Commodity Flow Survey Although the Ludington Commodity Flow Survey was distributed to a variety of existing and potential port users (272), a very poor rate of return (11%) has been achieved. , Even though the rate of return is too low for use in making projections, the survey results provide some interesting and useful pieces of information: o The main reason for using Ludington is the total transportation cost; however, there are a wide variety of secondary reasons. o Imports listed were road salt, wood pulp, newsprint, limestone, and compo- nents. TV-13 o Exports listed were iron ore pellets, dead burned magnesite, sand, buck- wheat, peas, birdseed, appliances, and frozen fruit. o Import origins in the U.S. Midwest and Canada/Mexico were given. o Export destinations in the U.S. East, Europe/USSR, and South America were given. Tabu] ations of the surveys returned are included in Appendix A. 2. Additional Commodity Flow Information Sources In addition to the original survey prepared for the Port of Ludington, other sources of commodity flow information exist. The U.S. Coast Guard has been conducting a survey of the origin and destination of ships calling at Ludington. Unfortunately, the Coast Guard information is too gen%ral, particu- larly with respect to commodities carried, for port planning. The U.S. Maritime Administration, Office of Domestic Assistance, can use U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data for an origin/destination computer run. This would be the best information source, since it reflects actual harbor usage over a number of years. If the computer run is not available, then Corps of Engineer s Commodity Flow maps and harbor information can be judgmentally assessed. D. OPPORTUNITIES AND LIMITATIONS A variety of opportunities and limitations appear to exist for the Port of Ludington. It is difficult to quantify their magnitude at this time. Opportu- nities and limitations for the Port of Ludington are discussed on the basis of their local, regional, and inter-regional service areas. 1. Local Local port development opportunities are centered around the waterborne trans- portation needs of major facilities, including power plants, major manufactur- ing facilities, or fabricators of large/heavy components. Each of these uses IV-14 would require industrial development encouragements to locate in Ludington. These facilities also have large land requirements. Sufficient land would have to be made available through condemnation or conventional assemblage programs. A second alternative is to attract an industry which only needs a small water- front terminal for a manufacturing/processing facility-which is located off the waterfront. In order to avoid unnecessary drayage fees, this opportunity is limited to industries moving liquid products through pipelines. A third alternative is to attract a sufficient nu(nber of medium sized indus- tries, with occasional waterborne transportation needs. These industries could contract for, or lease, facilities at a general purpose public terminal. 2. Regional The best opportunities for port facilities which service regional needs is in the delivery of dry bulk construction aggregates and liquid bulk petroleum products (gasoline, heating oil, diesel fuel), and liquid bulk agricultural chemicals Ifertilizers and pesticides). As with any'bulk operation, the envi- ronmental impacts of operation would have to be carefully controlled. A limited potential for imports and exports of other construction materials (especially lumber) and durable goods exist. This potential should be con- sidered as supplemental to other similar port uses. 3. Inter-Regional As the Kearny study indicates, there is a good potential for consolidated cross-lake railroad car ferry traffic. It would also seem that there is a good potential for cross-lake motor truck or container traffic. With a competitive rate structure, it could be-possible to offer Ludington as an alternate route for Western coal or pulp and basic paper products. Like- wise, it may be possible to offer an Escanaba-Ludington route for winter ship- ping pf iron ore from the Upper Peninsula area. IV-15 Chapter V Feasibility Determination CHAPTER V FEASIBILITY DETERMINATION INTRODUCTION The information and analyses which are necessary to determine the feasibility of port expansion are evaluated in this chapter. Commodity flow data and conclusions presented previously in combination with these additional analyses provide the basis for determining the level of port expansion which may realis- tically be accommodated in Ludington. SCOPE The scope of this analysis encompasses an investigation of potential develop- ment related to commodity flows on the local, regional and inter-regional levels. This is accomplished by taking a close look at several selected devel- opment scenarios. The selections made were based on the economic analysis and input from the Harbor Commission and are not intended to be exclusive of other real or potential development opportunities. These scenarios were chosen as representative of typical industries with a good future outlook, or those showing future technological developments. KEY ISSUES The key issues of this investigation can be associated with the local, regional and inter-regional levels of commodity flow patterns. On the local level , various types of industrial/manufacturing facilities which could be constructed and operated in Ludington were compared with similar developments in other cities. A regional terminal operation involving shipping and warehousing was investigated in terms of both feasibility to develop and feasibility to oper- ate. On the inter-regional level, the cost of shipping railroad, motor truck, and containerized freight through Ludington is compared to the cost of shipping on competitive alternate routes. V-1 A. PERSPECTIVE ON FEASIBILITY 1. Industrial Location Theory Industrial location theory has been employed for the purposes of this study to provide an organized framework for the investigation of potential development in the Ludington area. A primary feature of this theory is the pattern of product distribution to the market area. Secondly, the relationship to region- al elements, such as the transportation of raw materials and provision of a power source, is important. Thirdly, inter-regional elements affect the locational outlook in a more comprehensive sense. Natural elements of a particular region, such as the location and availability of raw materials and energy, land surface characteristics, and climate have a definite bearing on its attractiveness to potential industry. Cultural fea- tures are somewhat flexible, will influence, and are themselves affected by the location of a new industrial facility. Among the cultural elements to be considered are the labor supply, markets, transportation facilities, subsidies and government regulations. In order to qualitatively evaluate the many important factors involved in this study of industrial location, they are expressed in terms of costs. The study of these costs is most important, since manufacturing ceases to operate or fails to establish in a region when costs become too high. These cost differ- entials are examined in one of two ways, depending on which is most appro- priate: 1. Comparison of development and production costs between competitive loca- tions; or 2. Evaluation of the feasibility to develop and operate a facility in terms of profitability. Information on the detailed approach taken to evaluate the various development scenarios is contained in the methodology discussion. V-2 2. Traffic Management - Shipping Operations a. Functions of Traffic Management Traffic management encompasses all phases in the control of goods in transit. It involves the arrangement for carriers to move goods, arrange- ment for temporary storage or warehousing if necessary, the preparation of goods for shipment, and the receipt of incoming shipments. Traffic man- agement also involves establishing the rates and charges for the above services. Traffic management serves an important role in plant location decisions, whether they be regarding new plant facilities, warehousing facilities, or development of a new product line at existing facilities. Transportation management and costs are inseperable from industrial location theory. The analyses of transportation routes and facilities themselves, under varying commodity flow patterns, are a vital step in the industrial location analysis. b. Major Shipping Operati.ons The,water borne shipping business is highly competitive and its operations are complex . The principles of industrial sales management apply to the promotional work of the shipper's services. Booking space on a car rier involves ascertaining when that space will be available within the desired time limits, and obtaining the necessary freight contract and shipping permits. Other paperwork must be coordinated, which is generally referred to as shipper's papers. It includes the bills of lading, freight bills, dock receipts, and delivery receipts. The operation and management of terminal facilities is another facet of the shipping business, although the terminal may be' operated by other public or private concerns. Stevedoring is an essential auxiliary opera- tion which has to do with the actual handling of cargo between the termi- nal and the hold of the ship. The physical operation of the carrier itself involves purchasing fuel and ship stores, arranging for maintenance and repairs, scheduling, purchasing insurance, and staffing the ship, among many other things. V-3 B. METHODOLOGY 1. Criteria for Defining Case Parameters In order to approach the question of economic feasibility from a least cost or profitability viewpoint, the criteria for defining variables was chosen to simplify the complex study of industrial location and transportation costs. These criteria are also helpful in understanding the relationships between transportation cost and locational factors, marketing area breadth, and region- al or community development trends. a. Local Plant Development Plant development costs are expressed in terms of a cost per unit of finished product. This cost is the sum of production costs, transporta- tion costs for raw materials from their sources, and transportation costs for finished goods to their various markets. Raw materials were assumed available from the closest sources. Market areas were established based on characteristics of each particular industry. Production costs are often based on economies of scale; thus, the size of a particular facility plays an important role. An effort was made to obtain production costs based on modern, typically sized facilities that are appropriate for the particular market they serve. b. Regional Shipping Terminal Development The cost of developing and operating a regional shipping terminal is the sum -of shipping costs to and from the terminal and operating costs, including storage or warehousing costs. For the various commodities investigated, warehousing, handling and shipping costs were developed appropriate to the commodity. Where a trade-off between holding costs and transportation costs exists, an attempt was made to reach an optimum balance which reduces total distribution costs. For example, when sub- stantial costs are involved in holding inventories, it is possible to substitute a higher-priced, but faster means, of transportation. V-4 C. Inter-Regional Shipping Operations In the development of inter-regional shipping costs, the total shipping, transfer, and terminal charges were compared for a commodity traveling on various routes. Railroad routes were identified between urban centers which follow natural traffic patterns and minimize switching and transfer operations. Motor truck routes were based on the shortest and most direct route. 2. Data Sources A complete listing of references and sources of data for the feasibility deter- mination are contained in Appendix B. Published references on transportation and location theory were largely utilized to establish the equations, define the variables involved, and make the necessary simplifying assumptions. Trans- portation and material cost quotes were obtained from various sources, as necessary, to supplement and update published cost data. 3. Judgments Many simplifying assumptions were made in order to provide an understandable and workable system for analyzing the cost data. Explanation of the principal assumptions made for each case studied are explained in the section containing the results. 4. Equations a. Local Plant Development The equation used in the cost comparison for local plant development is as follows: Is (total cost) for Ludington less than (total cost) for other locations? Where total cost is defined as: V-5 Total cost = T raw + T fin + MFG T raw = Total cost of transporting raw materials to the plant site by appropriate means T fin = Total cost of transporting products to the market area by appropriate means MFG = Total cost of manufacturing, including facility construc- tion costs, labor costs, energy costs, taxes, etc. b. Regional Terminal The equation used for determining the feasibility to operate a regional shipping terminal is: Are (total terminal and shipping costs) for Ludington less than (total terminal and shipping costs) for other locations? Where total terminal and shipping costs include: (total terminal and shipping costs) = Sd + T fee + S dest Where: Sd = Total shipping costs to deliver commodity to the terminal T fee = Total terminal fees, including transfers and surcharges S dest = Total shipping costs to deliver commodity to its destination The equation used to assess the feasibility to develop a regional shipping terminal is: (cost to develop the terminal) + (terminal operating expenses) is compared to (volume) x (revenue rate) Where the cost to develop and operate the terminal is compared to the revenues collected. Where: Cost to develop Construction cost (including engineering) Financing + Land cost + Equipment cost Operating Expense Fixed costs (utilities, taxes, administrative overhead, etc.) + Variable costs (labor, energy, etc.) + Non-productive'burden Volume = The anticipated amount of tonnage that will be handled Rate = The charges for using various services of the terminal (i.e., docking fees, storage fees, transfer fees, etc.) V-6 C. Inter-Regional Shipping The equation used to evaluate inter-regional shipping operations compares shipping costs through Ludington to shipping costs through other routes, as follows: Are (total shipping costs) through Ludington less than (total shipping costs) via other routes? Where total shipping costs include: Overland transportation costs to Ludington (or other) Cost to transfer onto vessel Vessel transportation charges cross-lake Cost to transfer off vessel Overland transportation costs to destination Commodity penalties (if any) Empty carrier return charges 5. Cases Investigated The following industrial/manufacturing facilities were investigated regarding feasibility of development in the Ludington area:' Cement manufacturing Pulp/paper production Agricultural chemical processing A limited investigation was made in three additional areas: Steel fabrication Ship building and repair Power generation with wood fuels The other locations which were used for comparison vary by industry and are given in the section on results. V-7 The feasibility to develop and operate a regional shipping terminal was evalu- ated for the following commodity groups: General cargo Dry bulk material (such as sand, gravel, cement, etc.) Liquid bulk material (petroleum products, chemicals, fertilizers, etc.) Operational costs were compared for the following routes: Cross-lake through Muskegon Overla-nd through Chicago Cross-lake through Chicago Through Mackinaw Straits Inter-regional traffic was also evaluated for the commodity groups and routes listed above. The analyses were performed for rail freight, motor truck freight, containerized/piggy back cargo, and for passenger travel. C. RESULTS 1. Local Plant Development a. Cement Manufacturing The cement manufacturing industry is characterized by a fairly widespread distribution of raw materials, comparatively low finished product costs, and great bulk materials with consequently high transportation costs involved. Since considerable fuel is used in production and bulky raw materials are involved, cement can be produced profitably only on a large scale. Cement manufacturing involves mixing and crushing the raw materials, limestone, clay and gypsum, and firing them in kilns to a temperature of about 15000C. The material from the kilns, called clinker, is crushed into a fine powder to which a variety of additives may be combined to produce the cement. V-8 The ideal location for a cement plant is nearby the raw materials and fuel sources, and fairly centralized with respect to markets. The availability of labor is rarely important in the location of new cement plants, since the industry is highly mechanized. However, labor is an important factor in the cost of production and will influence the choice of location in this manner. Major U.S. market areas where water borne transportation of cement have developed are along the East Coast, the lower Great Lakes, and the Mississippi River. Where there is a large concentrated market which can be reached by water routes, substantial economies of scale can be achieved in shipping costs. This shipping method requires the use of huge barges, docks, and automatic loading and unloading facilities in order to be economical. The results of the feasibility analysis for the development of a cement manufacturing plant are presented in Table 13. Since the proximity to market areas and transportation costs play a vital role in the location, the equation for cost comparison was modified to compare the breadth of market area which could feasibly be reached. This modified equation is as follows: Market cement price = Total production costs + profit Where the total production costs are: Total costs = T raw + T fin + MFG, as defined previously. The average market price of bulk cement, from Engineering News Record's monthly market quotations for January 1982, is $57.23/ton or $2.86/cwt. For the purposes of comparison, a uniform profit of 10% has been assumed. This assumption allows estimation of the feasible market radius by various modes of transportation, presented in.Table 13. As seen in Table 13, Ludington does compare favorably to other locations for the production of cement. In addition to the markets reached directly by rail and truck, market areas across the lake and in Chicago could feas- ibly be reached by barge. V-9 TABLE 13 COMPARISON OF MARKET AREAS FOR CEMENT MANUFACTURING IN SELECTED CITIES Available Trans- Raw Material portation for Transportation Finished Cement Manufacturing Costs, (Traw) (Tfin) after Approximate Costs (MFG) (Trucked) 10% Profit Market Radius (Miles) city - $/CWT - Motor Truck Rail Chicago 1.07 0.78 0.73 100 150 Grand Rapids 1.07 0.78 0.73 100 150 CD Lansing 0.99 0.58 1.01 250 350 Ludington 1.02 0.54 1.01 250 350 Traverse City 1.00 0.74 0.84 150 200 "M 1W =I M" No an an -am b. Pulp/Paper Production Pulp mills process wood and other fiberous materials into pulp through either mechanical or chemical processes, or a combination of both. The principal woods used are spruce, hemlock, southern pine, poplar and fir. Cereal straw such as oats, rye and barley are often pulped for making corrugated box board. Paper mills refine the pulp and add bleaches, dyes, or other additives, depending on the paper stock desired. The pulp is formed into paper through a process of screening, drying, rolling and pressing. Pulp mills are commonly located near or at the source of wood. Many mills own or lease timberland and produce up to 75% of their raw material requirements. When not integrated with the paper mill, the pulp is rolled into bundles and shipped to the paper mill. As with the cement industry, pulp and paper mills are highly mechanized and thus not dependent on a large labor force. The major factor in loca- tion of pulp and paper mills is proximity to the growing area as the raw materials are bulky and low-valued and will not bear high transportation costs. The results of the feasibility analysis for a pulp mill alone are pre- sented. For the purposes of comparison, it wa's assumed that pulpwood was not available locally and would be purchased and transported from Escanaba, Michigan. Markets for the pulp (paper mills) were assumed to be located in five major cities in proportion to their population: Chicago, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Milwaukee, and Madison. Table 14 presents the results of this analysis. As seen in Table 14, Ludington compares favorably with the other areas. If a pulpwood source could be located nearby to supply a portion of the wood requirement, this would greatly reduce the total manufacturing costs as it would reduce the cost of raw material transportation. If the timberland were owned or leased by the pulp mill, the total manufacturing cost would be further reduced. V-11 TABLE 14 APPROXIMATE COSTS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PRODUCTION OF BLEACHED KRAFT PULP Plant Location T Raw T Fin Mfg Total Chicago 1.54 0.43 20.65 22.62 Grand Rapids 3.24 0.87 20.75 24.86 Ludington 1.22 0.97 19.45 21.64 Milwaukee 1.38 0.65 21.50 23.53 Traverse City 1.20 1.12 19.00 21.32 C. Fertilizer Production The three main components of commercial fertilizer are nitrogen-phos- phorus-potassium (N-P-K). Fertilizer production at Ludington would depend upon the importation of these materials, plus nitric acid, at production levels. Since Canada is a major producer of two of these components - nitrogen (as ammonia) and potash, the Great Lakes Basin has good potential for fertilizer production. It must be noted, however, that this area is in competition with the Gulf Coast (especially Louisiana, Texas and Florida), which have established production facilities. In addition, the Gulf Coast has year-round ocean shipping service for large size vessels. Of course, the cost of transporting the final product from these areas to northern markets would be greater. Likewise, a fertilizer production facility at Ludington could be in competition with existing/potential Canadian facilities. Production costs for six selected cities are compared in Table 15. TABLE 15 APPROXIMATE MANUFACTURING COST OF FERTILIZER (13-11-12, Grade) Mfg $/cwt* Chicago 5.40 Detroit 5.57 Grand Rapids 5.42 Ludington 5.18 Milwaukee 5.22 Traverse City 5.09 ------------ Includes the cost of raw material transportation V-12 Since natural gas is the third largest production cost (after raw materi- als and labor), Ludington's competitiveness could be enhanced if a depen- dable private source of natural gas were available. Si.nce there are no local fertilizer production facilities, a Ludington facility must provide fertilizer at a lower wholesale price than other competing wholesalers. A Ludington facility also must have sufficient market demand to absorb its 100,000 tons of annual production. Total cost delivered to Big Rapids from selected cities is shown in Table 16. TABLE 16 APPROXIMATE COSTS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PRODUCTION OF FERTILIZER (13-11-12, Grade) Wton) Plant Location Mfg T fin Total Chicago 107.92 20.70 -128.62 Detroit 111.30 21.45 132.75 Grand Rapids 108.35 7.15 115.50 Ludington 103.70 7.80 111.50 Milwaukee 104.33 22.50 126.83 Traverse City 101.80 10.40 112.20 As seen in Table 16, Ludington compares favorably with other area s. d. Steel Fabrication Steel fabricating involves the operations of cutting and shaping the steel, and fastening components together. Depending on the item being produced, operations could involve stamping, rol ling, cutting, riveting, welding, machining of parts (tool and die), and finishing operations such as painting, plating or corrosion treatment. This type of industry is fairly flexible, producing many specialty items and constantly changing to meet varying product markets. It is capital intensive, as most processes are mechanized and many are computerized. It is also labor dependent, as skilled craftsman, machinists, and equipment operators and repairmen are vital to the industry. V-13 Since the Ludington area would not support a large scale, general fabri- cator, only a specialty fabricator has been considered. Preliminary investigations revealed that the only significant advantage to a Ludington location is the harbor access for hea vy lift ships which handle extra large size components. Even this advantage is limited by the lack of suitable terminal facilities and the limited navigation season of the St. Lawrence Seaway. e. Ship Building and Repair Ship building and repair can be considered as having three sub-groups: ocean-going vessels, inland vessels, and private pleasure craft. Each sub-group has been considered. There is, at present, a world surplus of ship building and repair capacity. Likewise, there is a surplus of Great Lakes ship building and repair capacity for "laker" class vessels. Despite the aged nature of the Great Lakes fleet, these vessels and ones built at existing shipyards will meet Great Lakes demand for the foreseeable future. The forecast for inland vessels is strong (refer to Chapter IV, Section B, 8); however, these vessels are primarily river tugs and barges. Although such vessels could be built at Ludington, preliminary investigations did not indicate favorable conditions. Ludington does not have direct access to, nor favorable transportation rates for, steel supplies. Steel from Gary, Indiana must be transported up-lake,- against it's ultimate market direction. Steel from Europe or Japan is available only during a limited navigation season. In addition, Ludington does not have a ready labor pool of skilled labor for this specialization. In short, Ludington would be in competition with many other communities on the Mississippi-Ohio-Missouri River system. Boat building and repair for pleasure craft has its own set of economic variables. The pleasure boat building market is very volatile and highly competitive. It is characterized by a few industry "giants" and many V-14 smaller companies. Survival of these smaller companies depends on fic kle consumer acceptance, a sound product, and a competitive price. Boats less than about 15 feet LOA (length over all)can be built almost anywhere and trailered to the retailer. Boats above 25 feet LOA (especially above 35 feet LOA) are usually built on-order at a waterside plant. The industry giants seems to locate production facilities near major boating centers. As a result, delivery costs to the owner are reduced and sales represen- tatives have models to work with. Major yacht building areas are: California, South Florida, Connecticut, and Maryland. Within the Great Lakes, the population centers of Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland would seem to be logical production centers. It is known that there is are medium and small yacht building companies throughout the Great Lakes; however, it is difficult to justify this location in terms of economic advantage. What seems to be their major attraction is a quality of life that a community offers. Boat and yacht repair do seem to have some potential; however, the demand is difficult to quantify at this level of analysis. The demand for facilities, beyond those offered by a competent marina, is related to the number of permanent and transient boats at Ludington. Likewise, the availability of major repair services and out-haul facili- ties will influence work people to call Ludington home port. Several local people, familiar with Ludington's facilities, have indicated a need for a large boat out-haul facility. Given the occupancy rate at the new city marina, if the city doesn't need a large boat out-haul now, then it will probably need one soon. f. Power Generation with Wood Fuels On November 29, 1977, Governor William G. Milliken's Conference on Wood Energy was held in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The purpose of this conference was to examine the benefits and problems associated with the use of wood for energy. A variety of topics were presented at the conference, includ- ing the following: V-15 I. Methods of harvesting wood 2. Forestry management 3. Combustion and power generation technology 4. Requirements of the annual growing stock 5. Cost analysis of power generation with wood vs. other energy sources 6. Efficiency of wood fuels 7. Two case studies where wood has successfully been used for steam heating The main conclusion of this conference was that wood might feasibly be used as a supplemental and renewable source of energy, particularly if the cost of conventional fuels continued to rise at the rates that had been observed prior to 1977. Following this conference, a feasibility study was conducted for Consumers Power Company by a consulting engineering firm. The study investigated the potential for a 50-megawatt wood-burning power plant which would be located in Osceola County near Hersey, Michigan. Following the study, a public hearing was held to present the results and obtain public input. Based on the amount of public opinion against the power plant and related environmental concerns which were expressed, the project was terminated. No further investigation into a wood-burning power plant at this or other locations has been undertaken. 2. Regional Distribution a. General Cargo Terminal A review of the commodity flow information and survey results did not reveal any significant general commodity movements. This lack of volume makes a general cargo terminal infeasible at any development cost or rate structure. The lack of a general cargo terminal does not have to leave Ludington without such service. An inland warehouse could be used to make up rail car loads or container loads for transhipment. A freight forwarder, or other agent, knowledgeable in the preparation of marine documents, would also be necessary. V-16 b. Dry Bulk Terminal Phase I Operations (limited to inert construction aggregates only): Direct contacts revealed a current dry bulk importation of about 12,000 tons of limestone annually. A limited terminal, utilizing C&O Dock No. 1-112, could easily meet this demand. It would also provide the basis for additional terminal growth and open two existing terminal sites on the channel for redevelopment. Information detailing a limited bulk terminal development cost, operating cost, and site layout is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities, Dry Bulk Terminal, Phase I. Phase II Operations: Preliminary investigations indicate that the dry bulk terminal operations might feasibly be expanded in Ludington in the future to receive greater incoming shipments. The materials which have the most potential are: Crushed stone (primarily limestone) Rock salt (for ice control on roads) Seal coat chips Use of an existing terminal to receive shipments of agricultural lime has also been reported. Any materials other than inert aggregates which are considered for shipment through this terminal in the future must be carefully considered with respect to their potential environmental impacts. The demand for crushed limestone and aggregates varies naturally along with the volume of heavy construction. The use of road salt is somewhat more constant, although quantities are cut back during slow economic periods. A market for the following quantities of materials could be developed for the terminal: V-17 Annual Demand Crushed limestone 100,000 tons Rock salt 5,000 tons Seal coat chips 5,000 tons The cost to develop and equip a terminal to receive these materials is approximately $578,000. The terminal would receive shipments which could be loaded directly into rail cars or stockpiled by self-unloading barges. Annual operating costs for this facility are estimated at approximately $237,000, of which $82,000 is- retirement of capital debt. Information detailing the development costs and layout for such a terminal is given in Chapter VIII; Development Opportunities, Dry Bulk Material Terminal, Phase Ii. The market price for crushed limestone in the Ludington area varies, depending on the quantity and gradation desired. A typical cost for truckload quantities of limestone is approximately $18 per ton. To pay the terminal I s annual operating costs and make a 15 percent prof it, the terminal charges would be approximately $2.50/ton, or 14% of the market cost of limestone (assuming 110,000 tons annually). C. Bulk Petroleum Terminal A bulk petroleum terminal would be the most capital intensive and costly of the various types of bulk terminals investigated. It would most likely be developed in Ludington by an oil company or by a major distributor which has a large enough share of the market to recover its capital investment. The map on the following page shows the location of existing marine and pipeline terminals in Michigan. From the map, it can be @een that there are cu rrently no terminals in the immediate area of Ludington. The approximate annual consumption of petroleum products in the Ludington hinterlands is as follows: V-18 NAG" 14AAGA MANNIFITS LUCE ALGER um SCHOOLCRAFT MACKINAC CHIPF"IWA MIA J CHEBOYGAN PRESWE ISLE CNAMLEVOIX oq ANT IM OTSEGO ALPENA LEELANAIJ OR CRAWFORD OSCODA ALCONA UNIN Ta MAXISTIll WFJIPORD IMSSAIJKH ROSCOMMON OGIMAW losco ARIMAC MANN I.Allf Oscim CLARK OLAD" SAY muwm OCIANA MICOSTA ISABELLA MIDLAND NEWAYGO I TUSCOLA "HILAC 0 MONTCALM SAGINAW GRATIOT tam OTTAWA KINT IONIA CLINTON DWASUMS GENES" LAPUR Loa CA 0 MAC 0 ALIJIGAN Ulu lA" IMONAM LMHUM GARLAND 00 VAN PJUN 0, 00 00 JACKSON KALAMAZOO .. 00 0 CAN V JOSEPH 0 NANO 00 R NOT' REFINERIES PORT DEVVEL'OPMT STUDY 0 MARINE TERMINALS FIGURE 30 0 PIPELINE TERMINALS MICHIGAN BULK PETROLEUM TERMINALS SOURCE: MPA1980-131 MARKET ING,C)IRECTORY ANDYEARBOOK WILLIAMSaWORKS OCTOBER, 1982 670291 Gasoline (all grades) and diesel fuel 1,400,,000 barrels Fuel Oil (#1 and #2) 400,000 barrels The cost to develop and equip a terminal which could receive and distrib- ute 25% of this annual amount with a two-month storage period is approxi- mately $4.4 million. This terminal would provide a total storage capacity of 96,000 barrels in nine tanks, which could be rotated by product, as demand dictates. This capacity is typical of existing marine terminals in northern Michigan. Annual operating costs for this facility are approximately $782,000, of which the major portion is the retirement of capital facilities debt. If the annual operating costs and a 10% profit are levied uniformly on the annual volume of bulk products, the terminal fee would be approximately $1.93/barrel, or $0.046 per gallon. Information detailing the development costs, operating costs, and site layout for such a terminal is given in Chapter VIII, Development Opportu- nities, Bulk Petroleum Terminal. 3. Inter-Regional a. Railroad Traffic Several comprehensive studies -of cross-lake railroad car traffic have been made. A. T. Kearny & Associates published a study in 1980 that indicted a possible range of 16,145 to 62,433 carloads annually for Ludington and Frankfort combined. These estimates are based upon six scenarios which test several variables such as rate structure, level of service, and natural growth. The most recent study: ITB Utilization Plan for Lake Michigan ' (by John J. McMullen Associates, et al) was prepared for the Michigan Department of Transportation. It was published in draft form in May 1982. The McMullen study estimates 35,000 carloads annually in 1985, based upon a four round trips per day schedule. The demand is estimated at 27,000 carloads V-19 - annually in 1985, if only two round trips per day are provided. These estimates do not include empties which would increase total volume by about 50 percent. These estimates are for "upper lake" service; that is, all rail car traffic for Ludington and Frankfort combined. 9 The McMullen estimates are intended to be conservative and to reflect status-quo conditions. A major factor is the future policy of the C&O Railroad with respect to traffic routing through Chicago, Illinois. A C&O policy to route all traffic through Chicago could lower these estimates by as much as 50 percent. The McMullen study suggests that 99% of the estimated railroad traffic and all of the passenger/auto traffic can be accommodated by using the inter- grated tug barge (ITB) and either the Spartan or the Badger. This combination of vessels results in the lowest cost ($329/carload) but does not accommodate any of the projected truck/trailer traffic. The McMullen study is based upon a direct survey of railroad cross lake users and analysis of historical trends. b. Truck, Trailer, Container Traffic As used in this section, trucks -refers to tractor trailer trucks with drivers. Trailers refer to semi-trailers, which are transported cross- lake unattended. This distinction is important with respect to vessel capacity and turn-around time. It is especially important to vessel assignment, since the ITB will not be certified for passengers. In addi- tion, containers are considered as semi-trailers. The lack of container handling equipment requires that they be transported on their over-the- road wheels. The McMullen study estimates between 2,000 and 2,900 semi-trailer move- ments per year in 1985 for the upper lake crossing. A conservative esti- mate would be 2,000 semi-trailer movements per year. As with' the railroad car estimates, these are based upon direct surveys and trend analysis. This estimate is intended to reflect the status-quo. V-20 C. Passengers The McMullen study estimates that upper lake service to Kewaunee, Wisconsin would generate 28,000 passengers and 10,000 autos. They believe that a route to Manitowoc would generate more volume; however, how much more is not estimated. It is also believed that separating auto-passenger service from rail service would increase auto-passenger volume. Auto-passenger service is sensitive to rates, marketing, level of service, and route. We speculate that the volume for a Ludington-based auto- passenger ferry would be higher than for a Frankfort-based ferry, based on route considerations. The McMullen estimates are based on: o Data for past cross-lake pa ssenger traffic o Data of the summer 1981 demonstration project o Past survey results It was estimated that 10 percent of all inter-state Michigan: Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota pleasure auto trips would use a cross-lake ferry. Potential business person trips were estimated at 5 percent. Most of these trips were assigned to a lower-lake route. V-21 Chapter VI Draft Land Use Alternatives CHAPTER VI DRAFT LAND USE ALTERNATIVES FUNCTION AND PURPOSE The fundamental, official document a community uses to set down goals is a long-range land use plan which can be referred to by public officials and pri- vate citizens. The Municipal and Township Planning Act, Public Act 285 of 1931, and Public Act 168 of 1959, as amended, specifically give respective planning commissions the authority to prepare and officially adopt a Plan. -When prepared, officially adopted, and maintained, this Plan should provide an advisory guide for physical development of the community into the best possible living environment for present and future community residents. Because our social and economic structure and activities constantly change the Plan, periodic review and revision must reflect contemporary trends while maintaining long-range goals. To be effective, the Plan must: - Reflect needs and desires of the people; - Interpret realistically the existing conditions, trends, and the dynamic economic and social pressures for expansion; Inspire approval and cooperation among the various public agencies and citizens of the community so that they will build conformity with the objectives it sets forth. The Land Use Plan provides: 1. A comprehensive means of integrating proposals that look 15 to 20 years ahead to meet future needs regarding general and major aspects of develop- ment throughout the community. VI-1 2. An official, advisory policy statement for encouraging orderly and effi- cient use of the land for residences, business, parks, recreation, and industrial areas, and for coordinating these uses of land within each other and with streets and highways and other necessary public facilities and services. 3. A logical basis for zoning, subdivision design, public improvement plans, and for facilitating and guiding other work of the Planning Commission and the legislative body, as well as other public and private endeavors deal- ing with the community's physical development. 4. A means for private organizations and individuals to determine how they may relate their building projects and policies to official community planning policies. 5. A means of relating plans (Ludington and Pere Marquette) to plans of adjacent communities and to development of the region as a whole. The Land Use Plan is intended to be long-range and dynamic; it is based on potentials and projects, population growth, economic development, and ways of living. It attempts to look 15 to 20 years ahead. Present trends such as those indicating lower birth rates, higher energy costs, more leisure time, and higher standards of living have been considered in making plans that anticipate long-range needs. It would be desirable to base plans on even more distant goals, but the unpredictable events that may occur during longer periods make this impractical. Instead, the Plan must be subject to periodic review and revision. Through this process, it will always express 15 to 20 year goals and will reflect contemporary conditions and trends. THE LAND USE PLAN IS GENERAL IN SCOPE: IT IS NOT INTENDED TO ESTAB- LISH PRECISE BOUNDARIES OF LAND USE AREAS OR EXACT LOCATIONS OF FUTURE USES. ITS FUNCTION IS TO GUIDE GROWTH TOWARD LONG-RANGE, BROAD GOALS. IT ESTABLISHES THE FRAMEWORK REQUIRED TO ASSURE THAT MORE DETAILED DECISIONS CAN BE RELATED TO THE BROADER SCENE. VI-2 ALTERNATIVE LAND USE OPPORTUNITIES Five alternative land use opportunities have been developed based upon the information gathered and analyzed in the previous sections of this report. Three alternatives are presented for the City of Ludington and two for Pere Marquette Charter Township. Each alternative expresses different land use development philosophies for planning and each will have a different impact on -the community. A common element in all five 'alternatives is the preservation of the wetland areas adjacent to the Dow disposal lagoons. These natural areas provide impor- tan,t habitat and breeding grounds for Pere Marquette Lake and River. A buffer area is also designated between the wetlands park in conjunction with a town- ship park. These three areas (wetlands park, buffer and township park) will serve to enhance the aesthetic and recreation qualities of the area for enjoy- ment by existing and future resid ents and visitors to the area. VI-3 Alternative A-1 The following figure graphically illustrates the concepts of Alternative A-1.- This alternative encompasses land in the City of Ludington from the City Marina to the City Park adjacent to the Dow property. As can be noted, this alternative recommends that the existing rail corridor be maintained to serve and support ind,ustry in the area. This corridor has been, and should be, encouraged to be the backbone of moving goods in and out of Ludington. Coupled with the function of the rail corridor are the adjacent industrial designations. Approximately 35 acres are indicated, recognizing the existing industry and encouraging future industrial development in this area. Chapter V - Feasibility Determination - found the following industrial uses to be marginally feasible in Ludington: cement manufacturing, pulp/paper production, agricultural and chemical processing. East of this industrial area and west of the bridge, a marina development is proposed. This area could be developed as a marina and/or other water recreation oriented commercial uses. This would take advantage of the existing water frontage and serve as a logical line between the existing commercial/ recrea- tional uses adjacent t6 the area along the waterfront. Immediately south of the marina area, multi-family residential housing is proposed. Housing in this area should be of a low-rise medium density charac- ter strongly oriented toward the water. These units should not exceed three stories in height nor more than 12 units per acre. As a result, this 5.5± acre site could contain 60-70 dwelling'units with a resultant permanent population of approximately 200. Recent development trends for waterfront properties indicate a stronger poten- tial for seasonal occupancy and the construction of a condominium-type project. In any event, the proposed low-rise medium density development will blend with the existing character while allowing a reasonable density for this location. VI-4 W W. co 4 R -@_CFR V-;s -P..O ;@ -,PARK X, T 1. A, ULTlm-*' Mlpe ES. COMIMEPC14---@ PARkx MULT 2#2 N FAMILY M, "In g, PeRz DEVELOPMENT MARQUE-Ow ,4@ A@ 4k PEI PAM Itsm WET 4AN@0$ V@ SEE Ai@TERN tXr., l4n b- -'A WILLIAMS & WORKS Alternative A-2 Alternative A-2 is graphically illustrated on the following figure. This alternative encompasses land in the City of Ludington from the City Marina to the City Park. Starting at the existing City Park, this alternative proposes to enlarge this park to the north. At present, this park serves as a local recreation facil- ity. The proposed expansion would allow the development of more facilities (e.g., beach, play equipment, fishing, etc.) and upgrade the park to a regional- type facility. This regional park will reinforce the recreation/commercial uses existing in the area, plus wil I act as a tourist attraction. The Michigan DNR Waterways Division has stated that the westerly shoreline of the park was too exposed for docking facilities and the northerly shore offers water depths that are generally inappropriate for recreational docking facili- ties. In light of these comments, the future development of this park must be coordinated within these parameters- Moving north and west, this alternative designates three types of industrial uses - general industrial, marine transportation, and general marine terminal. The general industrial areas are intended to encourage the existing industries to continue and expand, plus provide land for additional manufacturing, ware- housing, and storage-type uses. The marine transportation area is intended for uses oriented toward water and land transportation networks. Utilizing the designated highway and railroad corridor, industrial uses would be provided convenience access to needed transportation systems. The marine terminal area is designed to promote Ludington as a shipping and receiving terminal, as detailed in Chapter V-Feasibility Determination. Again, the highway and railroad corridor will facilitate the future development of the marine terminal area by offering two modes of transportation. VI-5 C R JA I ND. E A PAR tk N4 Ji2p CITY' -ZN 3 ARK COMF M ,AERCIAI-w--:@ EqAEATIONAL R CI:I. A . @@ @D OAR Ov MULTI-t FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AR U E_r" OA fil R IL840M 04 W ET ixNo TEAN SEE dj AG E va WILLIAMS WORKS Alternative A-3 As graphically illustrated, Alternative A-3 is similar to Alternative A-1 with respect to the rail corridor, marine, city park, and industry. This concept differs in the area east and south of the city hall. Commercial and multi- family residential uses are proposed. The commercial area includes the land adjacent to city hall. Commercial uses in this location would be retail and recreation oriented, catering to the needs of the marina users and seasonal visitors along with the downtown shopper. This area could also provide convenience goods for the adjacent multi-family residential area. The multi-family residential area is proposed to have a low-rise medium densi,ty character strongly oriented toward the water. These units should@ not exceed three stories in height nor more than 12 units per acre. As a result, this 45± acre site would require extensive redevelopment-, to ade- quately provide a desirable living environment. When fully developed, this site would contain approximately 540 dwelling units, resulting in a population of 1,600 persons. This type of development will allow an aesthetically pleas- ing, well landscaped project, while allowing a density to help support downtown business. VI-6 'T 4NVT@ dr co RE AF V, R R rir ON; @T- CITY7.t Ri -11 com RCIA4- N-TIONAL lop Cp;l@ AR j C;8 MULTIA FAMILY DEVELOPMENT M7A u "low E Ar X . . . . . . . SkN.G 4M PAM R S WET, p A TON" NSEE J4 6-4 N. WILLIAMS ek WORKS Alternative B-1 Alternative B-1 encompasses land in Pere Marquette Charter Township as illus- trated in the following figure. At the present time, access to this area is hampered by a narrow, two-lane road. This alternative proposes an Improved Vehicular Corridor within the existing right-of-way to County Road Commission standards for a major roadway. Immediately north of the corridor, a large (400± acres) multi-family residential area is designated. Approximately a third of this property is tree covered, providing a desirable environment for low-rise, medium density development. This type of project should take full advantage of the natural assets on the site and utilize innovative design concept (e.g., cluster housing, zero lot lines, etc.) to make this area an asset to the community and a desirable place to live. Prior to the development of this site, utilities (sewer and water) will need to be provided at the site. With a potential population of approximately 10,000 to 15,000 people, it will be necessary to have this infrastructure. A neighborhood commercial center has been located in the residential area to provide convenience shopping opportunities for local residents. Uses in this commercial center could consist of barber and beauty shops, financial institu- tions, florists and gift shops, self-service laundry and dry cleaning pick-up stations, shoe repair, tailor and grocery store, to mention a few. To help service the water access needs in this area, a private marina is pro- posed in the southwest corner of Pere Marquette Lake. As a complement to the marina, an area of commercial /recreational use is designated immediately adja- cent. This commercial area would have recreation emphasis and not compete with the nearby neighborhood commercial center. VI-7 li47 _j 41 coftm k le t "4" Ao'L d; 01, 0 1-14 4r rE <lL PARK 4r Ph i_%, S A@2 %N D A- RiZ 'A WRM41RC I L 'RE RE TIONAL @,7 T Y ia 4RK All gc?w, MULTI@- FAMtLY F*ERE x DEVELOPMEqT MARQUETI'IE L AX C @Tk NG i4 .d f-AM 2! TI E-91 Elm WET t-ANDS P @C IV N @,7 kqLl, @AGE wv C Ft AYL L WILLIAMS 5 WORKS Alternative B-2 As graphically illustrated, Alternative B-2 contains land use concepts for Pere Marquette Charter Township. The rural ranchettes area is proposed for develop- ment of large lot (1-5 acre) single-family homesites. Since much of the 350± acres is tree-covered, a majority of the 140± sites could be nestled among the trees, leaving a natural-looking environment. If developed as proposed, approximately 400-450 people would populate this area. North of this area is a multi-family residential area. This 150± acre low- rise, medium density area should be designed and developed with,prime consider- ation to existing natural features. Much of this area is tree-covered, provid- ing desirable living opportunities for the 4,000 to 5,000 people who may inhabit this location. Moving further north is a commercial /recreational area. This type of develop- ment will serve as a buffer between the multi-family area and the existing industry. Next to the industry, a marina development is designated. A small marina operation is proposed to serve the needs of the nearby residents. VI-8 S .7 4@4 w. @k' _j F. '4# t z!. V ALTEF?F;rATtjr A-1, A--2 jApo ,A DEVELOPMENT PERE - FA ILY MARQUETTE LAKE SINGIjE L ';I R E ZE)@@ WET LAND$ PA@ TOWN$Hfp v IN'DUST L M U LAI@" FAM I LY R ES LQ'E NI L,.,'A K ff M I Hl,GA@ N kt Ie, A, d AGE 4N WILLIAMS a WORKS Chapter VII Harbor Land Use Plan CHAPTER VII PERE MARQUETTE LAKE LAND USE AND PORT PLAN INTRODUCTION The purpose of -this plan is to provide a broad framework to meet all the peo- ple's needs and activities (current and future). It also has the purpose of fitting these activities (land uses) to the natural characteristics of the land and with existing land uses. It is the further purpose of this plan to en cour- age and preserve desirable land uses and to discourage certain undesirable land uses. This plan is based upon the study data and analysis. It also reflects steering committee and public input. This plan is focused on the Pere Marquette Lake area. It provides for a compre- hensive range of land uses, from natural area preservation to heavy industrial. The discussion of land uses is presented in two sections (Ludington and Pere Marquette Township) for ease of adoption. A. GENERAL PLAN CONCEPTS This plan embodies several concepts which are common to both the City -of Ludington and to Pere Marquette Township. These are general development con- cepts on which the other plan features are based. These concepts include: 1. a balanced use of Pere Marquette Lake, with respect to industrial, commer- cial, residential, and natural area preservation. 2. the creation of a strong local economy through the use of Pere Marquette Lake for recreational boating and commercial shipping. 3. the preservation and enhancement of desirable land uses along the shore- line. % VII-1 gN z INJ .oj c "A Al , NIN"i \C c p MARQ Cl-ry OF LU r lq@ 4 VII LAKF- N \cl L--WILLIAMS WORKS 4. the redevelopment of under-utilized areas or inappropriate land uses. 5. blending of new areas with existing land uses and with the area's natural characteristics. B. THE CITY OF LUDINGTON: PLAN ELEMENTS 1. Residential The plan provides for the continuance of the existing multi-family area between the United States Coast Guard station and the new city marina. This small area is developed with multi-family residential. A second multi-family area, at the end of the Buttersville Bar, is also shown on the plan. Like the first area, it is developed with multi-family residential. It is the new condominium development known as the Crosswinds. The plan shows one single-family residential area, north of the new city marina. This area reflects the planning results of the marina area development plan. Another residential area is shown north of the Dow Chemical Industrial Complex. Although bisected by a small commercial strip, it is predominantly single-family developed. This plan does not seek any change in the character of any of these multi-family or single-family residential areas. One area, the Western Concrete site (also known as the Blout property) is designated commercial/recreation and multi-family residential. As multi-family residential, it is an attractive site for a seasonal condominium development. A prospectus for condominium development is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. The commercial/ recreation opportunities are discussed in Section 3, Mixed Commercial. VII-2 2. Commercial The plan shows the downtown area simply as commercial without delineating CBD areas from other types of commercial. No change from existing development patterns is contemplated, except near the Star Watch Case facility. The Star Watch Case facility is planned for redevelopment as an office facility. It would provide almost 100,000 square feet of office space for a large business such as a research and development facility, a professional design firm, a computer processing center, or municipal offices. A prospectus of redevelopment for this facility is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. The plan also provides for the development of a major hotel /restaurant complex south of the Star Watch Case facility. A hotel at this location would enjoy a good proximity to the downtown. It would have -a good view of Pere Marquette Lake, the harbor-channel, and Lake Michigan. Its view, however, would overlook the marine bulk terminal. If a hotel/restaurant is not developed on this site, it could be 'used for general commercial, commercial recreation, or light indus- trial. The area immediately south of the city hall is planned for commercial recre- ation. It is well related to the new marina and enjoys an excellent view of the entrance channel and outer harbor. Commercial recreation is intended to include those retail uses which are especially tourism oriented. Examples include: restaurants, handicraft shops, antiques and art galleries, bait and tackle shops, marinas and boat rentals, and the like. 'The area west of the Washington Street Bridge is also designated commercial recreation. This area presently supports several marinas. The commercial area along Washington Street, immediately south of the bridge, is presently mixed commercial. It should be encouraged to develop as commercial recreation with special emphasis on antique shops, art galleries, and handicraft shops. 3. Mixed Commercial The area immediately north of the C&O Railroad yards, north to Dowland Street is planned for a mix of commercial and industrial. It could support heavy commer- cial uses or provide expansion space for light industrial uses. VII-3 The Western Concrete site, also known as the Blount property, is proposed for commercial/recreation or multi-family residential. As commercial/recreation, it is especially attractive as a major hotel/restaurant site. It enjoys good views of Pere Marquette Lake and overlooks the Buttersville Bar and Lake Michigan. A prospectus for hotel development is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. 4. Industrial The plan shows the Dow plant as industrial. This reflects its current use. A second industrial area is shown just west of the Washington Street Bridge and south of the C&O Railroad tracks. This area includes a variety of small indus- tries, some of which are only marginally viable. The eastern portion of this area is proposed for industrial redevelopment. It is a good site for a small recreation boat manufacturer or a heavy repair boat yard. Redevelopment of this site could be aided by the relocation of Lake Street, along the railroad tracks. A development prospectus for this site is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. 5. Marine Transportation/Terminal The C&O Railroad property is shown as partly marine terminal and partly marine transportation. The marine terminal is shown along dock No. 1J. Uses proposed for this site include a bulk petroleum terminal and a small bulk construction aggregate terminal. Th'ese terminals are discussed in depth in Section D, Port Plan Features. A development prospectus for each of these is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. The marine transportation facility is intended to support a car ferry and in the future, the Integrated Tug Barge. Since much of the railroad car marshalling and train makeup is done inland, the smaller area allocated for marine transpor- tation should not affect the car ferry/ integrated tug barge viability. Marine transportation facilities are further discussed in Section D, Port Plan Fea- tures. VII-4 6. Public Uses The existing Lake Michigan beach, boat launch, and U.S. Coast Guard station are shown as public use on the plan. Likewise, the city park between the Western Concrete property and the Dow plant is also shown as public use. The new city marina and city hall are also shown as public use. If the city hall ever is moved to another location, then its present site could be used for commercial/recreation. 7. Transportation The plan assumes the continuance of waterborne shipping for Dow Chemical and Harbison-Walker. The plan also assumes the continuance of the inter-regional service of the car ferry and possible service by the Integrated Tug Barge. The import of bulk construction aggregate is provided for by the marine terminal. An access route will be necessary if and when both the dry bulk terminal and the petroleum terminal are fully developed. The plan calls for the development of a limited access truck route parallel. to the existing railroad tracks. This will provide a direct route to the bulk terminal. C. PERE MARQUETTE TOWNSHIP: PLAN ELEMENTS -1. Residential The plan provides for about 400 acres of residential in the upland sloped areas on the south side of Pere Marquette Lake. This area lends itself to low-density, single-family residential. This area should be developed with prime consid- eration to existing natural features and constraints. In particular, the wetland areas must not be degraded as a result of this area's development. This area is designated for rural ranchettes, large lot (1 to 5 acre) single- family homesites. Since about 350 acres is tree-covered, many of the 140± sites could be nestled among the trees, leaving a natural-looking environment. The larger ranchet tes could support gentlemen farms or equestrian activities. If VII-5 developed according to this plan, about 1400 people eventually, would populate this area. The plan also shows two single-family residential areas, along the Lake Michigan shoreline, and on the Buttersville Bar. This reflects past development and it is anticipated that future development will be similar. The plan provides for the continuance of the White Pine Village. 2. Commercial The plan provides for three small commercial areas. The existing commercial area on US-31 is shown on the plan as commercial. A small commercial area is shown inland in the rural ranchette area, however, the location of this area is not fixed. It is intended to provide convenience goods and services to the neighborhood population. It should not be developed until the population is in place to support it. Its size and locati,on must be tightly controlled to insure neighborhood service and not neighborhood dis- service. A third commercial area is the Sand Products site. At some future date, when this site is no longer needed for sand export, it would be a good site for a first-class restaurant or a small lodge. This site enjoys some interesting views of Pere Marquette Lake, the wetlands, and the City of Ludington. This site could also be developed with seasonal convenience retail thus eliminating the need for the new neighborhood commercial area (described above). 3. Industrial Two sites in Pere Marquette Township are shown as industrial on the plan. They are the Harbison-Walker plant and the Dow Disposal Lagoons. The Harbison-Walker designation reflects its current use. The disposal lagoons are intended to be limited to disposal operations and must be in compliance with state regulations. Future use of this land for industrial development is questionable. VII-6 4. Public Use The plan provides for two public use areas. The first is the existing Township park on Lake Michigan. It is planned that this park will expand to the east to Pere Marquette Lake and the area behind the Sand Products facility. The second public use area is the wetlands along the south side of Pere Marquette Lake. These surround the Dow Disposal Lagoons on three sides. Some of this area is planned as preserved open space with no development activity. Some of this area could be developed as a wetlands nature center with educa- tional stations and guided tours. Development should be limited to upland areas, except for hoardwalks into the wetlands. This area also includes a new Township park, developed in an upland area near the US-31 neighborhood com- mercial center. D. PORT PLAN FEATURES' 1. Regional Terminals This plan allows for the continuance of the Dow Chemical/Harbison-Walker Termi- nal. However, it provides for the regional import (or export) of other dry bulk materials at the planned marine terminal. This will free up other sites, such as Mohawk Transportation and Western Concrete for redevelopment. Neither of these sites is extensively developed, therefore, operations could be moved to a new terminal with relative ease. Unless an alternative terminal is provided, these sites cannot be redeveloped. The data collected through contacts with existing dry bulk terminal users indicated a current importation of about 12,000 tons annually. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers reports that in 1979, 18,700 tons of sand, gravel , and crushed rock were received in the Port of Ludington. It is possible that some of the Corps of Engineers reported imports were an inter-regional commodity flow utilizing the car ferry. Since there is an existing need for at least 12,000 tons annually, a small terminal is planned as Phase I. This terminal would have a minimum of capital VII-7 improvements and administrative organization. A prospectus for the Phase I dry bulk terminal, which details development and operational costs, and site layout, is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. The data collected through contacts with potential dry bulk terminal users showed a demand for at least 56,500 tons annually. Contacts included the State -of Michigan (Office-of Management and Budget), Mason County Road Commission, Lake County Road Commission, the Wexford County Road Commission, three trucking/ construction companies, and five redi-mix concrete product manufacturers. The State of Michigan, Office of Management and Budget, expressed little inter- est in using the Port of Ludington because it might lower volumes, thus raising prices at other ports. Five of the other contacts indicated an interest in using the terminal. The contacts made, which represent about half of the potential users, yielded a little more than half of our estimated annual ton- nage. Therefore, the dry bulk terminal volume estimates of 110,000 tons annual- ly (Chapter V, Feasibility Determination) could be obtainable, in time. The Phase II dry bulk terminal prospectus, which details development and opera- tional costs and site layout, provides for a larger public terminal. This terminal, which could handle about 55,000 tons of material at a time, could be developed as demand expanded. A bulk petroleum terminal is also shown at the C&O Railroad dock No. 11. The direct contacts indicated little interest in a public terminal, as private terminals are typical of the industry. Since there are several wholesalers in the Ludington area, there is a good potential that a terminal operator could be attracted to this site. A development prospectus for a bulk petroleum terminal is included in Chapter VIII, Development Opportunities. A bulk petroleum termi- nal is an appropriate private sector project. 2. Inter-Regional Terminal The plan provides for the continuance of the C&O Railroad facility as either a car ferry or integrated tug barge terminal. The Kerney & McMullen studies identified a good potential for cross-lake railroad car ferry traffic. A VII-8 sizable flow of passengers has also been identified. The continuance of cross- lake railroad car, automobile/ passenger and truck-trailer service is considered vital to Ludington's economy. In the future, it is possible that the northern area of the C&O Railroad facili- ty could be put to another use. This should not affect the viability of the car ferry terminal. 3. Harbor Improvements No major harbor improvements are necessary under this plan. The existing harbor entrance, navigation channel, turning basin', and aids to navigation are ade- quate. Some improvements to the C&O Railroad dock No. lf are necessary and their costs are included in the development prospectus. In addition, McMullen Assoc. recommends some modifications to the wing fender and the pile cluster at C&O Railroad dock No. 2. These modifications are necessary for the integrated tug barge. E. IMPLEMENTATION .1. Port and Terminal Management Options A variety of organizational structures can function as the lead agency to implement the port and terminal plan elements. The advantages and limitations of each are discussed in this section. Particular emphasis has been placed on the advantages and limitations of each with respect to Ludington. a. Ludington Harbor Commission The Ludington Harbor Commission is an advisory body to the Ludington City Commission. It is established by the City Ordinance in accordance with responsibilities similar to those of Public Act 234 of 1925, as amended. Public Act 234 of 1925 has been repealed by the Port Authority Act (P.A. 639 of 1978); however, the repeal is not effective until the Harbor Commission has converted to a port authority. VII-9 As the Harbor Commission stands now, it may study and recommend improve- ments, but has limited means of implementation. It must seek the assis- tance of another agency to undertake physical development or promotion. Furthermore, it has no responsibility to undertake such development or promotion. Another serious deficiency with the Harbor Commission is its lack of regulatory authority. It can not make and enforce rules and regulations. Furthermore, it does not have regular input to the Pere Marquette Township Board nor does the Township Board have regular input to the Harbor Commis- sion. Despite its disadvantages, the Ludington Harbor Commission has several advantages. The first is that it is an existing, functioning body. Its members are familiar with all aspects of Pere Marquette Lake. The second advantage depends upon its individual members. No single agency, no matter how broad its powers, can implement a comprehensive plan single- handedly. It must have the support of many agencies. This requires a continuing effort to "sell" the plan.- Given an operating budget, some individual initiative, and some minor organizational changes, the Ludington Harbor Commission could become the lever which moves a host of agencies into action. b. Port Authority Public Act 639 of 1978 created an agency new to Michigan, the Port Authori- ty. The creation - of a port authority requires approval of the voters within the county it is located and approval by the Governor. A combina- tion of cities and counties (including at least one city and one county) may incorporate a port authority, however, no direct township participation is provided for. The authority is eligible for state assistance for 50% of its annual operating budget. It may also seek grants for specific projects. The port authority is a body corporate and politic. It may own and operate a wide VII-10 variety of harbor facilities, terminals, bridges and ferries, waterways and lands, and the like. The port authority can regulate (i.e., zone) waterways,including pierhead lines. It can promulgate safety and environmental regulations. Port authorities make "payments in lieu of taxes" on public income produc- ing property; however, other public property is exempt.. Port authority property used for private purposes is taxable as private property. The chief. disadvantage of the port authority approach in Ludington is the limited scale of viable development and income producing projects. Since many of Ludington's terminals are privately owned and operated, there could be much activity, but litt le port authority revenue. Another disadvantage of the port authority approach is the lack of direct Pere Marquette Township participation. Pere Marquette Township would have to depend upon the county for representation; however, the county must represent all its constituent units. A less significant problem could be the reliance on state funds for operat- ing expenses. a port authority's annual operating budget is subject to approval by the Michigan Department of Transportation and appropriations by the State Legislature. The adv antages of a port authority are many and fairly obvious. They include: regulatory authority, rea-1 estate ownership, terminal operation, bonding and fee collection, state operational funding, and grant eligi- bility. In short, a port authority can plan, decide, develop, and operate. C. Independent Public Action/Private Development This approach could also be termed the "non-lead agency - all independent approach". Under this approach, no agency or a very ineffective agency would be given the responsibility of implementing the plan and managing the port. Each agency would be requested to implement that which it felt VII-11 timely and important. Likewise, the decision as to what is and what is not an agency's responsibility would be left to each agency. The principle advantage to this approach is its simplicity, and low "up- front" cost. It also makes use of existing agencies and private de- velopers. The disadvantages of this approach are many, and could be ruinous. Since each agency would act according to its own time table, development would be haphazardous at best. Many projects could be delayed for years while two agencies waited for each other to act. Without a lead agency advocating implementation, important projects could inappropriately lose priority status. Development, regulation, and management, when it did happen, could be contradictory, duplicative, or uneconomical. A lack of coordinated timing could delay a project and drive costs up. d. Pere Marquette Lake Council Under this approach, a joint council representing Pere Marquette Township, the City of Ludington, and Mason County would be established. It could also include the Mason County Economic Authority or other similar agencies. Such a*council would be organized under the authority of Public Act 66 of 1952, Harbors, Channels, and Other Navigational Facilities, or under the authority of Public Act No. 7 of 1967, the Urban Cooperation Act. Under P.A. 66 of 1952, political units may create a joint agency to: - govern the use of waterways, channels, harbors, and other navigational facilities; - adopt ordinances and rules to safeguard the public; - be empowered to undertake these duties; - employ a harbor master and other officers with full police powers. VII-12 An agency created under this Act is not a corporate body. It is an exten- sion of the constituent government units. It cannot tax, issue bonds, or own property. It is financially dependent upon the parent governments. The principal advantage of a joint council, created under Act 66 of 1952, would be the ability of each political unit to be involved. This should aid effective development and management. Another advantage woul d be the counci I 's abi 1 i ty to promul gate envi ron- mental and safety regulations. It should, however, be noted that certain state and federal laws would remain in force. Usi@g the existing Harbor Commission as the lead agency, the Pere Marquette Lake Council could also act as a catalyst to move other agencies to action. The principle di-s-advantage of such a council are financial and operational. Financially, the council could be so dependent on the parent governments that it might not be able to get its activities started. A Public Act 66 joint agency is operationally hampered by the prohibition on owning land. This would make assembling land for redevelopment, or developing a terminal very difficult. e. Economic Development Authority/Economic Development Corporation Under this approach, a local economic development authority/ economic development corporation (either city or county) would be charged with- port/terminal plan implementation. An EDA/EDC has the ability to issue bonds for public and private development, own land, and operate facilities. It does not have the ability to promulgate rules and regulations for environmental control. The principle advantage of the EDA/EDC approach are financial and opera- tional. The EDA/EDC can issue bonds and raise capital. It can cooperate with private industry for development and expansion projects. VII-13 The principle disadvantage of this approach is the lack of direct control. 2. Agency Responsibilities This section of the plan recognizes the roles of the many federal, state, and local agencies which will be involved in various stages of implementation of the plan. The responsibilities of these agencies range from ownership and management of port facilities to serving the development plan in various advisory capacities. Naturally, local agencies will have the most active roles in establishing policy and making decisions, while state and federal agencies will mainly be involved in a regulatory and/or advisory capacity, with some exceptions. a. Local Agencies Planning Commissions (Ludington and Pere Marquette Township): The local planning commissions will be involved in long and short range planning for port developments, particularly with respect to the needs and concerns of the two communities. They are directly concerned with site plan approvals, zoning changes, and comprehensive planning. City Commission/Township Board: The.Ludington City Commission and the Pere Marquette Township Board will have central roles in the implementation actions either directly or indirectly, such as the creation of a lead implementing agency. County Commission: The Mason County Commission can have a significant participation in the implementation of the plan. They can provide adminis- trative and financial support and marketing assistance. County Economic Development Authority: The Mason County Economic Develop- ment Authority is a semi-autonomous body concerned with county-wide econom- ic development. The Mason County EDA historically serves as a financial resource. It also could act as a promotional and development agency. VII-14 West Michigan Regi onal Planning Commission: The Regional Planning Commis- sion, in order to coordinate its comprehensive planning program and address the needs of the many communities in Region 8, will provide input on the plan and its implementation. b. State Agencies Michigan Department of Transp ortation (MDOT): The MDOT is the primary agency in Michigan involved with commercial navigation, and its activities in this area include planning, development, policy formation and analysis, and provision of grants and operating assistance. It also provides liaison between other agencies involved in commercial navigation, in addition to the private sector. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR): Activities of the MDNR are mainly related to environmental protection during s,uch projects as harbor or channel dredging and other construction on or near Michigan's waterways. The MDNR and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have somewhat over- lapping regulatory functions for projects on the Great Lakes, and typically issue a joint permit for these approved activities. Michigan Waterways Commission: A Commission of the MDNR, the Waterways Commission's powers include the acquisition, construction, and maintenance of recreational harbors, channels, docking, and launching facilitfes, and' the administration of commercial docks 'in the Straits of Mackinac. The commission provides control of recreational boating in Michigan, and collects a tax on fuel used for boating. The commission will be actively involved in any developments related to recreational boating in Ludington. Michigan Interagency Port Council: As the name implies, this agency exists to assure an appropriate balance between the aims of other state agencies involved in port development. Its members are representatives of the MDOT, MDNR, and state departments of commerce and agriculture. VII-15 Michigan Environmental Review Board (MERB): The purpose of this agency is to review projects in Michigan of major environmental significance. With respect to Great Lakes Ports, these activities would primarily be harbor and channel dredging. The state departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Management & Budget, MDN-R, Public Health, MDOT, and the Attorney General are represented on the MERB. C. Federal Agencies International Joint Commission (IJC): The IJC was created between Canada and the U.S. to study problems along the water boundary. The IJC also has control over the surface levels of the boundary waters through the power to approve of any use, diversion or obstruction which may alter the water levels. Thus it has an impact on commercial navigation on the Great Lakes. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: The Corps of Engineers serves as designer, builder, and operator of navigational facilities authorized by congress, in addition to a wide range of planning and development activities. The recent harbor improvements in Ludington illustrate@ the Corps' involvement in commercial navigation. These improvements and channel depths are maintained by the Corps on an on-going basis. The Corps also issues joint permits with the MDNR for approved activities on or nearthe Grbat Lakes which could affect water quality and/or navigation. U.S. Customs and Immigration Service: The U.S. Customs and Immigration Service is the agency of the Federal Government responsible for the control of goods and people across our national borders. Since only Dow Chemical and Harbison-Walker have any regular international shipping, the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service has a minor role in Ludington's port activities. U.S. Maritime Administration: This agency regulates waterborne shipping in foreign and domestic offshore commerce in the United States. It publishes long-term forecasts of waterborne foreign trade and other informational publications on the U.S. Merchant Marines and shipping. VII-16 U.S. Economic Development Administration: The U.S. Economic Development Administration is responsible for administering certain economic develop- ment local government grant programs and certain economic development private sector loan programs. These grants and loans are described in Section 3 of this chapter. U.S. Coast Guard (USCG): The Coast Guard has many responsibilities con- cerning commercial navigation and recreational boating, including mainten- ance of navigational aids, ice breaking services, vessel inspection, pollution control and cleanup, search and rescue, law enforcement and boating safety. The Coast Guard also compiles daily observations of weather and wave conditions which can be useful for design purposes. The U.S. Coast Guard station in Ludington is-located along the harbor entrance channel next to the Municipal Marina. 3. Funding Sources, Land Acquisition Methods, and Development Incentives The purpose of this section is to present alternative funding sources, land. acquisition methods, and development incentives. Implementation of complicated plans require the use of many of these tools. This discussion is intended to provide a basic summary. a. Funding Sources Although there has been much publicity about grant cutbacks, there are still many grants available. Competition is tough, but a sound project in an economically depressed area can be successfully funded. The most viable grant program in Michigan for economic development is the HUD Small Cities Block Grant program. The Michigan Department of Commerce is administering this program and they have established a selection proce- dure which favors job producing projects in economically depressed areas, with supporting private funding and grant paybacks. This payback feature can be of great benefit to the local community because these monies are earmarked for the community's -use. In this way, the grants are converted to low interest loans which in turn become the basis of an economic devel- opment revolving fund. VII-17 The U.S. Economic Development Administration has local public works grants which cover design and startup administration, land acquisition, and construction. These grants are available in economically depressed areas only. These grants require a 50% non-federal match. The U.S. Maritime Administration provides grants for comprehensive port planning. These grants require a 50% non-federal match. The U.S. Department of Interior, under former heritage conservation and recreation servict programs, has urban park and recreation recovery grants. These may be used for redesign, and rehabilitation of existing public parks. These grants require a 30% non-federal match. The U.S. Army--Corps of Engineers has a harbor cleanup program. Its purpose is to improve channels for navigation. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has urban development action grants (UDAGs) which are designed to assist the private sector with urban redevelopment projects. They may be used for residential, commer- cial, or industrial projects. The Michigan Waterways Commission makes grants for boat launch ramps, harbors of refuge, and public marinas. A Waterways Commission grant was used for the new city marina. The U.S. Economic Development Administration also has a loan and loan guarantee program to assist private sector projects, in economically distressed areas. Monies under this program may be used for land and building acquisition, machinery (process), construction, and rehabilita- tion. These loans require a 35% non-federal match. A few of the many foundation grants may be used for activities outside of the areas of the humanities, arts, and recreation. These should be tapped for special arts and recreation activities. VII-18 Several foundation programs are development/redevelopment oriented. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has been providing grants for preservation of historic marine vessels or maritime heritage in "signifi- cant" communities. Typically, these are the focus of tourist and recre- ation activities. The National Trust for Historic Preservation, through its main street program, makes grants for the rehabilitation or adaptive reuse of historic structures. The Star Watch Case facility is a candidate for this type of grant. The Audubon Society and other similar nature conservation groups have purchased land and established private nature parks. The Pere Marquette Lake wetlands is a candidate for this type of foundation activity. The standard financial institutions - banks and mortgage companies, savings and loans, insurance companies, and retirement funds can play an important role in plan implementation. Banks and mortgage companies make loans for residential, commercial, and industrial projects of all sizes. Savings and loans usually make loans only for individual residences; however, they can play an important role in the resale of a condominium project. Insurance companies and retirement funds participate in large projects of all types. They usually do not participate in projects smaller than one or two million dollars. Various agencies have the authority to sell bonds to raise capital for projects. Bonds fall into two categories - general obligation and revenue. General obligation bonds are sometimes used to fund projects which benefit the community as a whole. They usually require a vote of the people, and are paid off with general tax revenues. Revenue bonds are paid off with revenues raised by the project or by the benefitting industry, according to a repayment schedule.. With the assistance of a public agency issuing bonds, a private sector business or industry can get a loan at lower than market rates. VII-19 Public agencies which can issue revenue bonds include: the City of Ludington, Pere Marquette Township, Mason County, the Ludington Economic Development Corporation, the Mason County Economic Development Corporation, and the Mason County Industrial Development Corporation. Another method of raising revenue for public improvements is tax increment financing. In this situation, a public body pledges to use the new tax revenues, generated by certain private sector improvements, to develop public infrastructure benefitting that private sector industry. This is an "I will, if you will" approach. For example, a factory wants to expand but can't because the public water main to its factory is not large enough. Therefore, the factory will not expand until the water main is enlarged. Meanwhile, the city (or township) will not enlarge the water main until there is a real need, but it nevertheless would like to see the factory expand. The solution is for both to agree to move ahead simultaneously, with the city using "borrowed" monies in anticipation of new tax revenues for repayment. b. Land Acquisition Methods Land and buildings may be acquired or used under a variety of mechanisms. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages for meeting an owner's terms and a buyer's needs. The most direct means of obtaining property is to buy it outright. This involves buying all or most of its associated rights including the right to resell it. Unless a "bargain sale" or gift is involved, it can be the most expensive. A second technique is called leasing. Under this technique the owner "rents" property for a relatively long period, usually 20 years at minimum. The leasee has the responsibility for maintena'nce and may make major improvements to the property. The property owner can include operations requirements in the lease and at the end of the lease period it reverts to the owner's use and control. Leases are often used for temporary uses, where the owner expects a greater future value. VII-20 A third technique is called land writedowns. Un,der this technique, a local government acquires blighted or run-down real estate through tax rever- sions, fee-simple purchase, and condemnation. By clearing the land, assembling it into large tracts, or making other 'improvements, it increases its utility and, therefore, its value. The government, however, sells or leases the land at below its new market value. The purchase of these properties at depressed prices (due to blighting), acquisition of major parts through tax reversions, the creation of "new" land through road abandonments, and the condemnation of hold-out properties to assemble large tracts; usually permit the government to cover their costs while providing a private sector development opportunity. Michigan law permits the condem- nation of land in blighted areas for redevelopment purposes. This is a very effective redevelopment tool. because often the private sector can not assemble a large enough parcel for a major user. ,A fourth technique for controlling the use of land is easement purchase. Historically, easements have been granted or sold for access or for utili- ties. Easements can be purchased for any of the many rights that come with property ownership. Rece.ntly, e'asements have been granted for historic preservation of building facades, open space and natural area preservation or scenic vistas. Easements may be temporary or permanent. The propose@ wetlands boardwalk'could transverse Dow Chemical's wetlands by easement. A fifth technique for.acq uiring land is to trade for it. Land is often exchanged in small amounts to increase the utility of a parcel. If surplus land is available, it can be an inexpensive way of gaining other needed land. C. Development Incentives Some activities are intended to make development or redevelopment more attractive. These can be grouped as financial assistance, technical assistance, and the elimination of "red tape". Among the financial a ssistance programs are the insured/guaranteed loan programs of the Small Business Administration and the Economic Development VII-21 Administration. Under these programs a business or industry can qualify for a lower interest rate loan because of the backing of a government agency. Under Michigan law, a municipality may abate local property taxes for a new or enlarged business or industry. This abatement may be for up to 50% of its taxes for a period of up to 12 years. This has been widely used to encourage local community and industrial expansion. The Preservation and Tax Reform Act of 1976 provides for major tax credits for historic property rehabilitation. Section 2124 provides that a devel- oper may deduct, from his federal income tax, most of the costs for cer- tified rehabilitation of a "certified historic structure". Recent amend- ments provide for a tax credit of up to 25% for certain rehabilitation. Many communities in Michigan have undertaken joint public/private develop- ment activities. The Ludington public marina could be considered to fall within this category. It is a public project which directly supports the local tourism and recreation industry. The proposed public dry bulk terminal also fits into this category. Many local governments stand ready to offer technical assistance to new or expanding enterprises. A development coordinator, the most visible, helps secure grants or provides community facts. Sometimes cities hire a design firm to help downtown businessmen with storefront improvements, or the city engineer publishes important engineering data for all to use. In some areas the local Chamber of Commerce or the electric power company also provide technical assistance to developers. A city's staff, particularly in the areas of building and zoning codes, fire and life safety codes, and engineering can greatly aid development by adopting a "work-with" attitude. This need not be done at the expense of proper and complete code enforcement. VII-22 4. Zoning Ordinance and Map Review Zoning is an important tool for implementing the plan, and will encourage orderly and compatibTe development in accordance with the goals of the plan. It will also help to insure that the best use is made of lands in the port area, and that the locational needs of potential investors in commercial or industrial facilities may be met. Several zoning changes were anticipated as a result of this plan. A review of the-existing zoning map compared to the proposed Pere Marquette Lake Land Use and Port Plan has revealed differences that need to be addressed. Likewise, the zoning ordinance permitted uses are in some cases in conflict with the proposed plan. The following discussion, for the City of Ludington and Pere Marquette Township separately, points out these differences and proposed zoning changes. a. City of Ludington The proposed single and multiple family residential area s next to the municipal marina currently are zoned M-R Motel Resort District which does not permit residentia-1 use. This area should be rezoned according to the recommendations of the marina area neighborhood study. One area on the plan is noted as Commercial /Industrial. The present Ludington zoning ordinance does not provide for mixed-commercial/industrial areas. Specific zoning for these areas should be-established as either C-2 or C-3, depending on which development opportunity comes about. Currently, there are three RIB single-family residen ce districts in the area shown on the plan as commercial. Wh-ile these areas are in the vicin- ity of the marine-transport zone, they are shielded by commercial develop- ment and do not present a problem to the plan. No revisions are antici- pated at this time for those areas. The marine terminal and marine transport areas on the plan are currently zoned M-2, Heavy Industry. This zoning would provide for activities at the terminal and does not need to be modified. VII-23 The Blount property (Western Concrete site) as discussed earlier would be an attractive site for seasonal condominium development or commercial development such as a hotel. To encourage this type of development, a change from existing heavy industry zoning is necessary. ' This area should be rezoned either M-R or R-3 depending on the type of development oppor- tunity that comes about. Several other small areas, such as the downtown area in the city, are zoned in another category than shown on the plan but -do not present a conflict. The intent of the plan is to be flexible, allowing the character of exist- ing areas to remain and follow natural growth trends. For this reason, the plan will be more general than the actual zoning map, to encourage compati- ble development in surrounding areas and particular types of port-related development. b. Pere Marquette The major area of conflict in Pere Marqu ette Township is the area currently zoned as Harbor Industry, which the plan identifies as a public use wet- lands park. Zoning for this area will need to be changed to protect the area as a natural wetlands while permitting public access and compensating the owner for its use. The industrial disposal area where the lagoons are located needs to be identified separately so that its use does not conflict with the wetlands areas. It is proposed that the areas designated as wetlands park be rezoned as conservation zone. The area south of the wetlands is designated as single family residential and is proposed to be developed as low-density single family residences (rural ranchettes). Current zoning of this area is A-2, to promote res- idential and agricultural development. The minimum lot size is one acre. This could be increased, up to five acres minimum size, at the Planning Commission's recommendation. While it appears that commercial -use of the Sand Products facility would require commercial zoning, in fact, when it is no longer used as a sand exporting terminal, it should be rezoned as A-2. Under section 501:4 of the Pere Marquette zoning ordinance, certain commercial uses are permitted as a conditional use. VII-24 5. Implementation Program This section details the overall implementation strategy of the responsibilities of a development coordinator, a specific marketing strategy, and other implemen- tation actions. This section provides a "road map" for implementation as seen from a fall 1982 perspective. No doubt the actual implementation will encounter some detours. Hopefully, it will also find some short cuts. a. Overall Strategy The overall implementation strategy is shown in Figure 37, Implementation Strategy. It shows the critical path for implementation. It begins with the Study Steering Committee's plan adoption. Next the local legislati-ve bodies will need to consider and adopt the plan. It is anticipated that input from the local planning commission and perhaps other advisory boards will be necessary. The appointment of a lead agency for implementation follows. This agency will have on-going responsibility for plan imple- mentation, including tasking responsibilities to other agencies. Some implementation actions may be accomplished without direct lead agency involvement. The lead agency should try to involve the private sector. While these projects are in progress, the lead agency can be marketing the other development opportunities. A staff development coordinator would be most helpful in this task. It is anticipated that the marketing program will be an on-going effort. Likewise, each development project will move ahead at different rates through construction and into operation., An important step in the implementation of the development opportunities will be contacting the regulatory agencies which have authority over the proposed activities. These agencies and their responsibilities are des- cribed in Section E.I., Agency Responsibilities. Those activit-ies which involve construction of new commercial or recreational docks, dredging or filling, and other types of construction on or near the waterfront will be subject to complete review by the MDNR and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Regulations apply under the Michigan Inland Lakes and Streams Act and related laws regarding the amount and type of fill material which may be allowed, testing and disposal of dredged materials, etc. The proposed VII-25 mmm mm mm "Now w m m w 8 2 9 10 5 7 .5 4 8.6 6 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 1. STEERING COMMITTEE ADOPTION 7. PROJECT MARKETING 2. CITY COMMISSION ADOPTION 8. DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMITMENTS 3. TOWNSHIP BOARD ADOPTION 8.1 DRYBULKTERMINAL 4. COUNTY COMMISSION ADOPTION 8.2 PETROLEUM TERMINAL 5. LEAD AGENCY APPOINTMENT 8.3 OFFICE COMPLEX 6. RESPONSIBILITY TASKING 8.4 HOTEL COMPLEX TOVARIOUSAGENCIES 8.5 CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX 6.1 ZONING AMENDMENTS 8.6 MANUFACTURING FACILITY 6.2 STATE/FEDERAL COORDINATION 9. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT& 6.3 WETLANDS PARK PROJECT CONSTRUCTION 6.4 MARINA/RECREATION PROGRAMS 10. OPERATIONS Figurer 37 IMPLEMENTATION 6.5 FERRY OPERATIONS STRATEGY 6.6 PERE MARQUETTE LAKE CITY OF LUDINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PORT DEVELOPMENT STUDY WILLIAMS A WORKS location of recreational docking is to be reviewed by the MDNR Waterways Commission and the Michigan Department of Transportation. Local regula- tions of the City of Ludington, Pere Marquette Township, and Mason County will also apply. -There is a great need for good inter-agency coordination. This will have to be an on-going effort. Each member of the lead agency should, be assigned a permanent responsibility for coordination with at least one other agency. This responsibility should include regular periodic meetings with the other agencies. b. Lead Agency_ A Pere Marquette Lake Commission seems-to be the most viable lead agency at this time. It has several advantages in terms of local coordination, control, and environmental protection. A lake commission could form the basis of a port authority. The organization of a port authority could be effected at some later date when demand warranted or it could be organized to continue cross-lake ferry operations if the demand is sufficient. New opportunities should be monitored closely to determine as early as possible the need for a port authority. - The lake commission, or perhaps ultimately a port authority, should call upon any resource or agency for assistance in developing the plan. The agencies discussed in Section E.2 of this chapter will be particularly helpful. Table 17 shows the annual operating budget for the Pere Marquette Lake Commission. It includes the half-time services of a development coordi- nator, as Jt is presumed that this person's responsibilities will not be limited to Pere Marquette Lake projects. While a development coordinator should not be a part-time employee, it is possible for a development coordinator to promote several projects at a time. This budget provides a total of $6,000 for travel, advertising, and promo- tion. These monies are conservatively estimated and are necessary for spreading the word about Ludington. VII-26 The commissioners meeting reimbursement has been arbitrarily set at $10 per meeting. Twelve members attending 18 meetings per year are budgeted. Table 17 Pere Marquette Lake Co mmission Annual Operating Budget Development Coordinator (1/2 time) $12,000 Fringe Benefits 3,600 Office Space 5,000 Supplies and Postage 3,000 Travel 4,000 Advertising and Promotion 2,000 Contract Services (accounting, legal, etc.) 4,000 Commissioners Meeting Reimbursement 12 members, 18 meetings @ $10 each 2,160 Total $35,760 C. Development Coordinator The position of Development Coordinator is a difficult one. A solid under- standing of the business world and real estate development are necessary. A development coordinator must be a "self-starter" and must meet people well. A development coordinator must combine the qualities of a salesman with those of a diplomat to make projects happen. There is no one specific set of education/experience criteria which make up a good development coordinator. The key criteria seem to be experience in getting things done and industry contacts. The Development Coordinator should be the primary staff contact of the Lake Commission, although the Development Coordinator also works for the City Manager. It should be the responsibility of the Development Coordinator to help with all phases of a development project. Typically, this includes: o Information Development o Direct Marketing and Promotion o Marketing Assistance to Realtors o Development Proposal Review and Analysis o Grant and Financial Assistance 0 "Red-Tape" Cutting VII-27 In short, the Development Coordinator locates a developer interested in a project which is viable in Ludington, helps him make the decision to develop in Ludington, and "runs interference". Sometimes the Development Coordinator must bring together a group of divergent investors to make a project happen. d. Marketing Strategy There are three basic approaches to marketing development opportunities such as those identified in Chapter VIII. Each has its advantages and disadvantages and therefore the Development Coordinator must know when each is most appropriate. One approach is to advertise the advantages or opportunities of Ludington in industry publications. This communicates these opportunities to a well-defined group of interested decision makers. Using this technique, large geographic areas and many special interest groups can be reached. This approach can be used on the local scale (daily newspapers), the state scale (major metropolitan newspapers, West Michigan Magazine, etc.) or the national scale (the Wall Street Journal, industry magazines, etc.). A variation of this approach is to write feature articles describing the success or innovative approach of a recent project. This article should make good use of the publicity to promote other projects. Both of these approaches are inexpensive and get the information out to many people. This approach can, at best, spark some interest on the part of a developer. It is, however, a necessary step. The second basic approach is by the use of direct contacts. These contacts should be made by both the Development Coordinator and commercial /i ndus- trial realtors. Both local and out-of-town realtors may be enlisted, on a commission basis. To the extent possible, these contacts should be targeted toward likely prospects. Established personal relationships should be used where possi- ble, but the "cold" contacts should not be overlooked. VII-28 Although this approach is time-consuming and, therefore, costly, it is a requirement of any sizable project. In difficult economic times it is especially necessary because it gives the Development Coordinator a chance to really sell Ludington. The third basic approach is to solicit development proposals. Under this approach potential developers are contacted either directly or indirectly and invited to submit a proposal for developing a certain piece of pro- perty. The municipality supplies a "bid-package" of basic site informa- tion, economic data, and development potentials. The developers submit their proposals, including jobs created, tax base expanded, and required development incentives (government-backed bonds, grants, tax abatement, etc.). The municipality reviews all the proposals and selects the one which is best for the community as a whole. This approach works best in better economic times, since it puts developers in competition with each other. In good economic times it is a very cost- effective technique. It can be held in reserve for future use. F. RECOMMENDATIONS This section presents the studies recommendations and their reasons. Rec.ommen- dations for both the harbor expansion feasibility study and the harbor land use plan are included. No attempt has been made to prioritize these, recommenda- tions. These recommendations are based upon the work completed by the consul- tants, - study steering committee input, the State of Michigan comments, and public input. The recommendations that are based on future development of land that is pri- vately owned are contingent on the availability and acquisition of that land. This study does not insure the availability or acquisition of these lands. VII-29 CONSIDER HEAVY INDUSTRY ONLY IF A PROPOSAL IS PRESENTED BY A SPECIFIC INDUSTRY. REVIEW DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS AS THEY IMPACT SURROUNDING AREAS. DO NOT ACTIVELY PROMOTE HEAVY INDUSTRY. Although the Feasibility Determination showed that certain heavy industries could be marginally feasible at Ludington, the active solicitation of these is a long and costly program. The actual development of such a facility is a "long shot" un der the best of circumstances. The marginal feasibility, plus a lack of a local natural market or a local supply of raw materials, suggests that, even though such operations could be profitable at Ludington, these operations could be more profitable at other locations. In addition to these economic problems, there are environmental and land use problems associated with these facilities. Even with the best environmental equipment, environmental problems of major consequence could cause significant public health problems. Likewise, even minor environmental problems could degrade the quality of life, thus hurting the recreation and tourism industry. In addition, the harbor layout is such that the only place for a major indus- trial facility is the C&O car ferry site. This site is near downtown and prime recreation/tourism areas of Ludington. It is felt that such a facility would be inappropriate. Further, it would eliminate this site's availability for the car ferry or the in@egrated tug barge. 2. ENCOURAGE AND AID THE CONTINUANCE OF EXISTING WATERFRONT INDUSTRIES. The recommendation to not seek additional heavy industry should not be con- sidered as a negative attitude toward the existing heavy industries. These industries which represent the status quo are the foundation of Ludington's economy. Since they operate year-round, they create a stabilizing influence on the area's economy. 3. ENCOURAGE AND AID THE CONTINUANCE OF EXISTING MARINE AND RECREATION RELATED COMMERCIAL, ESPECIALLY MARINAS, BOAT YARDS, HOTEL FACILITIES, AND TOURISM- ORIENTED COMMERCIAL. Tourism and recreation are important industries to Ludington. They are proven to be successful and the new City Marina shows that the saturation point has not VII-30 yet been reached. There is a demonstrated need for additional marina berths. Pere Marquette Lake has many opportunities for recreation/tourism development, yet many industrial -tourism land use conflicts exist. Industrial and recrea- tion/tourism can co-exist, and each be improved, with proper planning. There is reason to believe that existing recreation/tourism industries have not been optimized to take full advantage of this opportunity. A national ly-known hotel complex would provide a magnet to draw visitors from a larger area. A year-round facility, with convention facilities, would help eliminate the slow periods. The Western Concrete site is an ideal location for a major hotel. 4. ENCOURAGE AND AID THE CONTINUANCE OF INTER-REGIONAL CROSS-LAKE RAILROAD AND PASSENGER SERVICES. EXPAND TRUCK TRANSPORT SERVICES. The importance of inter-regional traffic to Ludington has often been stated. The McMullen Study forecasts a solid future for cross-lake rail traffic. It also forecasts a sizable cross-lake passenger volume. The importance of this passenger traffic to the recreation/tourism industry in Ludington cannot be over-emphasized. Improved trailer/truck facilities, especially timely sailings, will support area industrial growth. Since Ludington is on the record as desiring to be the integrated tug barge home port, it follows that the Plan should give careful consideration to the needs, uses and implications of this facility. 5. ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTE WATER-RELATED, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES, SUCH AS PLEASURE BOAT BUILDING AND REPAIR. This Study did not focus on the myriad of light industries that could locate in Ludington, because they generally do not need waterborne transportation. One exception to this is pleasure boat building. Medium size boat builders often locate in a community because of non-quantifiable factors such as "quality of life". Attracting such an industry, especially if coupled with a major repair facility, is a feasible objective for a city such as Ludington. VII-31 6. ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTE WATERFRONT OR NEAR-WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT OF PROFES- SIONAL OFFICES, TECHNICAL RESEARCH FACILITIES, AND THE LIKE. Although this study did not focus on the professional office and technical research facilities at or near the waterfront, Harbor Commission input indicates a strong desire to include these uses. Historically, these uses have been successfully relocated to areas with a good quality of life rating. A water- front or near-waterfront setting, with its choice views, can be the factor which determines where a company locates. The area behind the C&O Railroad facility and near downtown is a good location for these types of uses. The Star Watch Case facility is an ideal facility for conversion. 7. ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTE A PUBLIC BULK MATERIALS TERMINAL FOR CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATES AND A PRIVATE BULK PETROLEUM PRODUCTS TERMINAL (GASOLINE, DIESEL FUEL, HEATING OIL). The Feasibility Determination shows the opportunity to develop a small scale public dry bulk materials terminal. The present importers of construction aggregates would benefit from an improved facility and lower operating costs. Development of a limited facility (Phase I) is critical to the redevelopment of the North Lake and industrial area and the Western Concrete site. The use of this terminal during Phase I will be limited to inert construction aggregates only. If the market developed, then the terminal could be expanded as shown (Phase II). Any materials other than inert aggregates which are proposed for shipment through the Phase II expanded terminal must be considered for their potential environmental impacts. Certain improvements to the terminal under Phase II are anticipated, such as drainage diversion away from Pere Marquette Lake and stockpile covering to protect the lake and surrounding environment. A bulk petroleum terminal, developed by a private entity, could serve the hinterlands of Ludington (north of Muskegon, south of Frankfort, and west of Cadillac). 8. ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT LAKE MICHIGAN AND PERE MARQUETTE LAKE ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS WHICH DRAW TOURISTS TO THE AREA. This recommendation is intended to support general recreation/tourism activities in the area. Organized and advertised activities draw visitors to the area. They contribute to the activities which make Ludington popular. VII-32 9. DEVELOP THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF PERE MARQUETTE LAKE FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH NON-RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES TO SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESI- DENTS ONLY. -PRESERVE THE WETLANDS IN A SUBSTANTIALLY NATURAL STATE. Although some of the steep slopes in this area lend themselves to cluster type multi-family, there is not sufficient public infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.) to support this level of development. This area, with some level areas, could be developed with large tract (about five acres) rural estates, despite the steep slopes in some places. Any non-residential development in this area should be limited to convenience commercial, sized to serve the needs of the immediate neighborhood only. A small, limited service marina or gas dock also could be considered. . Churches and schools could be considered too. Preservation of the wetlands would be in keeping with state goals. It would provide a buffer from the Dow disposal lagoons. A nature park could also be developed. 10. A PER-E MARQUETTE LAKE COMMISSION SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED AND TAKE LEAD AGENCY RESPONSIBILITY FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION A Pere Marquette Lake Commission, formed from the Ludington Harbor Commission, with representatives from the City of Ludington, Pere Marquette Township, and Mason County could provide fair representation to all local governmental units concerned with Pere Marquette Lake. It would have the ability to encourage plan implementa tion, but through financial dependency, would be controllable. 11. ESTABLISH A PORT AUTHORITY, WHEN FUTURE NEED WARRANTS While a port authority can be an effective implementation agency, the level of activity in the Ludington Harbor does not justify it at this time. This need could become real, however, if the C&O car ferry operation is abandoned and if it becomes feasible for the city to operate it independently. Therefore, cer- tain initial preparations could be justified by the Lake Commission. VII-33 12. APPOINT A DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR A plan of this magnitude can not be implemented without the assistance of a professional staff person. Volunteers can not be expected to implement this plan without day-to-day staff assistance. The most effective marketing stra- tegy, direct contacts, require a professional staff person who is primarily concerned with implementation and development. 13. ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT THE PLAN ACCORDING TO THE OVERALL IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY CONTAINED IN SECTION E.5 OF THIS CHAPTER While the details of implementation may differ from those presented herein, it is not possible to fully implement the plan withbut the formal support of the Ludington City Commission, the Pere Marquette Township Board, or the Mason County Board of Commissioners. Likewise, without an agency taking lead respon- sibility for implementation, it is not probable that the plan will be either fully implemented or implemented on a timely, economical basis. VII-34 Chapter VIII Development Opportunities CHAPTER VIII DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES INTRODUCTION, In this chapter, the results of the feasibility determination (Chapter V) are presented in the form of a development prospectus for each identified opportu- nity. Each prospectus contains a land development plan including a site layout. The layout shows relationships to surrounding elements and to the harbor. Site acquisition and development costs are also provided in the prospectus. The four commercial and recreational opportunities identified are: 1. Major hotel 2. Condominiums and recreation-oridnted commercial enterprise 3. Major office complex 4. Manufacturing facility There are two opportunities involving shipping: 1. Bulk petroleum products terminal 2. Dry bulk terminal (construction and road maintenance materials) a. Phase I - initial operations (limited to inert aggregates only) b. Phase II - expanded future operations Following the prospectus for the bulk terminal opportunities is a brief summary of the information gathered during contacts with the prospective shippers. This information was used to demonstrate the potential for shipping various commodities into Ludington. The figure on the following page shows the location of the development opportu- nities with respect to the harbor and existing development. VIII-1 N LA RUS ELL JIM BRYANT LONI IN H LY w Lou" T s DR X, M TOO WHI IF LN 1% .1 'KHAM 0 WOODLAWN VE ELL ST z N ST 0 R s WE THER u INC ON VE PRO SED OFFICE w a -G3 COMPLEX SITE Is > .c 31 PROPOSED MANUFACTURING FACILITY SITE 10 LAK U. ST 'A Ist PROPOSED MAJOR HOTEL 2no SITE OR CONDOMINIUMS/ z z 0 RECREATION ORIENTLEC) COMME RCIAL PROPOSED BULK MARINE TERMINAL SITE DRY BULK Sk PETROLEUM PRODUCTS 7th _j zta LL ucc Powr ocvmxx-wwN-r sTuoy LUOINGTON,MICHiGAN W @RUS hH Ly S TOU z WIDLAW. FIGURE 38 LOCATION OF DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES -WILLIAMS a WORKS Q5lo8Lrptj9a2 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MAJOR HOTEL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WILLIAMS & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VIII-2 PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area ...................................................................................................... 7.4 Acres Land Use Type Area Percent 0 Hotel and Restaurant 0.8 acres 10% Efficiency Motel 0.3 acres 4% Parking and Circulation 1. 3 acres 18% Open Space 1. 7 acres 23% Green Belt 0.5 acres 7% Amenities 2.8 acres 38% 7.4 acres 100% Rental Units Hotel - 14 rooms per floor times 7 floors plus 2 on first floor .... = 100 rooms Motel - 12 rooms per floor times 2 floors, efficiency type .......... = 24 rooms ECONOMIC INFORMATION Acquisition Cost .......................................................................................... $474,000. Less Area to Public Space (green belt) .......................................................... 24,000. $450,000. SITE IMPROVEMENT COSTS Demolish Existing Buildings ....................................................................................... 21,000. Earthwork ..................................................................................................................... 55,000. Pavements and Parking ............................................................................................... 90,000. Sewers, Water, Lift Station ........................................................................................ 126,000. Green Belt (rip-rap wall) ............................................................................................. 12,000. Marina, 42 slips ......................................................................................................... 155,000. CONSTRUCTION COSTS Hotel, Resturant, Meeting Rooms ........................................................................ $5,000,000. Enclosed Pools (2) ...................................................................................................... 420,000. Motel, Efficiency Type ........................................................................................... 1,000,000. Parking and Circulation ............................................................................................. 165,000. Landscaping ............................................................................................................... 275,000. Concessions .................................................................................................................. 75,000. Total Estimated Cost ............................................................................................. $7,689,000. Estimated hotel cost per square foot including resturant, meeting rooms, pool, parking, roads, underground and landscaping .................................................. $68.07 Estimated motel cost per square foot including pool, parking, roads, underground, landscaping and amenities ................................................................... $69.04 Estimated marina cost per slip ............................................................................... $7,524.00 VIII-3 QN 4 4w 211111W. Mill 4. ch.." r.1 TVIIM C3@mgnd Wx*kwm 0. C. K- St. LMM Al XPROPOSED HOTEL Sin tw@ le- '4& Au -#Ova. LLLLJT-L TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT IVIII-4 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area, Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed hotel site. This information is intended as a resource for investors seeking an attractive and profitable location for a major hotel in Michi- gan's western Lower Pennisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 populat ion of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowmobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment for both residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor. The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 7.4 acres, located along the northeast shore &INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS The construction of new commercial facilities may lead the investor to a 50% exemption from INCENTIVES: the ad valorem property tax for 12 years, while restoration of obsolete facilities may lead to a 100% exemption from ad valorem property taxes on the value of the improvements for 12 years. These incentives are provided forby Public Act 255 of 1978. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhauled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludin ton and Pere Marquette Township the 1981 tax rate per $1,000 of equalized valuation is dividel as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: City ....................................................... 20.000 Township ................................................ 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County .................................................... 4.876 County ..................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Twp. Hall Mason County Bldg. Municipal Bldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH:(616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVEST YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VT T T -.1; A PROSPECTUS FOR CONDOMINIUMS AND RECREATION ORIENTED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WILLIAMS & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VIIT-6 PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area ............................................................................................ 7.4 Acres Land Use Type Area Percent Residential 0. 7 acres 19% Community Buildings 0.4 acres 5% Parking and Circulation 1.3 acres 18 % Amenities 0.1 acres 1 % Open Space 3.7 acres 41% Green Belt 1.2 acres 16% 7.4 acres 100% Density 48 total dwelling units 6.5 dwelling units per gross acre Dwelling Units Units: 2 story condominium garden apartment Each apartment: 1250 square feet with 2 bedrooms ECONOMIC INFORMATION Acquisition Cost .......................................................................................... $474,000. Less area to public space (green belt) ............................................................ 76,000. $398,000. SITE IMIPROVEMEENT COSTS Demolish Existing Buildings .......................................................................... 21,000. Earthwork ........................................................................................................ 55,000. Pavements and Parking ................................................................................ 100,000. Sewers, water, lift station ............................................................................. 141,000. Green Belt, Rip Rap Wall ............................................................................... 32,000. Marina, 30 Slips ............................................................................................ 111,000. CONSTRUCTION COSTS Condominiums ......................................................................................... $2,400,000. Clubhouse and Restaurant ......................................................................... 1,128,000. Parking and Circulation ................................................................................ 165,000. Landscaping, pool ......................................................................................... 302,000. Concessions ..................................................................................................... 75,000. Total Estimated Cost ................................................................................ $4,817,000. Estimated condominium cost per square foot (including parking, roads, underground, landscaping) ................................. $46.12 Estimated clubhouse cost per square foot (including parking, roads, underground, landscaping) .................................. $87.88 Estimated marina cost per slip ....................................................................... $8,370. Estimated condominium dwelling unit cost ............................................... $57,645. VIII-7 500 400 CAP_ -A Dh / \ 200 mit-M.o. G- a LLMUM4G N' r( I vr pittam'"N 0@ C. Spr %fim K-- CltV St. L-1. !PROPOSED 'coNDomiNium srm 3 Ir - TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT rvi I @,- 8 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area' Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed condominium location. This information is intended as a resource for investors seeking an attractive residential and recreational develop- ment site in Michigan's western Lower Pennisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 population of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowmobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment for both residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor. The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 7.4 acres, located along the northeast shore & INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS The construction of new commercial facilities may lead the investor to a 50% exemption from INCENTIVES: the ad valorem property tax for 12 years, while restoration of obsolete facilities may lead to a 100% exemption from ad valorem property taxes on the value of the improvements for 12 years. These incentives are provided for by Public Act 255 of 1978. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhauled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludin ton and Pere Marquette Township the 1981 tax rate per $1,000 of equalized valuation is divideg as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: City ............................................... ...... 20.000 Township ...................................... ......... 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County .................................................... 4.876 County ..................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Twp. Hall Mason County Bldg. Municipal Bldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH: (616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS. YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VTTT-9 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MAJOR OFFICE COMPLEX IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WILLIAMS & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VT T T -10 PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area ........................................................................................... . ......... 4.5 Acres Land Use Type Square Feet Area Percent Offices (three floors) 33,300 0.8 acres 18% Hotel 15,600 0.4 acres 9% Restaurant 9,200 0.2 acres 5% Parking and Circulation 90,120 2.1 acres 44% Amenities 47,800 1.1 acres 24% 4.5 acres 100% ECONOMIC INFORMATION Acquisition Cost .......................................................................................... $307,000. SITE IMPROVEMENT COSTS Demolish Existing Factory Buildings ..................................................................... ..105,000. Demolish Existing Houses ............................................................................................ 20,000 Earthwork. ....................................................................................................................... 3,000. New Street Work .......................................................................................................... 35,000. New Sewers, Water ...................................................................................................... 25,000. CONSTRUCTION COSTS Offices .................................................................................................................... $3,497,000. Hotel ........................................................................................................................ 4,278,000. Restaurant ................................................................................................................... 800,000. Parking and Circulation ............................................................................................. 450,000. Landscaping ................................................................................................................. 80,000. Total Estimated Cost ............................................................................................. $9,600,000. Hotel and Restaurant ............................................................................................. $5,5089000 Offices ..................................................................................................................... $4,092,000 Estimated new hotel cost per square foot including parking, restaurant, and amenities .............................................................................. $75.57 Estimated remodeling building cost per square foot including parking and amenities ................................................................................. $40.96 viii-11 amps& CA D.t.,h 200 3DO '00 8.y LUUMVI@!4G U I ffio Ch..W Ft 4w SP-WiOd 1-dwomoift v SED CE COMPLEX SrrE K-m 0tv SL Lw. L-Mft or Ludington's northcentral location m midwest markets easily assessible. 7Zo Mbfiom=-:-w, mw==- TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT FVT T T -12 .1 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area, Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed office complex site. This information is intended as a resource for investors seeking an attractive and profitable office location in Michigan's western Lower Permisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 population of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowniobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment for both residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor. The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 4.5 acres, located along the northeast shore &INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS The construction of new commercial facilities may lead the investor to a,50% exemption from INCENTIVES: the ad valorem property tax for 12 years, while restoration of obsolete facilities may lead to a 100% @xemption from ad valorem property taxes on the value of the improvements for 12 years. These incentives are provided forbyPublic Act 255 of 1978. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhauled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax'in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludington and Pere Marquette Township the 1981 tax rate per $1,000 of equalized valuation is divide as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: City ....................................................... 20.000 Township ................................................ 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County .................................................... 4.876 County ..................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Twp. Hall Mason County Bldg. Municipal Bldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH: (616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS. YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VIII-13 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MANUFACTURING FACILITY IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WILLI"S & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VIII-14 PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area ............................................................................................ 6.0 Acres Land Use Type Area Percent Industrial 4.5 acres 75% Open Space 0.8 acres 13% Public Streets 0.7 acres 12% 6.0 acres 100% ECONOMIC INFORMATION Acquisition Cost ........................................................................................... $346,000. Less Area to Public Space .............................................................................. 86,000. $260,000. SITE IMPROVEMENT COSTS Demolish Existing Buildings .......................................................................... 68,000. Earthwork .......................................................................................................... 7,000. Relocated Street .............................................................................................. 45,000. Relocated Sewers, Water ................................................................................ 48,000. Green Belt (rip-rap wall) ................................................................................ 32,000. CONSTRUCTION COSTS Manufacturing Plant ................................................................................ $1,330,000. Offices ............................................................................................................ 318,000. Service Facilities ........................................................................................... 422,000. Parking and Walks ........................................................................................ 192,000. Landscaping, Fencing ................................................................................... 150,000. Total Estimated Cost ................................................................................ $2,872,000. Estimated Building Cost per square foot ........................................................ $40.99 Estimated Amenities Cost per square foot of building .................................. $ 7.41 Estimated Public Service Cost per square foot of building ........................... $ 4.79 Estimated Land Cost per square foot of building .......................................... $ 5.15 VIII-15 5w awpILL 4w CA 2DD G- a. lou LUDMTON o.w, ChKW T@Wo@ CWVA F,. wwhwq@ 0. K-- Qtv SL LM. I 1 1-77 PRO SED or Ludington's northcentral. location m ake s midwest markets easily assessible by truck. r c rot bit 0*10 TV AaLo TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT IVITT-16 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area, Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed light-duty manufacturing site. This infor- mation is intended as a resource for investors seeking an attractive and profitable manufacturing site in Michigan's western Lower Pennisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 population of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowmobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment for both residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor."The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 6 acres,-located along the northeast shore .&.INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS Construction of a new manufacturing facility could lead the investor to *a tax saving equivalent INCENTIVES: to 50% of the ad valorem property tax for 12 years. Property, such as land improvements, b 'ul ings and structures, whether leased or owned, personal property, including machinery, equip- ment, furniture and fixtures would be eligible. Land and inventories are excluded. This incen- tive is provided by Public Act 198 of 1974. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhauled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludington and Pere Marquette Township the -1981 tax rate per $1,000 of equalized valuation is divided as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: City ....................................................... 20.000 Township ................................................ 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County ............................................ ....... 4.876 County ...................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Twp. Hall Mason County Bldg. Municipal Bldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH:(616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS. YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VIII-17 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MARINE PETROLEUM BULK TERMINAL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR TH]E CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WILLIAMS & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VT T T -1,q PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area .......................................................................................... 13.8 Acres Land Use Type Area Percent Bulk Storage 4.5 acres 32% Office and Facilities 1.9 acres 14% Public Street 0.9 acres 6% GreenBelt 6.5 acres 48% 13.8 acres 100% ECONOMIC INFORMATION Acquisition Cost (approximate) ................................................................. $300,000. SITE IMPROVEMENT COSTS New Street ....................................................................................................... 90,000. Sewer and Water ............................................................................................. 48,000. Dock Face Improvements ............................................................................... 60,000. CONSTRUCTION COSTS Office ............................................................................................................. $78,000. Service Building .............................................................................................. 48,000. Parking and Loading Area .............................................................................. 89,000. Overhead Truck Loading Equipment ............................................................ 40,000. Tanks and Appurtenances ......................................................................... 2,525,000. Tank Foundations ......................................................................................... 875,000. Earthwork (dikes) ............................................................................................ 42,000. Piping and Pumps ......................................................................................... 104,000. Metering and Miscellaneous Equipment ....................................................... 30,000. Fencing ............................................................................................................ 38,000. Foam Extinguishing System ........................................................................... 40,000. Total Estimated Cost ................................................................................ $4,407,000. ANNUAL OPERATING COST ESTIMATE Administration ................................................................................................ 50,000. Labor ................................................................................................................ 60,000. Retirement of Development Costs (20 years at 13 %) ................................ 627,000. Operating Expenses (supplies and equipment) ............................................ 20,000. Utilities ............................................................................................................ 25,000. Annual Estimated Operating Costs ............................................................ $782,000. Operating costs per gallon for 18,700,000 gallons annually ............................................................................ $0.042 VIII-19 500 4w CA D1k1th '00 vo FT chx"o MISM Ft. v4v I . - matowpot. M"Oursh PRO SED K@ City St. L-b NURINE PEMOLELTM BULK TERhMAL wr Ludington's northcentral IfJication mak midwest markets easily assessible. by truck. 601AFL4x 9151LT ST, 64WOLOW 694:r NOW cueK_ A r r I OFfICS AW M1 MUIL."Llco 6*411W01`4 t= AA 1=4 Ull Wil I fill Ill Hu 11111411111 Ill I Ill 11111111dii (1h (Ml WINITAINAMANT PIKISS T01111101111TWITIM 115 %41aw tz4g CZF Ill IQ M111111111111111 1111 111111111111111.114 1-141111.1-11111 if lull fill Jill ill 0 Jill I 11jifilwinutimll Mil [I Milit" Igiflillijillujill III I Ill I I 111111M."I SFV W*rov. Par-TH 0 9M, 1@+rr wer. F-Azo I X 9 oil rlWP- MAJR4USTM L.Avro P 1 110 4d0,f0W4Z1r MM",K TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT VFIII-20 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area, Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed bulk marine terminal location. This in- formation is intended as a resource for investors seeking a profitable marine petroleum terminal site in Michigan's western Lower Permisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 population of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowniobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment fbrboth residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor. The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 13.8 acres, located along the northeast shore &INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS The construction of new commercial facilities may lead the investor to a 50% exemption from INCENTIVES: the ad valorem property tax for 12 years, while restoration of obsolete facilities may lead to a 100% exemption from ad valorem property taxes on the value of the improvements for 12 years. These incentives are provided forby Public Act 255 of 1978. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhaiiled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludington and Pere Marquette Township the 1981 tax rate per $1,000 of equalized valuation is divided as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: City ....................................................... 20.000 Township ................................................ 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County .................................................... 4.876 County ..................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Twp. Hall Mason County Bldg. MunicipalBldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH: (616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS. YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VIII-21 COMMODITY DATA Results of Bulk Shipping Terminal Contacts for Bulk Petroleum Terminal Summary A number of contacts were made with local distributors (jobbers), regional distributors, oil company representatives, professional organizations, and bulk users of petroleum products. Most contacts reported that a marine petroleum terminal would typically be developed by a major distributor or an oil company, and thus public ownership would not be likely (although land could be leased). Most contacts reported that a thorough and detailed feasibility study would be necessary prior to consideration of this type of investment. The petroleum distribution business is highly competitive; thus, rates, transportation costs, terminal fees, and profits were not revealed. VIII-22 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PHASE I OPERATION MARINE DRY BULK TERMINAL IN THE CITY OF LUDINdTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR TEE CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WulLUMS & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VTTT-23 PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area ............................................................................................ 2.5 Acres Land Use Type Area Percent Railroad 0.3 acres 12% Open Stockpile 0.6 acres 24% Open Space 1.6 acres 64% 2.5 acres 100% ECONOMIC INFORMATION Dock Improvements Replace One Mooring Bollard ........................................................................ $1,000. Repair 25 Feet of Steel Sheetpile cap ................................................................. 500. Upgrade Existing Fender ..................................................................................... 500. $2,000. ANNUAL OPERATING COST ESTIMATE Administration Costs ........................................................................................ * 2,000. Maintenence and Upkeep of Dock Face (labor and materials) ...................... 1,000. Retirement of Dock Improvement Costs (10 years at 13 %) .............................. 370. Property Rental Costs from C&O Railaroad (assessed at $0.50/ton for an estimated 12,000 tons annually) ...................... 6,000. Annual Estimated Operating Costs ................................................................ $9,370. Operating costs per ton for 12,000 tons annually ........................................... $0.78 VIII-24 500 Duiuth CA 300 a.- s. ve LUID)MG Mik- , L-" 3 Chw pt Ab, p4vto,"" 5"Wi.1d wmhwq- 0. C. ROPOSED v nRv waux K-- City St. L@. X Ludington's northcentral location makes\ midwest markets easily assessible' by truck. ------------- U,5 10 1t1rvWr-4r--WAW 'ro CAKFO"'Y wMa I I.-tmistrrams 4aw 140AVIN 1 10 =2 T01411 J Alt" 16 FT. WAIWK POP114 OA9454- &VOt fW1F AT OMOMTIPIL-0 MCK a WiLdPAIVINCO f'roFJ-= MAKqUFTT5 "KM 447 F;T. -rO 4A9p%#M-e VWK TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT VT T T -25 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area, Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed dry bulk materials terminal. This infor- mation is intended as a resource for investors seeking a profitable marine terminal site in Michi- gan's western Lower Pennisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 population of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowinobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment for both residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor. The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 2.5 acres, located along the northeast shore & INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS The construction of new commercial facilities may lead the investor to a 50% exemption from INCENTIVES: the ad valorem property tax for 12 years, while restoration of obsolete facilities may lead to a 100% exemption from ad valorem property taxes on the value of the improvements for 12 years. These incentives are provided for by Public Act 2 55 of 1978. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhauled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludington and Pere Marquette Township the 1981 tax rate per $1,000 of equalized valuation is divided as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: City ....................................................... 20.000 Township ................................................ 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County .................................................... 4.876 County ..................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Tvrp. Hall Mason County Bldg. Municipal Bldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH: (616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS. YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VIII-26 A PROSPECTUS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT -OF A PHASE II OPERATION MARINE DRY BULK TERMINAL IN THE CITY OF LUDINGTON, MICHIGAN PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF LUDINGTON AND THE LUDINGTON HARBOR COMMISSION ALL INQUIRIES HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE WILLIAMS & WORKS, INC. September, 1982 VIII-27 PROJECT DATA LAND USE INFORMATION Site Area .......................................................................................... 13.8 Acres Land Use Type Area Percent Public Streets 1.0 acres 7% Open Storage and Facilities 3.8 acres 28% Green Belt 2.3 acres 16% Open Space 6.7 acres 49% 13.8 acres 100% ECONOMIC INFORMATION Acquisition Cost .......................................................................................... $300,000. SITE IMPROVEMENT COSTS New Street ....................................................................................................... 70,000. Sewer and Water ............................................................................................. 14,000. Dock Face Improvements ............................................................................... 60,000. CONSTRUCTION COSTS Office ........................................................................................................... $104,000. Garage ............................................................................................................ 108,000. Parking Lot and Driveways ............................................................................ 91,000. Truck Scales .................................................................................................... 31,000. Landscaping .................................................................................................... 50,000. Stockpile Covering and Drainage ................................................................... 50,000. Total Site Improvement and Construction Costs ...................................... $578,000. ANNUAL OPERATING COST ESTIMATE Administration ................................................................................................ 50,000. Labor ................................................................................................................. 40,000 Retirement of Site Improvement and Construciton Costs (20 years at 13 %) ............................................................................................ 82,000. Property Rental Costs from C&O Railroad assessed at $0.50/ton for an estimated 64,000 tons annually .......................................... 32,000. Operating Expenses (equipment, utilities and supplies) ............................. 15,000. Annual Estimated Operating Costs ............................................................. $219,000. Operating costs per ton for 64,000 tons annually ........................................... $3.42 VIII-28 3,0 '00 S if- L-1 0. Ch"'W Twwa 0-d"." Ft. VSV 11 indwwooti, 0: C. A Vnj C.@ Kwom Pty St. L- PROPOSED MARINE DRY BULK TERMINAL Ludington's northcentral location makes midwest markets easily assessible by truck. 7 1 1 7 P&-- V__Mwza T-16 M-7VAT01%. PP-PTH AM FWe-0 p-r -ro y @-JW-P- MA9j?U191T* L-AKS TYPICAL SITE LAYOUT @T T @T-29 PROSPECTUS This prospectus provides background information on the Ludington, Michigan area, Pere OBJECTIVES: Marquette Lake and harbor facilities, and the proposed dry bulk materials terminal. This infor- mation is intended as a resource for investors seeking a profitable marine terminal site in Michi- gan's western Lower Pennisula. GENERAL The community of Ludington, with a 1980 population of 8937, is the commercial center of BACKGROUND: Mason County. Manufacturing currently provides over 60 percent of the area's employment. Located on the eastern shores of Lake Michigan, Ludington is also a major recreational hub of the region. Sport fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, snow skiing, and snowmobiling are among the popular outdoor activities that provide year-round enjoyment for both residents and tourists. New home construction costs in the Ludington area generally start at $60,000, while older homes are also available in favorable locations to fit various lifestyles. The West Shore Community College offers residents many special interest courses, training programs, workshops and lec- tures. . I HARBOR Ludingtion has a natural deep water year-round harbor which serves a variety of commercial FACILITIES: and recreational needs. Presently, approximately two million short tons annually are shipped through the harbor. The recently completed $5 million channel improvement project, under the guidance of the Army Corps of Engineers, has improved navigation in the port. SITE DESCRIPTION The land area available at the site is approximately 13.8 acres, located along the northeast shore &INFORMATION: of Pere Marquette Lake. The information inside is provided for the typical site layout shown. BUSINESS The construction of new commercial facilities may lead the investor to a 50% exemption from INCENTIVES: the ad valorem property tax for 12 years, while restoration of obsolete facilities may lead to a 100% exemption from ad valorem property taxes on the value of the improvements for 12 years. These incentives are provided forbyPublic Act 255 of 1978. STATE BUSINESS Michigan overhauled its business tax structure in 1976, replacing seven separate taxes with one TAXES: tax (known as the Single Business Tax). Businesses locating in Michigan, in effect, pay only 2.35% in corporate income tax in place of the previous 7.8%. New business investment is re- garded under Michigan's tax laws with an immediate 100% write-off for all new personal prop- erty capital investments. Michigan is one of only sixteen states that do not levy a tax on inven- tories. TAX RATE: In Ludington and Pere Marquette Township the 1981 tax rate' per $1,000 of equalized valuation is divided as follows: Ludington: Pere Marquette Township: city ....................................................... 20.000 Township ................................................ 1.000 School ................................................... 19.300 School .................................................... 19.300 County .................................................... 4.876 County ..................................................... 4.876 Special Voted ......................................... 3.799 Special Voted .......................................... 3.799 INFORMATION ,SERVICES: For any of your informational services, please contact by phone or outline your needs and mail to one of the following: City Manager Township Supervisor Development Coordinator City of Ludington Pere Marquette Twp. Hall Mason County Bldg. Municipal Bldg. 1671 S. Pere Marquette Rd. Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, MI 49431 Ludington, M! 49431 PH: (616)845-5407 PH: (616)845-6231 PH: (616)845-1277 ALL INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED AT NO COST TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS. YOUR INQUIRY WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLETE PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENCE. VTTT-in COMMODITY DATA Results of Bulk Shipping Terminal Contacts for Dry Bulk Terminal Background Information Sand is not a commodity which could feasibly be brought into a bulk terminal at Ludington, since it is a net exporter of sand. Most contacts indicated they owned or were very near by their sand and gravel source. Among the dry bulk commodities which might be feasibly brought into the port are: 1. Cement - Would not currently be feasible since the economy and construc- tion volume are so depressed. However, cement is currently obtained from Muskegon by truck and might feasibly be shipped to Ludington if the demand increased (economy improved or a large construction project is begun). 2. Seal Coat Chips - Would be feasible to ship in since use is fairly con- stant by County Road Commissions, although it is down somewhat during slow. economy. 3. Road Salt - Same as Seal Coat Chips. 4. Crushed Limestone - Is currently being brought into Ludington to two locations - Carey Docks and C&O slip 1-1/2 (Laman Asphalt). 5. Agricultural Lime - Used as a fertilizer but mainly supplied by sand and gravel truckers. Might feasibly be shipped into Ludington. Results of Contacts: Total Number of Contacts = 15 Summary A dry bulk terminal should be feasible, particularly since the port is cur- rently being used to bring in these items. Again, flexibility is important, as with fertilizers, to insure that, as shipping needs vary, the terminal will be able to receive a variety of commodities. VIII-31 Appendix A U idington Commodity Flow Survey ENGINEERS/PLANNERS/ARCHITECTS/SURVEYORS/GEOLOGISTS/CHEMISTS 611 CASCADE W. PKWY., S.E. P.O. BOX 6510, GRAND RAPIDS. MI 49506 PH:(616)942-9500 WILLIAMS & WORKS T.O. WILLIAMS, 1961-1941 F.D. WORKS, 1880-1931 W.B. WILLIAMS. l895-1974 March 8. 1982 Dear Sir: The City of Ludington,, in cooperation with Pere Marquette Township, Mason County, and the Michigan Coastal Management Program, is studying the feasibility of ex- panded port utilization. If port expansion is warranted, a general development and management plan will be developed. Williams & Works has been retained to assist in this project. Enclosed is a commodity flow survey which we would appreciate your taking a few minutes to fill out. A realistic understanding of your plans and needs is fundamental to the success of this study and the improvement of the Port of Ludington. Please return the completed survey,, to my attention, by March 19, 1982. Thank you for your cooperation. Yours truly, WILLIAMS & WORKS David W. Landmann Project Manager Copy: Phyllis Ambrose, City of Ludington Gordon Anderson, MDNR Coastal Zone Unit /sv LUDINGTON COMMODITY FLOW SURVEY INSTRUCTIONS: Complete part I once for your company as a whole. Complete part II for each different commodity (as distinguished by four-digit Standard Industrial Code) shipped or received. Leave blank any question which does not apply to your situation. Additional comments or questions are encouraged and may be directed to David Landmann, Williams & Works, Inc. -- 616/942-9600. PART I A. GENERAL INFORMATION FIRM ADDRESS CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE NUMBER Please describe the general nature of your firm's business Standard industrial Code (SIC), if known Do you wish the responses to this survey to remain anonymous? YES- NO_ B. PORT SELECTION Which port do you use? Ludington Other Who decides on-the transportation mode? Local Plant Manager Corporate Headquarters Shipping Agent Other T-1 Who determines the shipping route or port of entry/exit? Local Plant Manager Corporate Headquarters Shipping Agent Other In choosing a shipping route or port of entry/exit, what information sources do you use? Your Port Experience Personal Port Visit Trade Books or Directories Recommendation of Agent or Shippers Port Advertising or Promotional Other Materials Why do you utilize the port(s) that you do? Please rank the considerations below in priority order (1-highest, 2, 3, etc.). ignore those that are not important in your selection decision. a) Facilities b) Staff Services c) Security d) Consolidation Services e) Port Free Time Policies f) Lack of Port Congestion g) Port Charges h) Inland Freight Rates i) Highway Linkages j) Railroad Linkages k) Pipeline Linkages 1) Total Combined Costs m) Customs Service n) Sailing Schedule o) Shipping Lines P) Port Reputation q) Tradition r) Tax Advantages s) Last Port of Call t) Proximity to Plant/Raw Mat'ls.- u) Other 1-2 C. LUDINGTON'S FACILITIES What deficiencies exist at the Port of Ludington? Harbor Entrance Channel Width/Configuration Channel Depth Turning Basin General Terminal Facilities Specialized Terminal Facilities Administrative Organization Land Side Expansion Area Facilities State of Repair Inter-Modal Connections Security Port Reputation Rate Structure Other How many days have you lost to weather? What improvements could be made at the Port of Ludington which would benefit/ increase your usage? How much would these improvements increase your tonnage shipped? 1-3 PART II A. IMPORTS/EXPORTS Commodity (as imported) sic Commodity (as exported) sic If this commodity is only exported, proceed to Part IIC. B. IMPORTS Year Tonnage Origination 1979 1980 1981 1982 (projected) 1985 (projected) 1990 .(projected) What is the basis of these projections? What changes in technology, regulations, shipping rates, or the like would cause these projections to: Increase? Decrease? How confident are you in these projections? % confident. TT-1 Are these imports... (please check one) shipped through Michigan? distributed to Michigan's lower peninsula remanufactured locally (water Other side)? Is this commodity... (please check one) a finished product? an intermediate product? a raw material? How is (will be) this material rece ived? % Currently % Near Future bulk neo-bulk container break bulk In what form is this commodity received? gaseous liquid solid C. EXPORTS Year Tonnage Destination 1979 1980 1981 1982 (projected) 1985 (projected) 1990 (projected) What is the basis of these projections? 11-2 What changes in technology, regulations, shipping rates, or the like would cause these projections to: Increase? Decrease? How confident are you in these projections? % confident. Do these exports... (please check one) originate from outside Michigan? originate from Michigan's lower peninsula originate locally (water side)? other Is this commodity... (please check one) ) a finished product? ( ) an intermediate product? a raw material? How is (will be) this material shipped? bulk % Currently % Near Future neo-bulk container break bulk In what form is this commodity shipped? gaseous liquid solid 11-3 LUDINGTON COMMODITY FLOW SURVEY TABULATION PART I What port do you use? NUMBER Ludington 2 None 2 Other: Escanaba 1 U.S. Atlantic & Gulf Ports 1 Alpena 1 Grand Haven 1 Milwaukee 2 Montreal I Charlevoix-St. James I Who decides on the transportation mode? NUMBER Local Plant Manager 1 Shipping Agent Corporation Headquarters 6 Other: Location of Buyer I Traffic Department; Headquarters, Pittsburgh 1 Michigan Department of Management & Budget I Customers 2 Sales I General Manager 1 Who determines shipping route or port or entry/ exit ? NUMBER Local Plant Manager 1 Shipping Agent - Corporation Headquarters 6 Other: Location of Buyer I Traffic Department; Headquarters, Pittsburgh I Michigan Department of Management & Budget I Customers Vessel Carrier 1 Sales I In choosing a shipping route or port of entry/exit, what information sources do you use? NUMBER Your Port Experience 5 Trade Books/Directories 3 Port Advertising I Personal Port Visit 3 Recommendation of Agent/ Shippers 3 Other: Location of Buyer I Tarriffs I Vessel Carrier & Customer 1 Carriers I Rate Factors I Why do you utilize the ports that you do? lst 2nd 3rd 4th or Lower a) Facilities 1 2 1 1 b) Staff Services 1 c) Security 1 d) Consolidation of Services 1 1 1 e) Port Free Time Policies 1 1 f) Lack of Congestion 1 2 g) Port Charges 1 1 h) Inland Freight Rates 2 3 1 2 i) Highway Linkages 1 1 1 1 j) Railroad Linkages 2 1 2 k) Pipeline Linkages 1 1) Total Combined Costs 8 2 m) Customs Services 1 1 n) Sailing Schedules I I 1 1 o) Shipping Lines 2 2 2 P) Port Reputation 1 1 q) Tradition 2 r) Tax Advantages I s) Last Port of Call 1 t) Proximity to Plant/ Materials 1 1 3 u) Other: Custom Docks I Adequate Service I Location I What deficiencies exist at the Port of Ludington? NUMBER Harbor Entrance Channel Width/Configuration I Channel Depth 1 Turning Basin General Terminal Facilities Special Terminal Facilities Administrative Organization Land Size Expansion Area Facilities State of Repair Inter-Modal Connections Security Port Reputation Rate Structure Other: Demand How many days have you lost to weather? NONE OR 1 2 - 3 4 5 6 OR MORE 2 What improvements could be made at the Port of Ludington which would benefit/increase your usage? Various comments made regarding the general economy and shipping rates. How much would these improvements increase your tonnage shipped? Various comments made regarding the general economy and shipping rates. PART I I A. IMPORTS/EXPORTS NUMBER Commodity As Imported Bulk Ice Control Salt 1 Woodpulp, Newsprint I Limestone Components NUMBER Commodity As Exported Iron Ore Pellets Dead Burned Magnesite Sand Buckwheat, Peas, Birdseed Appliances I Frozen Fruit B. IMPORTS TONNAGE ORIGINS U.S. CANADA/ Year: 1979 MID WEST MEXICO 0 - 10,000 +10,000 - 20,000 +20,000 - 30,000 +30,000 - 40,000 +40,000 - 50,000 +50,000 - 60,000 +60,000 - 75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1980 0 - 10,000 +10,000 - 20,000 +20,000 - 30,000 +30,000 - 40,000 +40,000 - 50,000 +50,000 - 60,000 +60,000 - 75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1981 0 - 10,000 +10,000 - 20,000 +20,000 - 30,000 +30,000 - 40,000 +40,000 - 50,000 +50,000 - 60,000 +60,000 - 75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1982 0 - 10,000 +1-0,000 - 20,000 re +20 000 - 30,000 +30:000 - 40,000 +40,000 - 50,000 +50,000 - 60,000 +60,000 - 75,000 +75,000 - TONNAGE ORIGINS U.S CANADA/ Year: 1985 MID WEST MEXICO 0 - 10,000 +10,000 - 20,000 +20,000 - 30,000 +30,000 - 40,000 +40,000 - 50,000 +50,000 - 60,000 +60,000 - 75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1990 0 - 10,000 +10,000 - 20,000 +20,000 - 30,000 +30,000 - 40,000 +40,000 - 50,000 +50,000 - 60,000 +60,000 - 75,000 +75,000 - Are these imports . . . NUMBER shipped through Michigan? distributed to Michigan's lower Peninsula? remanufactured at waterside? 1 utilized locally? Is this commodity . . . NUMBER a finished product? an intermediate product? a raw material? 2 How is/will be this material be received? CURRENTLY. 0 - 25% 26 - 50% 51 75% 76 - 100% Bulk 2 Neo-Bulk Container Break Bulk FUTURE 0 - 25% 26 - 50% 51 75% 76 - 100% Bulk 2 Neo-Bulk Container Break Bulk In what form is this commodity received? NUMBER Gaseous Liquid Solid 3 C. EXPORTS TONNAGE DESTINATION U.S. EAST EUROPE/U.S.S.R. S. AMERICA Year: .1979 0 -10,000 +10,000 -20,000 +20,000 -30,000 1 +30,000 -40,000 +40,000 -50,000 +50,000 -60,000 +60,000 -75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1980 0 -10,000 +10,000 -20,000 +20,000 -30,000 +30,000 -40,000 +40,000 -50,000 +50,000 -60,000 +60,000 -75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1981 0 -10,000 +10,000 -20,000 +20,000 30,000 +30,000 40,000 t40,OOO 50,000 +50,000 60,000 +60,000 75,000 +75,000 Year: 1982 0 -10,000 +10,000 -20,000 +20,000 -30,000 +30,000 -40,000 +40,000 -50,000 +50,000 -60,000 +60,000 -75,000 +75,000 - TONNAGE DESTINATION U.S. EAST EUROPE/U.S.S.R. S. AMERICA Year: 1985 0 -10,000 +10,000 -20,000 +20,000 -30,000 +30,000 -40,000 +40,000 -50,000 +50,000 -60,000 +60,000 -75,000 +75,000 - Year: 1990 0 -10,000 +10,000 -20,000 +20,000 -30,000 +30,000 -40,000 +40,000 -50,000 +50,000 -60,000 +60,000 -75,000 +75 000 - What is the basis of these projections? NUMBER Historic Use 1 Discussion With Shippers 1 What changes in techno,logy, regulations, shipping rates, or the like would cause these projections to:... NUMBER INCREASE.; In Paved Road Mileage 1 Rail-Water, Rail- Intermodal Rate Reductions I Steel Business Increase Construction More Competitive Rates 1 DECREASE: Regulation Prohibiting Sodium Chloride Steel Business Decrease I How confident are you in these projections? NUMBER 100% - 90% 1 89% - 80% 2 79% - 70% 69% - 60% 59% - 50% 49% or less What is the basis of these projections? NUMBER Economic Forecasts, Test Competition Estimates What changes in technology, regulations, shipping rates, or the like would cause these projections to: INCREASE: NUMBER New Source of Foundry Sand I Better Port Facilities I DECREASE: How confident are you in these projections? NUMBER 100% - 90% 89% - 80% 79% - 70% 1 69% - 60% 59% - 50% 1 49% or less Are these exports NUMBER originated outside Michigan? 2 originated from Michigan's Upper Peninsula? originated locally (water 3 side)? NUMBER Other: lower Peninsula? 2 several states? Is this commodity . . NUMBER a finished product? 1 an intermediate product? 2 a raw material? 3 How is/will be this material be received? CURRENTLY 0 25% 26 - 50% 51 75% 76 - 100% Bulk 1 3 Neo-Bulk Container 1 2 Break Bulk 2 1 FUTURE 0 25% 26 - 50% 51 75% 76 - 100% Bulk Neo-Bulk Container Break Bulk In what form is this commodity reci eved? NUMBER Gaseous Liquid Solid 5 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 335 - A. Lindberg & Sons, Inc. 560 Mather Ave. Ishpeming, MI 49849 276 - Albert Meeusen A&C Carriers, Inc. 2909 E. Laketon Ave, Muskegon, MI 49442 1 - Brian D. Gibbon Abitibi Paper Co. Ltd P.O. Box 2990 Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada 2 - H.G.E. Portch Abitibi Paper Co. Ltd Toronto-Dominion Center Toronto, Ontario, Canada 3 - J.E. Wilbee Abitibi Paper Co. Ltd 408 University Avenue Toronto, Ontario, Canada 4 - M.H. Brown Agrico Chemical Co. P.O. Box 750 Saginaw, MI 48606 5 - D.W. Newbauer Agrico Chemical Co. P.O. Box 522, Saginaw Term. Carrollton, MI 48724 6 - Air Express International Agency 29300 Goddard Road Romulus, MI 48174 7 - Ralph J. Nero Airco Alloys & Carbide 3801 Highland Avenue Niagara Falls, NY 14305 8 - Benjamin Bigelow Albumina Supply Co. 82 Beaver Street New York, NY 10005 9 - Ronald W. Hawkins Alcoa Company of America Alcoa Building Pittsburgh, PA 15219 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 2 10 - Warren Steckmert Alcoa Steamship Co. 17 Battery Place New York, NY 10004 11 - Kurt Konodi-Floch Alltransport Inc. 300 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 12 - Eric F. Tiegerman Alox Corporation 3943 Buffalo Avenue, Box 556 Niagara Falls, NY 14303 293 Alpena Aggregate, Inc. 7590 Weiss Road Alpena, MI 49707 294 Alpena County Road Commission 1400 N. Bagley Alpena, MI 49707 13 Altransco 4461 West Jefferson Detroit, MI 48209 14 - Niels H. Christensen Am-Can Transport Inc. P.O. Box 412 Westmont, IL 60559 15 Amerford International Corp. 27130 Trolley Industrial Taylor, MI 48180 295 American Aggregates Corporation Drawer 160 Greenville, OH 45331 16 - John P. Martell American Can Company American Lane Greenwich, CT 06830 17 - Ed Hora American Can Company P.O. Box 702 Neenah, WI 54956 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 3 18 - American Marine Supply 15 Ferris Street Highland Park, MI 48203 260 American Mexican Petroleum Corp. 123 N. Northwest Highway Park Ridge, IL 60068 19 - Leonard C. Kropp American Motors Cop. 14250 Plymouth Road Detroit, MI 48232 20 - American President Line 24800 Northwestern SU400B Southfield, MI 48075 21 - Louis E. Ervin American Steamship Co. Marine Tower Buffalo, NY 24203 22 - Alex Greten Amerlux Steel Products Co. 100 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 23 - Amerny Shipping Agency 1 World Trade Center, #2743 New York, NY 10048 261 - L. F. Schnake Amoco Oil Co./Fertilizer District 200 East Randolph Dr., MC 3303 Chicago, IL 60680 24 - John J. McDonough Anaconda Company 25 Broadway New York, NY 10004 25 Anchor Line/Chester, Blackburn 1 Word Trade -Center, #1067 New York, NY 10048 26 - Anderson Steamship Agency 23400 Michigan Avenue Dearborn, MI 48214 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 4 35 - I Anglo Dutch Shipping/World Shipping 13530 Michigan; Room 210 Dearborn, MI 48136 27 - Norman D. Hilger Ansul Company One Stanton Street Marinette, WI 54143 28 - I Anticost Shipping Co. 800 Dorchester Blvd. Montreal, Quebec, Canada 29 Arctic Line/Int'l Great Lakes Ship'g 4461 West Jefferson Detroit, MI 48209 333 - I Arenac County Road Commission 116 Bridge Street Omer, MI 48749 31 Argentine Line/Shipping Ltd 410 St. Nicholas Street Montreal, Quebec, Canda 32 - I Armada Line/Tolmar Int'l 20600 Eureka Road Taylor, MI 48180 30 Artic Steamship Line/March Ship'g Ltd 400 Craig Street West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 33 - William T. Pierce Associated Coat. Transport 90 West Street New York, NY 10006 34 - Associated Container Transport 410 St. Nicholas Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 36 - I Atlantic Coast Agencies 17 Battery Place North New York, NY 10004 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 5 37 - Atlantic Container Line 80 Pine Street New York, NY 10005 38 - Atlantic Container Line 465 St. Johns Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 39 Atlantic Line & Nav/Azure Agencies PO Box 127 Detroit, MI 48218 262 - C. P. Oonk Atlantic Richfield Co./Michigan-West 1134 Post Ave. Hollandy Michigan 49423 40 Atlantica Line/Shipping Limited 410 St, Nicholas Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 41 Atlanttrafik Express/March Ship'g Ltd 400 Craig Street West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 42 - Azure Agencies, Inc. P.O. Box 127 Detroit, MI 48218 296 - B&K Sand & Gravel Route #1 Wallace, MI 49893 43 B&K Shipping Agency 465 St. Johns Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 44 - Baltic Steamship/March Shipping Ltd 400 Craig Street West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 45 - Harry K. Barr Barr Shipping Company 44 Beaver Street New York, NY 10004 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 6 46 - Edward Ladd Beaver Island Boat Co. Charlevoix, MI 49720 299 - Bedrock Aggregates 4225 W. Columbia Road Mason, MI 48842 300 - Beeman Trucking & Bulldozing Co. Route #1 Grawn, MI 49637 47 - Freuland Belgian Line Inc. 5 World Trade Center New York, NY 10048 48 - Shadi L. Katyal Bemis Company Inc. 800 Northstar Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 49 - Michael B. Tillander Bendix Corporation Bendix Center Southfield, MI 48076 50 - Richard S. Bennett Bennett, R.S. & Co. 6869 W. Grand River Avenue Lansing, MI 48901 301 Bichler Gravel & Concrete Co. Box 263 Escanaba, MI 49829 51 - Louis F. Gallina Black & Geddes, Inc. 11 Broadway New York, NY 10004 52 400 Craig Street West Black Sea Canada/March Ship'g Ltd Montreal, Quebec, Canada 53 - Ms. Margaret Buchmann Blue Line Coal Co. 975 Hansen Road Green Bay, WI 54304 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 7 54 - Reford Blue Star Line/Robt Reford Co, Inc. 221 St. Sacrement Street Montral, Quebec, Canada 302 - Blumke Excavating Co., Inc. Box 126A Alanson, MI 49706 55 - James A. Lehnen BMV Manufacturing Co. Ltd Whalley St; PO Box 130 Milverton, Ontario, Canada 56 - James J. Wagner Boland & Cornelius Marine Trust Bldg Buffalo, NY 14203 263 - Leo V. Dalton Boron Oil Company 1872 Guild Hall Building Cleveland, Ohio 44115 57 Braemar Shipping Ltd 1 Westmount Square Montreal, Quebec, Canada 58 - Don Brent Brent Manufacturing, W.D., Ltd Elmbank Road Malton, Ontario, Canada 59 - Emlen G. Hare Breton Agencies Ltd PO Box 2290 Halifax, Nova Scocia,, Canada 304 - Brewers City Dock, Inc. 24 Pine Avenue Holland, MI 49423 6o - British Steel Corp./Kerr Steamship 1420 Parklane Towers East Dearborn, MI 48126 307 - Brownell Sand & Gravel Co. 14020 Morley Road Manitou Beach, MI 49253 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 8 61 - F.D. Fountain Budd Company Corporate Office Troy, MI 48084 62 - Joseph S. Baranoski Budde & Westermann 350 Broadway New York, NY 10013 340 - Budzen Cement Products, Inc. Route #1 Paw Paw, MI 49079 63 - Ron Bublick Bultema Marine Transportation 559 E. Western Ave, Box 728 Muskegon, MI 49443 65 Canada Orient Line 637 Craig Street West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 66 Canada Pacific Steamship Place DU Canada Montreal, Quebec, Canada 67 - F.A. Bennett Canada Steamship Line 7 Port Street East Port Credit, Ontario, Canada 68 Canada Steamship Line 759 Victoria Square Montreal, Quebec, Canada 69 - I Canfreight Containers 300 St. Sacrement Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 70 - B.R. Carney Carborundum Int Sales PO Box 337 Niagara Falls, NY 14302 71 - Bruce Weinardt Cargill Maumee, OH LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY 14AILING LIST 9 72 - Carson M. Simon & Co. 209-211 Chestnut St, Philadelphia, PA 19106 308 - Cash & Carry Gravel Co. P. 0. Box 1105A Holland, MI 49423 309 - Caspian Construction Co. 100 W, Caspian Caspian, MI 49115 73 - Cast North America Ltd East Tower, #521 Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 74 Cast North America Ltd PO Box 1954 A Detroit, MI 48232 75 - Cast Ship Services/Hasserodt Marine 28430 Swan Island Dr. Grosse Ile, MI 48138 64 - Jim Mueller CCI Forest Product Iron Mountain, MI 49801 76 - David LeBoeuf Cedar River Lumber Co PO Box 151 Powers, MI 49874 77 - William Kreckman Champion International 2250 Wabash Avenue St. Paul, MN 55114 310 - Champion, Inc. 105 E. "A" Street, P. 0. Box 490 Iron Mountain, MI 49801 311 - Cheboygan Cement Products, Inc. 702 Lafayette Avenue Cheboygan, MI 49721 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 10 78 - I Cherry Central Co-op 415 Munson Avenue Traverse City, MI 48684 79 Christensen Canada Afr Line 465 St. Johns St. Montreal, Quebec, Canada 80 - Donn B. Whitmer Chrysler Corporation PO Box 1976 Detroit, MI 482 88 264 - Charles L. Dunlap Clark Oil & Refining Corp. 8530 W. National Ave. Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53227 81 - D.J. McKay Clarke Transport Canada 1155 Dorchester Blvd West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 82 - Don Ryan Cleveland Cliffs Iron Empire Mine Ishpeming, MI 290 - "I Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. 504 Spruce St. Ishpeming, MI 49849 312 - Click Sand & Gravel P. 0. Box 273 Port Huron, MI 48079 278 - a Coastal Tank Lines, Inc. 215 E. Waterloo Road Akron, OH 44319 313 - Coit Avenue Gravel Company, Inc. 4772 Coit Avenue, N.E. Grand Rapids, MI 49505 314 - I Concrete Services, Inc. W. Front Street Traverse City, MI 49684 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 84 Constallation Navigation 233 Broadway New York, NY 10007 83 - Nelson VanLeeuwen Construction Aggregates Corp. PO Box 342 Grand Haven, MI 49417 315 '- Construction Aggregates Corp. P. 0. Box 68 Ferrsburg, MI 49409 316 - Contractors Gravel Co. Box 83 Sparta, MI 49345 85 - James V. Guthrie Cottman Company 300 Water Street Baltimore, MD 21203 86 - Coughlin, F.X. Co. 28451 Wick Road Romulus, MI 48174 87 - Cymeon Shipping Co. 25 Broadway, #514 New York, NY 10004 282 - D. M. Mitchell D. M. Mitchell Transport Co. 3501 Wyoming Avenue Dearborn, MI 48120 88 - Don Kirt D&B Furniture Outlet 1300 38th Avenue Menominee, MI 89 Dafra Line/Stevenson-Kerr Corp 29 Broadway New York, NY 10006 90 - Joseph Grabowski Del-Mar Inc. 1681 Columbus Road Cleveland, OH 44113 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 12 91 Delta Steamship Lines 1 World Trade Center New York, NY 10048 92 - H. George Miller Diamond Crystal Salt St. Clair, MI 48079 93 - T.J. Cloghesy Domtar Newsprint Sale 940 Sun Life Building Montreal, Quebec, Canada 305 - Don Britton, Inc. 1480 Westwood Road Marquette, MI 49855 95 - J.P. Dubreuil Dubreuil Borthers Ltd Dubreuilville, Ontario Canada 94 - Marshall Bonier Dubreuil Brothers Ltd 530 Cathguard Street Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario 318 Dunbar Sand & Gravel P. 0. Box 246 Cadillac, MI 49601 96 - William A. Dempsey Dundee Cement Co. Dundee, MI 48131 317 Earl Dubey & Sons Route #3 Alpena, MI 49707 97 - William Austin East Jordan Iron Works East Jordan, MI 49727 98 - Joseph P. O'Donn 11 Eastman Kodak Company Lake Avenue Rochester, NY 14650 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 13 99 - James E. Bowles Emerson Electric Co. 1821 13th Street Menominee, MI 49858 100 - Werner E. Scholtz Ernst Russ-North America One North LaSalle St Chicago, IL 60602 101 - Eurolakes Tanker Line/Hasserodt Mar 28430 Swan Island Drive Grosse Ile, MI 48138 102 - Eurolakes Tanker Line/Hurum Ship'g 300 St. Sacrement Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 163 Express Forwarding Co. 28420 Highland Road Romulus, MI 48174 104 - Ms. Melinda Otto Exxon Minerals Co. 300 South Lake Avenue Crandon, WI 105 - Robert Russell Exxon Minerals Co. 655 Washington; PO Box 813 Rhinelander, WI 54501 106 - Federal Comm/Navig Ltd- Stock Exchnge Twr/Victoria Sq Montreal, Quebec, Canada 107 - James E. Roberts Federal Lime & Stone Huron Lime Plant Huron, OH 44839 108 - Finnlines/Boise-Griffin SS Co 1 World Trade Center, 38th Flr New York, NY 10048 319 Fischer Gravel Co. 2604 S.-Snyder Road Wellston, MI 49689 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 14 109 - Richard C. Hanel Footner & Company Inc 33 Rector Street - New York, MY 10006 110 - Allen A. Moody Ford Motor Company The American Road Dearborn, MI 48121 111 - Richard Haupt Ford Motor Company One Parklane Blvd, JJE200 Dearborn, MI 48126 11@ - Arnold L. Sabin Foreston Coal Co.. Inc 353 Fifth Ave New York, NY 10016 320 - Fox Valley Construction Co. Box 1274, 103 W. College Ave. Appleton., WI 54911' 113 - Albert Gani Francosteel Corp. 757 Third Ave New York, NY 10017 114 - Richard J. Sherry Freight Traffic Service 12878 Farmington Road Livonial MI 48 150 115 - French Paper Company Box 729 Niles, MI 49120 116 - Furness, Withy & Co., Inc. 5 World Trade Center, #7411 New York, NY 10048 117 - Gdynia America Line 1 World Trade Center New York, NY 10048 306 Gene Brow Construction Co. 'P. 0. Box 5 Seney, MI 49883 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 15 118 - A. Pearson General Mills Inc. 9200 Wayzata Blvd Minneapolis, MN 55440 119 - Earl R. Wiseman General Motors Corp. 30007 VanDyke Avenue Warren, MI 48090 120 - Frank J. Weckerle General Motors Corp. Chevrolet Division Buffalo, NY 14240 121 - Donald J. Prause Georgia Pacific Corp. 308 Huron Street Grayling, MI 49738 122 - P.J. Sullivan Gerber Products Co. Fremont, MI 49412 123 - Maurice Pelletier Go-Pell Engineering 1035 Boul. Ste-Anne Beauport, Quebec, Canada 124 - C.T. Lee Goodyear Tire & Rubber 4315 Airwest, S.E. Kentwood, MI 49508 125 - D.F. Brain Goodyear Tire & Rubber 1144 East Market Street Akron, OH 44305 127 Grace Line/March Shipping Ltd 400 Craig Street West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 128 - Grand Colombiana/United Liners Agcy 465 St. Johns Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 129 - Dominick Chiappone Great Lakes Carbon Co Electrode Division Niagara Falls, NY LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 16 130 - Mario Signorelli Great Lakes Container 103 Erieside-Avenue Cleveland, OH 44114 131 - David A. Healy Great Lakes Motor Shipping PO Box 2886 Livonia, MI 48151 126 Great Lakes Transcaribbean/Tolmar 20600 Eureka Road Taylor, MI 48180, 135 - Robert W. Freske Great Plains Associated Ltd 123 Marmont Street; Box 358 Niles, MI 49120 132 - Robert Vanderheyden Green Bay Packaging PO Box 1107 Green Bay, WI 54305 133 - R.G. Olson Green Giant Company Le Sueur, MN 56058 321 Gronlund Gravel Co. Route #2, Box 28 Bear Lake, MI 49614 134 - Alan B. Williams GSW Limited Box 5273, Terminal A London, Ontario, Canada 265 - W. J. Berghoff Gulf Oil Company - U.S. P. 0. Box 29165 Columbus, Ohio 43229 136 - Sven Hubner Guthrie-Hubner, Inc. Board of Trade Bldg Duluth, MN 55802 137 - Lawrence O'Connor Hanna Mining Co. 100 Erieview Plaza Cleveland, OH 44114 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 17 291 Hanna Mining Co./Groveland Mine Star Route 1, Box 131 Iron Mountain, MI 49801 138 - Hapag/Lloyd/Russ/Montral Shipping 360 St. James Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 139 - Joe Karas Hardy Salt Company 1501 Main Street Manistee, MI 49660 140 Hasserodt Marine Agency 28430 Swan Island Drive Grosse Ile, MI 48138 141 Hellenic Line/World Shipping, Inc. .13530 Michigan; Room 210 Dearborn, MI 48136 297 - Henry Balkema Sand & Gravel 7758 Kilowatt Dr. Kalamazoo, MI 49001 142 - Larry Eckert Hercules (Cent. Reg) Oakbrook, IL 143 - Lee Allen Hickman, Williams & Co 100 Rannaissance Plaza #1875 Detroit, MI 144 - Richard W. Lambrecht Hickman, Williams & Co. 40 Port Avenue Monroe, MI 48161 322 Hodgkiss & Douma, Inc. P. 0. Box 311 Petoskey, MI 49770 145 - William J. Cochran Hooker Chemical Corp. Chemicals & Plastics Niagara Falls, NY 14302 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 18 146 Hurum Shipping/Trade Co. 300 St. Sacrement. Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 147 - I.M.C. Industries Group/Azure Agncy PO Box 127 Detroit, MI 48218 266 - J-. F. Swain Industrial Fuel & Asphalt Corp. 566 Market Avenue, S.W. Grand Rapids, 141 49502 148 - James P. Dwyer Industrial Minerals of Canada 7 King Street East Toronto, Ontarioa, Canada 149 - A.J., Jr. Cayia Inland Lime & Stone Co. Div. of Inland Steel Co. Gulliver, MI 49840 334 Inland Lime and Stone Co. Gulliver, MI 49840 292 - I Inland Steel Co./Sherwood Mine P. 0. Box 232 Iron River, MI 49935 151 - International Great Lakes Shipping Ill East Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60601 152 - P. Norman Ness International Milling-Co., Inc. Minneapolis, MN 150 - Paul B. St. Onge International Mineral & Chemical Co. Old Orchard Road Skokie, IL 60076 153 - William J. O'Meara International Multifoods 1300 Investors Bldg Minneapolis, MN 55402 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 19 157 - Thomas P. Monahan International Salt Co. 614 Superior Ave, #1414 Cleveland, OH 44113 154 - Frank J. McGinley International Standard Electric Co. 50 Church Street New York, NY 10007 156 - Harry J. Delay International Talc Co., Inc. 90 West Street New York, NY 10006 155 - Irving Lichter Interntional Steel Products 233 Broadway New York, NY 10007 158 Irish Shipping Ltd/Shipping Ltd 410 St. Nicholas Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 159 Japan Line Services 1 World Trade Center, #2867 New York, NY 10048 303 John Boerman Sand & Gravel Route 4 Allegan, MI 49010 160 - Kurt H. Waldm nn Jones & Laughlin Steel Co. 15 Court Street Buffalo, NY 14202 161 K Line 465 St. Johns Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 323 - K&V Gravel Company 403 Cherokee Drive Fremont, MI 49412 162 - James S., Jr. White Kendall Refining Company Bradford, PA 16701 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 20 163 Kerr Steamship Co., Inc. 1420 Parklane Towers East Dearborn, MI 48126 164 - Jon.D. Counts Kimberly-Clark Corp. Neenah, WI 54956 324 Koboski Coal Company, Inc. 114 Washington Street Petoskey, MI 49770 267 - Don Price Koch Fuels, Inc. P. 0. Box 128 Ferrysburg, MI 49409 268 - D. C. Horton Koch Fuels, Inc. P. 0. Box 307 Green Bay, WI 54305 165 - Edward McKendry Koppers Company, Inc. PO Box 129 Peshtigo, WI 54157 166 Kuehne & Nagle, Inc. 6170 Middlebelt Road Romulus, 141 48174 167 - Charles D Parmelee Lake Ontario Cement King Street Toronto, Ontario, Canada 325 - I Lake Sand and Gravel Co. P. 0. Box 829 Baldwin, MI 49304 168 - Robert Rotundo Lake-Link Transportation Corp. Ontonagon, MI 49953 269 - Edward Fleischman Lakeside Refining Co. Box 909 Kalamazoo, MI 49005 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 21 169 - Karl, P.E. Hauser Levy, Edward C. Company 8800 Dix Avenue Detroit, MI 48209 279 - Lewis C. Johnson Liquid Transport, Inc. 2000 E. Superior Street Alma, MI 48801 170 - Edward N. Locke Locke, Edward N. P.O. Box 488 Marquette, MI 49855 171 - Randy Anzalone Louisiana-Pacific Corp. Hayward, WI 172 - Leonard J. Russ Luria Brothers & Co., Inc. 4446 Main Street Buffalo, NY 14226 277 - Peter R. Gout M. L. Ashbury, Inc. 1100 S. Oakwood Detroit, MI 48217 173 - Maersk Line/Robt Reford Co., Inc. 221 St. Sacrement Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 174 - Manchester Liners/Mardell Shipping 333 West Fort; Suite 1806 Detroit, MI 48226 270 - W. R. Gravius Marathon Oil Co./Wholesale Sales 26400 Lahser Road Southfield, MI 48034 175 - Brian A.H. Cartwright Maritime Coastal Cont. 634 Barrington Street Tower Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada 280 McKinley Trucking Co. Carson City, MI 48811 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 22 176 - Gerald R. Gould Head Paper Publishing Paper Division Escanaba, MI 49829 177 - Medlakes Service/Montreal Shipping 360 St. James Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 178 - Donald Estebo Menominee Paper Co. P.O. Box 300 Menominee, MI 49858 179 - Mexican Line/Smith & Johnson 11 Broadway New York, NY 10004 180 - Charles Duffrin Michigan Handle & Block PO Box 8 Wallace, MI 49893 281 Michigan Transportation Co. 3601 Wyoming Ave. Dearborn, MI 48120 181 - James A. Calvey Mid-Continent Coal 5031 Turney Road Cleveland, OH 44125 182 - William L. Cook Minneapolis Grain Exchange 400 South 4th Street, #652 Minneapolis, MN 55415 271 - E. W. Thompson Mobil Oil Corp./Lansing Dist. Office P. 0. Box 1330 East Lansing, MI 48823 183 - Montreal Shipping Ltd 360 St. James Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 184 - William E. Brandt Morton Salt Company 110 North Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 23 185 - Alex C. Little Murray & Robinson, Ltd 11 King Street West, #1400 Toronto,- Ontario, Canada 186 - Nahrgang, V.G., Co. 155 West Congress Street Detroit, MI 48226 187 - Richard Harris National Gypsum Co. National City, MI 188 - Robert J. Eaton National Gypsum Company 325 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, NY 14202 189 - Nebam Line/International Great Lakes 4461 West Jefferson Detroit, MI 48209 190 - J. Leonard Nestle Company, Inc. 100 Bloomingdale Rd. White Plains, NY 10605 191 - Ms. Ava Sauer Nettles & Company, Inc. 9801 West Higgins Road, #416 Rosemont, IL 60018 192 - Bernard S. Costello New England Shipping Agency 177 State Street Boston, MA 02109 193 - Stanely W. Gordon New York International Sales 347 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10016 194 - Ray L. Falkner Niagara of Wisconsin Materials Manager Niagara, WI 54151 195 Nordana Line/Barber Steamship Line 17 Battery Place New York, NY 10004 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 24 298 - Norman Bartlett Sand & Gravel Route #3, Box 86 East Jordan, MI 49727 196 - Edward Fox North Star Steel Co. 3000 East Front Street, B 1200 Monroe, MI 48161 284 - I Northwood Oil Co. P. 0. Box 4.08 Cheboygan, MI 49721 336 - Onaway Stone Co., c/o Cherryland Cut Stone Co. Route 4, Box 529 Traverse City, MI 49684 197 - Martin J. O'Doherty Ontario Paper Company Thorold, Ontario, Canada 198 - Richard A. Trampe Pabst Brewing Company 917 West Juneau Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53201 199 Pacific Star Line 1155 Dorchester Blvd West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 200 - Seymour K. Padnos Padnos Iron & Metal Co. River Avenue at Bayside Drive Holland, MI 49423 201 Panocean Bulk Carrier/Patton S'ship 26300 Northwestern Highway Southfield, MI 48076 202 - Parcel Tankers Inc./Hasserodt Marine 28430 Swan Island Drive Grosse Ile, MI 48138 203 - Brian A. Galvin' Park Gate Iron/Steel I North LaSalle Street Chicago, IL 60642 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY 14AILING LIST 25 204 Patton Steamship Agency 26300 Northwestern Highway Southfield, MI 48076 205 - Peninsula Fruit Exchange 2955 Kroupa Road Traverse City, MI 49684 272 - Charles G. O'Donn 11 Penn oil Co./Grand Rapids District 7893 Foxwood Richland, MI 49084 206 - Edward E., Jr. Rodgers Pennzoil Company Executive Offices Oil City, PA 16301 273 - Phillips Petroleum Co. 909 Mayfair Road Wauwatosa, WI 53226 208 - Howard Collier Pillsbury Company PO Box 128 Morral, OR 43337 216 - E.J. Bedor Pillsbury Company Agri-Products Division Minneapolis, MN 209 - Richard K. Krawze Pine River Lumber Co. Long Lake, WI 54542 210 - Polish Ocean Line/Int'l Grt Lakes Shp 4461 West Jefferson Detroit, MI 48209 211 - Robert H. Allen Presque Isle Corp. Box 426 (Stoneport) Alpena, MI 49707 337 Presque Isle Corp. P, 0. Box 426 Alpena, MI 49707 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 26 285 - Ms. Verna Priebe Priebe Transport Co. 1207 Broad Street St. Joseph, MI 49085 212 - Douglas Deitrich Procter & Gamble 502 Eastman Avenue Green Bay, WI 54301 213 - Robert M. Burke Procter & Gamble Co_ Buying and Traffic Cincinnati, OH 214 Protos Shipping Ltd 407 McGill Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 215 Quaker State Oil Refinery Export Manager Oil City, PA 16301 283 Ray Molder, Inc. 8300 Beech-Daly Road Taylor, MI 48180 286 - Refiners Transport and Terminal Corp. 445 Earlwood Ave. Oregon, OH 43616 287 Rex Transportation Co. 1520 N. Woodward Ave., Suite 207 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48013 21.7 - E.J. Sullivan Robin Hood Flour Mills Montreal, Quebec,.Canada 218 - Donald G. Castonguay Rothesay Paper Corp. Traffic Manager St.John,New Brunswick,Canada 219 - Richard S. Baibak Saginaw Bay Trading Co. 245 South Main Street Frankenmuth, MI 48734 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 27 220 - C. Sabinsky Saguenay Shipping Ltd 1060 University Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 221 - Richard Sarenac Sarenac Shipping Co. 647 West Virginia Street Milwaukee, WI 53204 326 - Schworm, Inc. P. 0. Box 162, M-37 South Traverse City, MI 49684 327 See's Sand & Gravel, Inc. 4500-31 Mile Road Romeo, MI 48065 222 - Art Kitzeas Serv-Best Foods Highland Park, IL 274 - R. W. Sherwood Shell Oil Company/Milwaukee Dist. 3505 North 124th St. Brookfield, WI 53005 223 - Wm. J. McLaughlin Shipping Limited 410 St. Nicholas Street Montreal, Quebec, Canada 328 - Shook Paving Company 8281 Snows Lake Road Greenville, MI 48838 224 - Showa Line/Clark Transport Canada 1155 Dorchester Blvd, West Montreal, Quebec, Canada 225 - Sidemar Navigation/World Shipping 13530 Michigan; Room 210 Dearborn, MI 48136 329 - Sievert Brothers, Inc. 200 E. River Street Manistee, MI 49660 LUDINGTO N CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 28 226 - William G. Benisch Spencer Kellogg Division 120 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, NY 14240 227 - Richard D. Anderson Standard Alliance Ind. 1211 West 22nd Street, 1008 Oak Brook, IL 60521 228 - William Gagner Standard Milling Co.- Standard Elevator & Grain Buffalo, NY 229 - Stanek & Sons, Inc. 9378 Co. Road 633; PO Box 253 Traverse City, MI 49684 288 - Stang Tank Lines P. 0. Box 257 Menominee, MI 49858 230 - Stanley J. Stewart Steelmet, Inc. 1204 Grant Building Pittsburgh, PA 15219 231 - Patrick J. Fox Stroh Brewery Co. 909 East Elizabeth Street Detroit, MI 48226 232 Surinam Line/Hansen & Tidemann 1 World Trade Center, #1627 New York, NY 10048 233 - Rheinberger Swift & Company Chicago, IL 275 - S. Tolbert Texaco, Inc. 630,E. "B" Street Iron Mountain, MI 49801 234 - I Texas Transport & Terminal 71 Broadway New York, NY 10006 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 29 235 - Sam T. Boleware The Ohio River Company 1045 Evans Road Flossmoor, IL 60422 236 - Hugh R. Murchie Total Petroleum, Inc. 13544 West Bayshore Drive 'Traverse City, MI 49684 338 U. S. Steel Corporation Limestone Operations Rogers City, MI 49779 237 - Harry Ainsworth U.S. Gypsum Alabaster, MI 244 - Fred A. Hopfinger U.S. Plywood Corporation 1160 Scottsville Road Rochester, NY 14624 245 - Arnold E. Busse U.S. Steel Corporation 1000 E. 80th Place, #617 Merrillville, IN 46410 246 - N.V. McLean U.S. Steel Corporation 3001 West Big Beaver Road Troy, MI 48084 247 - Duane G. Rohrer U.S. Steel Corporation Cedarville Plant Cedarville, MI 49719 248 - W.R. Ransom U.S. Steel Corporation 400 Missabe Building Duluth, MN 55802 249 - D.T. VanZandt U.S. Steel Corporation 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15230 238 - Vincent G. Wilson Union Carbide Corp. 270 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 30 239 - Phil Iverson United Block Company Arcade, NY 14009 240 - Keith Eccles United Sierra 80 Coehill Drive, Apt. 105 Toronto, Ontario, Canada 241 - Ms. Wendy Lenfield Upjohn Company Kalamazoo, MI 242 - Robert D. Fischl Upper Peninsula Shipbldg Foot of River Street Ontonagon, MI 49953 243 - - I Uruguayan Line./B&K Shipping Agency 465 St. Johns Street Montreal, Quebec,.Canada 339 - Van Deusen Stone Co. 234 S. Huron Road Au Gres, MI 48703 289 - I Wagoner Transportation Co. 755 E. Hackley Ave. Muskegon Heights, MI 49444 250 - Wayne, C. Johnson Walter C. Best, Inc. Chardon, OH 44024 251 - Zenon Baranski Ward Hydronics, Inc. 11600 Genesee Street Alden, NY 14004 252 - R.D. Waterman Waterman Fruit Producers North Road Ontario Center, NY 14520 253 - Frank Barry Welch Grape Juice Co. General Traffic Manager Westfield, NY 14787 LUDINGTON CZM SURVEY MAILING LIST 31 330 Wexford Gravel Co. 300 Haynes St. Cadillac, MI 49601 254 - Bruce Karnes Whirlpool Corporation Benton Harbor, MI 49022 255 - R.G. Dodge Wickes Corp, Michigan Bean 1741 North Niagara, PO Box 2069 Saginaw, MI 486.05 331 - Wiggins & Sons Merritt, MI 49667 256 - Joseph H. Carollo Windsor Detroit Bridge Line 4461 West Jefferson Street Detroit, MI 48209 257 - Huberto Platz Wisconsin Electric Milwaukee, WI 332 - Wolverine Gravel Co. 3790 Puite, S.W. Grandville, MI 49418 258 - Howard A. Lambka World Shipping Inc. 13530 Michigan Ave., #210 Dearborn, MI 48126 259 - Y.S. Line/Texas Transport & Ter. 71 Broadway New York, NY 10006 Appendix B Feasibility Data & Calculations APPENDIX B FEASIBILITY DETERMINATION CALCULATIONS, DATA, AND SOURCES SECTION I. LOCAL PLANT DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS AND DATA A. Hydraulic Cement Production Production volume is 4,000,000 barrels/year or 750,000 tons/year (one barrel = 376 lbs) TABLE B-1 Breakdown-of Operating Costs for a Typical 4,000,000 barrel/year Cement Plant Plant Cost Item Symbol Per Barrel Labor L .$0.76 Fuel F 0.68 Power (electrical) P 0.59 Miscellaneous Supplies S '0.57 Maintenance & Materials M 0.34 Supervision & Overhead 0 0.28 Depreciation Expense D 0.71 TOTAL $3.93 TABLE B-2 Locality Cost Adjustment Factors Labor (A 1) Electrical (A P) Materials (Am) Depreciation (A d) city Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Chicago 1.01 1.21 0.94 0.97 Grand Rapids 0.99 1.25 0.96 0.97 Lansing 0.93 0.88 0.90 0.91 Ludington 0.86 1.25 0.89 0.87 Milwaukee 1.03 0.87 1.02 1.02 Traverse City 0.79 1.25 0.88 0.83 Calculation of Manufacturing Costs (MFG): MFG = (L x A,) + F + (P x A + S + (M x A + 0 + (D x A Sample calculation for Chicago: MFG = (0.76 x 1.01) + 0.68 + (0.59 x 1.21) + 0.57 + (0.34 x 0.92) + 0.28 + (0.71 x 0.97) MFG = $4.02/barrel B-1 TABLE B-3 Cement KFFGCosts by Cities $/CWT $/Barrel (100 lbs) Chicago 4.02 1.07 Grand Rapids 4.04 1.07 Lansing 3.71 0.99 Ludington 3.84 1.02 Traverse City 3.76 1.00 Raw Material Requirements: To produce one ton of cement requires approximately: 1.2 tons of limestone 0.4 tons of clay 0.027 tons of gypsum Calculation of Costs to Transport Raw Materials (T raw): T raw ($/ton-mile) x (miles to limestone source) x 1.2 20 + ($/ton-mile) x (miles to clay source) x 0.04 20 + ($/ton-mile x (miles to gypsum source) x 0.027 20 T raw is expressed in terms of $/CWT of finished cement-product. Costs per ton-mile versus distance are developed from actual quotes and statis- tics for various commodities transported on various routes and distances. Table B-4 contains data used to compute T raw. T raw is computed using the least expensive transportation mode for each raw material. Sample calculation for T raw for Chicago: T raw (.20) x 60 x 1.2 = 0.72 20 (.28) x 10 x 0.4' = 0.06 20 J.28) x 10 x 0.027 = 0.004 20 T raw 0.78 for Chicago TABLE B-5 T raw, $/CWT of Cement Chicago 0.78 Grand Rapids 0.78 Lansing 0.58 Ludington 0.54 Traverse City 0.73 B-2 TABLE B-4 Transportation Distances and Costs Per Ton/Mile for Raw Materials Limestone Clay Gypsum By Truck - By Rail WaTe-rborne By Truck By Truck By Rail $/Ton- $/Ton:, $/Ton- $/Ton- $/Ton- %/Ton- Source Miles Mile Miles Mile Miles Mile Source Miles Mile Source Miles Mile Miles Mile Chicago LaPorte, IN 60 .20 60 .20 - Local 10 .28 Local 10 Grand Rapids Bellevue, MI 60 .20 60 .20 - Local 10 .28 Local 10 .28 - Lansing Bellevue, MI 35 .24 - - - - Local 10 .28 Grand Rapids 65 .20 65 .20 Ludington Charlevoix, MI 140 .11 140 .055 126 .08 Local 10 .28 Grand Rapids 95 .15 95 .15 Traverse City Charlevoix, MI 50 .22 - - - - Local 10 .28 Grand Rapids 140 .11 140 .055 B. Pulp and Paper Production Pulp Production Production volume is 900 tons/day of bleached kraft pulp TABLE B-6 Breakdown of Operating Costs for a Typical 900 ton/day SBK Pulp Mill Plant Cost Per Item Symbol Ton of Pulp Raw Materials (Pulpwood and chemicals) M $152 Energy E 36 Labor L 49 SG&A S 10 Capital and Related D 88 Profit P 89 TOTAL $424 Locality cost adjustment factors used are given in Table B-2, except power (energy) adjustment was not applied. Calculation of Manufacturing Cost (MFG) MFG (M x Am) + E + (L x A,) + SG&A + (D x Ad) + P Sample calculation for Chicago: MFG = (152 x 0.94) + 36 + (49 x 1.01) + 10 + (88 x 0.97) + 89 MFG = $413/ton of pulp TABLE B-7 Pulp MFG Cos-t-s--Fy Cities $/ton $/cwt Pulp Pulp Chicago $413 $20.65 Grand Rapids $415 $20.75 Ludington $389 $19.45 Milwaukee $430 $21.50 Traverse City $381 $19.00 Calculation of Costs to Transport Raw Materials (T raw): To produce 1 ton of pulp requires approximately 2.5 tons of wood chips. T raw ($/ton-mile) x (miles to wood source) x 2.5 20 B-4 T raw is expressed in terms of $/cwt of pulp. Costs for transporting wood from source in Escanaba,* Michigan to the locations by various modes are given in Table B-8. T raw i s computed using the least expensive transportation mode for each location. TABLE B-8 T_ T raw, /cwt of Pulp Mode of $/cwt Transportation Chicago 1.54 Waterborne Grand Rapids 3.24 Rail or truck Ludington 1.22 Waterborne Milwaukee 1.38 Waterborne Traverse City 1.20 Waterborne Calculation of Costs to Transport Finished Product (SBK Pulp) to Markets (T fin) It is assumed pulp will be marketed to paper mills in major midwest cities in proximity to Lake Michigan in proportion to population. The breakdown of this market is as follows: Approximate %-of 1978 Po'Pulation -Market Chicago 7,030,000 70 Grand Rapids 585,000 5 Lansing 458,000 5 Milwaukee 1,417,000 15 Madison 319,000 5 TOTAL 9,809,000 100 Formula to compute T fin; (in terms of $/cwt of pulp) T fin (distance to Chicago) X ( $/ton-mile) x 0.70 20 + (distance to Grand Rapids) x ($/ton-mile) x 0.05 20 + (distance to Lansing) X ($/ton-mile) x 0.05 20 + (distance to Milwaukee) X ($/ton-mile) x 0.15 To- + (distance to Madison) X ($/ton-mile) x 0.05 20 T fin + Total The data for calculation of T fin is contained in Table B-9. B-5 TABLE B-9 TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES AND COSTS PER TON-MILE FOR WOOD CHIPS FROM ESCANABA, MICHIGAN PULP BY TRUCK BY RAIL WATERBORNE PRODUCTION AREA Miles $/Ton-Mile Miles $/Ton-Mile Miles $/Ton-Mile Chicago 315 0.082 320 0.07 274 0.045 Grand Rapids 370 0.070 370 0.07 - - Ludington 340 0.070 350 0.07 130 0.075 Milwaukee 225 0.105 230 0.07 200 0.055 Traverse City 250 0.080 270 0.07 120' 0.080 B-6 TABLE B-10 TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES AND COSTS FOR TRUCK TRANSPORTATION OF PULP TO MARKET AREAS Chicago Grand Rapids Lansing Milwaukee Madison $/Ton- $/Ton- $/Ton- $/Ton- $/Ton- Plant Location Distance Mile Distance Mile Distance Mile Distance Mile Distance Mile Chicago Local 0.27 175 0.10 2iO 0.09 85 0.17 140 0.11 (20 mi.) Grand Rapids 175 0.10 Local 0.27 65 0.20 260 0.08 315 0.07 (20 mi.) Ludington 235 0.08 95 0.15 160 0.10 320 0.07 375 0.07 Milwaukee 85 0.17 260 0.08 295 0.07 Local 0.27 75 0.18 (20 mi.) Traverse City 310 0.07 140 0.11 170 0.10 395 0.07 450 0.06 Sample calculation of T fin for Chicago: T fin = (20 x 0.27 x 0.7 = 0.19 20 + (175 x 0.10 x 0.05 = 0.04 20 0 09 6@ + 210 x w 20 x 0.05 = 0.05 + (85 x 0.17 x 0.15 = 0.11 20 + (140 x 0.11 x 0.05 = 0.04 20 - T fin = 0.43 TABLE B-11 T fin, $/cwt Pulp Chicago 0.43 Grand Rapids 0.87 Ludington 0.97 Milwaukee 0.'65 ,Traverse City 1.12 C. Agricultural Chemical Production Fert'ilizer plant (13-11-12 grade) with production volume of 400 tons/day or roughly 100,000 tons/year. TABLE B-12 Breakdown of Operating Costs (A Typical 400 ton/day Plant) Plant Item Symbol Cost/ton Raw Material RM $ 42.24 Utilities & Labor UL 21.12 Depreciation D -42.24 TOTAL $105.60 B-8 TABLE B-13 Locality Cost Adjustment Factors Utilities & (A Ul) Depreciation (Ad) Labor Adjustment Adjustment Chicago 1.17 0.97 Detroit 1.19 1.04 Grand Rapids 1.19 0.97 Lansing 0.89 0.91 Ludington 1.17 0.87 Madison 0.87 0.87 Milwaukee 0.90 1.02 Traverse City 1.16 0.83 Calculation of Manufacturing Costs (MFG) MFG = RM + (UL x Aul) + (D x A d) Sample calculation for Chicago MFG = 42.24 + (21.12 x 1.17) + (42.24 x 0.97) MFG = 107.92 TABLE B-14 MFG Costs by Cities $/ton $/cwt Chicago 107.92 5.40 Detroit 111.30 5.57 -Grand Rapids 108.35 5.42 Ludington 103.70 5.18 Milwaukee 104.33 5.22 Traverse City 101.80 5.09 Calculation of Costs to Transport Finished Product (13-11-12 Grade) Fertilizer to Market (T fin) It is assumed that the fertilizer will be marketed in Mason, Oceana, Manistee, Newaygo, Lake, Wexford, Missaukee, Osceola, Clare, and Mecosta Counties. Big Rapids (Mecosta County) was selected as a representative wholesale market. The calculation of (T fin) is given in Table B-15. B-9 TABLE B-15 Transportation -Distances and Costs for Fertilizer to Big Rapids Market By Railroad Total Distance Cost T fin Plant Location (mile-SI ($/ton-mile) ($/ton) Chicago 230 .09 $20.70 Detroit 195 .11 21.45 Grand Rapids 55 .13 7.15 Ludington 60 .13 7.80 Milwaukee (via Kewaunee and Ludington) 250 G9 22.50 Traverse City 80 .13 10.40 SECTION II. REGIONAL SHIPPING TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT Dry Bulk Terminal - Phase 1 Operation (for existing dry bulk commodity flows) ,(Limited to inert aggregates only) Limestone: Currently, the north end of the dock, is being used by Laman Asphalt; continue to reserve this area for their use. Remainder of limestone to be placed at south end. Typical Barge Characteristics (for self-unloaders): Boom Length varies from 50 to 200 feet (typ ical 150) Capacities vary from 1000 to 8000 tons (typical 2000) Length varies from 100 to 300 feet (typical 200) Draft varies from 8 to 20 feet (typical 12) Booms on self-unloaders will not reach across US-10. This area could be used as "long-term" storage for materials moved across the road by loaders or reserved-for future use. Annual Quantities (from direct contacts): Limestone Laman Asphalt - 2 barge loads x 2000 tons/barge 4000 tons Other - 8-10,000 tons Stockpile Areas Required: Limestone - Laman Asphalt - Allocate area for storage of 1 barge load, or 2000 tons Angle of repose for limestone is 350 Tan 350 = 0.70, slope is about 1 on 1.5. For a rectangular pile - width = 45 feet , height = 15 feet Cross sectional area = 15 feet x 22.5 feet = 340 square feet B-10 Pile length: 2000 ton x 23 cf/ton x 1.12 gross/net ton 340 sf 150 Length = 150 feet; minimum area = 150 x 45 = approx. 7000 square feet Other Limestone - Allocate the area at the south end of the dock. This area is approx. 17,000 square feet For rectangular pile - width 75 feet, height = 25 feet Cross sectional area = 25 feet x 37.5 feet = 940' square feet Pile length = 250 feet Available storage area: 940 sf x 250 sf = 235,000 cf 235,000 cf approximately 10,200 ton's 23 cf/ton This area could stockpile the remainder of the total annual volume, or 4-5 barge loads. Cost Estimate for Dry Bulk Terminal Phase I Operation (inert aggregates only)- Minimal Dock Face Improvements: Including the following Replacement of one (dislodged) mooring bollard $ 1,000 Replacement of 25 feet of steel sheetpile cap (dislodged) 500 Minor upgrading of fender system (rub.ber tires) 500 TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS $ 2,000 Estimation of Operating Costs All equipment and. personnel to perform loading and unloading operations will be supplied by the terminal users. The only operating cost will be administrative (to perform record and bookkeeping tasks), and labor involved in minor maintenance of the rubber tire fender system.* Oper ating Costs (annual) Administrative $2,000 O&M labor and materials 1,000 Debt retirement of improvement costs - 10 yrs @ 13%- 370 Land lease costs - assessed on the basis of 50c/ton and assuming 10,000 tons/yr 5,000 TOTAL $8,370 It is assumed existing staff will be able to assume these duties. B-11 Dry Bulk Terminal - Phase 2 Operation Materials with the most shipping potential (currently) Crushed stone (mostly limestone) Seal coat chips Rock salt Pit-run sand and gravel do not currently appear to be feasible commodities to ship into Ludington, as they are so abundantly available locally. Sources of the Materials: Limestone and seal coat chips are available from mines in the upper LQwer Peninsula and Upper Peninsula. Rock salt is available in the Detroit area and is also shipped from the Gulf Coast. Thus, these materials are located such that water transportation is feasible, particularly in light of the fact that both seal coat chips and limestone are now brought into Ludington, and salt into Manistee occasionally. Projected Annual Quantities: Crushed Limestone: From phone conversations with County Road Commission empro-yees, the annual use of limestone varies quite a, bit, but a minimum amount of 25,000 cubic yards is typical. Several local contractors also reported a typical annual use of about 5,000 tons. 6 counties x 25,000 cy x 1.17 ton/cy 176,000 ton 10 local contractors x 5,000 tons 50,000 ton TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL CONSUMPTION 226,000 ton Assuming that a terminal in Ludington would capture 50% of this requirement, the annual volume through the terminal would be approximately 100,000 tons. Seal Coat Chips Typical annual use of seal coat chips reported by County Road Commissions is 1,500 tons 6 counties x 1,500 tons -= 9,000 tons For a 50% market share, the annual volume would be 4,50 0 tons. Rock Salt Typical annual use of rock salt by County Road Commissions is 1,500 tons. 6 counties x 1,500 tons = 9,000 tons For a 50% market share, the annual volume would be 4,500 tons. Proposed Bulk Terminal Facilities: The bulk terminal would provide open storage for half of the annual volume of commodities, or B-12 50,000 tons limestone 2,500 tons seal coat chips 2,500 tons rock salt Space Requirements: Assuming a 1:2 slope for piled material (angle of repose) and pile height of 50 feet, cross-sectional pile area is: 50 ft x 2 x 50 ft - 2,500 sq.ft. 2 Limestone: 50,000 tons x 23 cu.ft./ton = 460 ft (length of pile) 2,50U-s-q.ft. Salt and Seal Coat Chips: 2,500 tons x 30 cu.ft./ton x 2 = 60 ft (length of both piles) 2,500 sq.ft. Total Open Storage Area Required (doubled to allow for access, office building and garage): (460 ft + 60 ft) x 100 ft x 2 = 104,000 sq.ft. or approximately 2.5 acres B-13 Equipment and Facilities Required: Office - approximately 1,000 sq.ft. Garage - approximately 2,500 sq.ft. Truck Scales Wheel Loader Parking Lot - approximately 1800 sq.ft. or 200 sq.yd. Cost Estimate Site Improv ement Costs Dry Bulk Terminal New Street 1400 lf @ $50/lf $ 70,000 Sewer - connect to existing on Foster St. 500 lf @ $20/lf 10,000 Water - relocate hydrants 200 lf @ $20/lf 4,000 Minor dock face improvements 600 lf @ $100/lf 60,000 Construction Costs Office 1600 sf @ $65/sf $104,000 Garage 3600 sf @ $30/sf 108,000 Parking lot & misc. paving Lot and drive 6900 sf Drive to garage 3000 sf Truck loading area 6900 sf 16,800 sf @ $5/sf 84,000 Weigh station 350 sf @ $20/sf 7,000 Truck scales and remote reading system Lump Sum 31,000 Stockpile covering and drainage Lump Sum 50,000 Landscaping for Greenbelt 50,000 sf @ $1/sf 50,000 $578,000 B-14 Calculation of the Annual Fee - Phase II Operation Operating Expenses Salaries $90,000 Utilities 10,000 Supplies and Equipment O&M 5,000 Property rental from C&O Railroad Assessed at $0.50/ton for an estimated 100,000 tons annually 50,000 Debt Retirement $578,000 @ municipal bond rate of 13.0% for 20 years 82,000 TOTAL 1 $237,000 Cost per ton (for 100,000 tons annually) = $2.37 Cost of Limestone Delivered to Ludington: Cost of limestone (market price) in Ludington is approximately $18/ton Transportation costs: Barge from Alpena 250 miles x 4t/ton-mile = $10.00/ton Cost to truck to market (assume 35 miles average distance) 20 miles x 25t/ton-mile = $5/ton Fee ($/ton) that t@rminal could charge: $18/ton market price -10 barge delivery cost, FOB (including material cost) - 5 inland trucking T-3/ton B-15 Liquid Bulk Petroleum Terminal Annual consumption of petroleum products in the six-county area is shown in the following tables. Annual Consumption by Fuel Type for 1980 (1000 gals) Motor Kerosine #2 Fuel Diesel County Gasoline 01 Fuel Oil) Oil Fuel-' Lake 2,203 119 171 -0- Manistee 11,744 636 5,694 285 Mason 13,616 419 3,063 1,976 Oceana 7,394 248 1,273 850 Osceola 7,771 560 1,517 158 Wexford 12,029 1,085 2,290 128 TOTAL 54,757 3,067 14,008 3,397 50% - -25% 10% Total 1980 Consumption of total of total of total Fuel Type (TO-0-0--ga-I-) (barrels) (barrels) (barrel-SI (barrels) Motor Gasoline 54,757 1,303,700 651,900 325,900 130,400 Kerosine (#1 Fuel Oil) 3,067 73,000 36,500 18,300 7,300 #2 Fuel Oil 14,008 333,500 266,800 83,400 33,400 Diesel Fuel 3,397 80,900 40,400 20,200 8,100 TOTALS 75,229 1,@91,100 895,600 447,800 179,200 1. Average gas service station size from our work for 4-Star Service Station. From service station data, average storage by fuel type: Regular 35% No Lead 25% Premium 25% Remainder 15% (fuel oil, range oil, and diesel fuel) 2. Average tank truck size: 10,000 gallons 3. Average railroad tank car size: 40,000 gallons B-16 4. Average tank barge size: From Greenwood's Guide - Powered Tankers # of ship tanks range from 4 to 27 net tonnage ranges from 12 to 10,000 Tank Barges # of tanks range from 3 to 16 capacity ranges from 6,300 to 142,000 bbls Average of "typical" size appears to be 20,000 bbl capacity with ten (10) tanks Overall Length - approximately 230 feet Draft - approximately 12 feet Balance Sizes with Volumes: Hinterland area yearly consumption of fuels is 1,791,100 barrels. 50% of market share = 895,600 bbls 25% of market share = 447,800 bbls 10% of market share = 179,200 bbls Storage Requirements: One of the controlling factors on sizing of terminal facility might be winter weather restrictions. For a two-month storage requirement: 25% Share 447,800 bbl/yr 74,600 bbl/2 mos Storage requirements by type of fuel Gasoline 54,300 bbl Kerosine 3,050 bbl #2 Fuel Oil 13,900 bbl Diesel Fuel 3,350 bbl Tanks and sizes to meet above requirements Gasoline Regular 2 - 15,000 bbl No-Lead & Premium 3 - 12,000 bbl Kerosine 1 - 6,000 bbl #2 Fuel Oil 1 - 12,000 bbl Diesel Fuel 2 - 6,000 bbl This allows for some rotating of storage capacity if necessary. Assuming a 25% market share, the average month's requirements are 37,300 bbls. For an average tank barge capacity of 20,000 bbl, this would require approx. 2 barge deliveries/month. B-17 If 50% of product is trucked to destination and 50% by rail, then: 80 truck loads/month 3 truck loads/day 20 rail cars/month 1 rail car/day If a typical gas station sells 600,000 gal/yr, or 50,000 gal/mo, the port could supply 30 gas stations. Cost Structure: for 15% Profit - $782,000/yr ON and Debt Retirement $117,300/yr Profit Operating Fees Fee Structure Market Gallons for 15% Profit Share Per Year $/Gallon VGallo-n 50% 37,529,000 0.0240 2.40 25% 18,764,500 0.0479 4.79 10% 7,505,800 0.1198 11.98 Operating Expenses Cost/Year Salaries: Administration $ 50,000 Operators 60,000 Utilities and electric 25,000 Misc. supplies 5,000 Maintenance and equipment repair 15,000 Capital facilities: retirement 627,000 $782,000 Construction Cost Estimate Office (1200 sf @ $65/sf) $ 78,000 Service Building (1600 sf @ $30/sf) 48,000 Parking and Loading Area (17,750 sf @ $5/sf) 89,000 Truck Loading Racks 40,000 Tanks and Appurtenances 24,000 bbl - 2 @ $400,000 800,000 15,000 bbl - 4 @ $300,000 1,200,000 7,000 bbl - 3 @ $175,000. 525,000 Concrete Tank Foundations (3,500 cy @ $250/cy) 875,000 Earthwork for Dikes (4,150 cy @ $101cy) 42,000 Piping and Pumps 104,000 Fencing (2,600 lf @ $12/lf) 31,200 Gates (2 @ $3,500 each) 7,000 Foam Extinguishing System 40,000 TOTAL $4,407,000 B-18 DATA SOURCES 1. 1982 Means Construction Cost Data (Unit Prices) 2. 1982 Means Square Foot Costs 3. 1982 Dodge Guide to Public Works and Heavy Construction 4. 1982 Dodge Construction Syst ems Cots 5. 1982 Dodge Manual for Building Construction Pricing and Scheduling 6. 1981 Commodity Year Book, Commodity Research Bureau, Inc. 1981 7. Process Plant and Equipment Cost Estimation, O.P. Kiharbanda, 1979 8. Manufacturing: A Study of Industrial Location; E. Willard Miller, 1977, Pennsylvania State University 9. Domestic Transportation Practice, Theory and Policy Sampson - Farris, 1971 10. Plant Location, Leonard C. Yaseen, 1956, American Research Council, Inc. 11. Wood Energy, Michel L. Hiser, Proceedings of Governor William G. Milliken's Conference, November 29, 1977. B-19 This document was prepared in part through financial assistance prov;!4ed _kv the Coastal Zone Manapement Act of 1972 administered by the Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3 6668 14102-5488--