[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
r LU i"'10 E Tic' co c:x C-0 CD V-@ . ..... 2-1 < kNj 'v C) zk \1A U S A V" @j T v 7,7 P@ - ------ V'k '-A A c "I - 11 E LZ I TE TC 328 C53 V, 1980 CHE MARINA/CANAL F SCHERVISH, VOGEL, MERZ, P.C. CITY OF DET CHENE/ST. AUBIN PARK MARINA/CANAL FEASIBILITY CITY OF DETROIT Coleman A. Young, Mayor RECREATION DEPARTMENT Daniel Krichbaumi, Director Prepared by: SCHERVISH, VOGEL, MERZ PC Arch i tects/Landscape Arch i tects/P1 anners 1452 Randolph Detroit, Michigan 48226 Engineering Consultant: SNELL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP Engineering/Planning/Research 1120 Ma'y Street Lansing, Michigan 48906 this report was funded in part through financial assistance provided by the Office of COASTAL ZONE MA NAGEMENT National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration United States Department of Commerce through funds provided under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (PL 92-583) and administered by MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Land Resources Program Chris Shater, in charge, Coastal Zone Management Unit David Warner, Project Representative September, 1980 Rev. October, 1980 3.0 RESOLUTION OF POTENTIAL INDUSTRIAL/RECREATIONAL/ TRANSPORTATION/U-1 ILI TY CONFLICTS 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Consolidated Docking 3.3 Medusa Cement Company 3,4 Penn-Dixie Cenient Company 3.5 Rec@eation Set-vice and Security Vehicles 3.6 Pedestrian/Bicycle Access 3.7 Truck Routing 3.8 Utility Conflict-; -id Dust 3.9 Noise at 3.10 Rail Transportation 3.11 Summary, Conclusions and Recornm6ridat ions 4.0 MAR INA 4.1 1 n troduct ion 4.2 Marina Program 4.3 Design Criteria A 4.4 Operations and Maintenance 4.5 Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations 5.0 ECONOMIC IMPACTS 5.1 1 n troduc I iot 5.2 Construction Costs of Marina/Canal Improvement 5.3 COnsh-uctiol-, Costs of Medusa Improvements 5.4 Total Construction Costs of Marina/Canal and Medusa Improvements 5.5 Marina Revenue TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.6 Funding Potentials 5.7 Other Economic Developments Chapter 6.0 SUMMARY 1.0 1 NTRODUC T I ON 6.1 Feasibility of Marina/Canal 1.1 Scope 6.2 Impact on Chene Phase I Design 1.2 Alternative Marina/Canal Configurations 6.3 Applicability To Other Sites 6.4 Recommenda t ions 2.0 TECHNICAL MARINA/CANAL CONFIGURATION 6.5 Conclusion 2.1 1 n troduct ion 2.2 Wave Action C(-,)ncerns 2.3 Canal Hydraulics REFERENCES 2.4 Construction Beyond Harborline, PLANNING TEAM 2.5 Summary, Conclusions and Recommenclat ions ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Introduction 1.0 11 Q, C I C-.,u J In October- of 1979, preliminary design and engi- neering or the Linked Riverfr-ont Parks Project was ... completed. This project is the first segment of a vast recreational scheme for the entire ten mile Detroit r-iverfront that was proposed by the City of Detroit Recreation Department in it's "Detr-oit in 1978. R i verf r,on tRecreation Plan" developed -ie This plan advocates public access to 0 river arid a continuous linear park and pedestrian/ bicycle path tying together mixed land uses. CR The Linked Riverfront Parks Project Study, funded C I f5j-j E if) part by the Coastal Zone Management Unit of the Michigan Department o f Natural Resources, proposed the linking togethei- of five potential U#1 7J, @ I .- J park sites through a riverwalk/bicycie path (river- I A Ce- T f:4-Jr:R link), and a historical interpretive trail (interpre- Gi-,t tive link) between the Renaissance Center and the JJJ_ A- A Belle Isle Bridge (Figure 1.2). Two of the pro- FIGURE 1.1 posed park sites (Chene #1 and St. Aubin) are ST ANN0NE PARK ENTRY RENAISSANCE CENTER PARKLETT PARKLETT HURON CEMENT ST. AUBIN PARK MEDUSA CHENE PARK PENN DOVE CO CEMEMT CEMEMT CO CO FIGURE 1.2: LRPP GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN further linked by a proposed transient marina/ Realization of the total park canal which passes through land privately owned acquisition of various parcels of land (Figure by the Medusa Cement Company. The purpose of 1.3). The city presently owns the vacant Chene the marina/canal is threefold: 1) to create a sin- #1 and Chene #2 sites. It does not, however, gle entity of two separate park sites; 2) to pro- own the complete St. Aubin site except for a por- vide much needed boat access to the downtown tion at the western edge (referred to as the Water- area; and 3) to provide a catalyst for private de- board Site). Acquisition of the St. Aubin site, velopment in the east riverfront area. Since the presently a container port, is under negotiation. completion of the LRPP study, design development Finally, to accomodate the canal link between the services have been performed for the total Chene/ Chene and St. Aubin sites, a land trade with St. Aubin park and marina/canal (Figure 1.4). Medusa Cement Company is required. In addition to the marina/canal linking the park Assuming that land acquisition is finalized, de- sites, Atwater Street is proposed to be closed be- sign development indicated that complete implemen- tween Orleans Street and Chene Street creating a tation of the marina/canal relied on the resolu- pedestrian mall parallel to the canal. It is as- tion of certain concerns beyond tje scope of the sumed that this mall and canal would spur in- tense private development north of Atwater in- LRPP study or the Chene/St. Aubin design develop- cluding conversion of existing warehouses and ment contract. These concerns, which relate di- building of new commercial, entertainment orres- rectly to the feasibility of the marina/canal, in- idential developments. clude the following: a) cost impacts; b) impacts 1.2 WALKER M ELLIOT PARK ENTRY JEFFERSON PORT SITE DEVELOPMENT BELLE ISLE PARKING/ENTRY POWER HOUSE UNIROYAL EDGE CONVERSION DEVELOPMENT MT ELLIOTT PARK COAST GUARID PARKE DAVIS DEVELOPMENT ADAIR STREET WAREHOUSE DEVELOPMENT MARINA on infrastructure; C) impacts on circulation sys- dress the Chene/St. Aubin marina/canal issues tems, especialLy truck transportation; d) tech- just described. These issues have been grouped nical engineering questions concerning flow, wave into four major categories: a) the technical canal action, profile and alignment; e) marina pro- configuration which includes hydrautic and wave gram; f) impacts on surrounding industry; and action implications; b) potential industrial, recre- 9) environmental impacts. ational transportation and utility confilicts; c) the content and feasibility of the proposed seasonal The Recreation Department has contracted for an transient boat marina; and d) the cist impacts of Environmental Assessment Report to address the recommended physical improvements. last concern. The rough draft has been prepared but awaits vital information contained in this This study will build upon previous studies fund- study. In February, 1980, the Coastal Zone Man- ed by Coastal Zone Management grants including agement Unit of the Michigan Department of Natur- The Linked Riverfront Parks Project, performed by al Resources agreed to fund a special emergency Schervish, Vogel, Merz, P.C.; a sub-report of the grant to address the remaining issues. This LRPP executed by The Snell Environmental Group study is a result of that grant. entitled Hydraulic Study Chene/St. Aubin Park Riverfront Canal; and Riverfront Capabilities Ex- 1.1 SCOPE pansion Analysis by Coastal Zone Laboratories of the University of Michigan. This new report will The purpose of this study is, therefore, to ad- also serve as a support document for the Chene/- 1.3 ILA, @13 1.4 ORLEANS ROW 6. AINSWORTH WAREHOUSE WATERBOARD SITE 7. FAMOUS FURNITURE 8. LAUHOFF 1. CENTRAL IRON FOUNDRY 9. NORTHERN ENGINEERING 2. GLOBE TRADING COMPANY 10. HURON CEMENT COMPANY 3. VIGLIOTTI BUILDING ll. MEDUSA CEMENT COMPANY 4. MEDUSA CEMENT COMPANY 12. PENN-DIXIE CEMENT CO. PROPERTY 13. COAST GUARD FIG. 1.3 5. KENTMORE 14. REX TRUCKING St. AUbin Environmental Assessment Report pres- ently being prepared under a separate contract. Lastly, information in this report concerning hy- drological questions such as wave motion, surge and canal profile that may have applicability to other areas of the riverfront will be so noted and summarized. 1.2 ALTERNATIVE MARINA/CANAL CONFIGURATIONS For the purposes of this study, and in order to fully investigate the marine aspects of the park complex, two alternative marina/canal configura- tions were explored. The first alternative, herein- after referred to as the "Marina/Canal Alternative" assumes a configuration as delineated in the de- sign development drawings for the total Chene/St Aubin Park (Figure 1.4). The second alternative assumes a delay or inability in acquiring the St. 1.5 C, GLOBE TRADING WAREHOUSE GO. CONVERSION 0 ATWATER 7T HURON CEMENT X Go. TRANSIENT440 (aw MARINA c" VT- LEGEND 1. ATWATER MALL 2. TRANSIENT BOAT ST AUBIN PARK SITE 4 PARKING 3. AIAPH I THEATER 4. OVERLOOK/SCOOP 5. TOILET FACILITIES 6. PLAZAS 7. PEDESTRIA14 BRIDGES 8. TRUCK SERVICE BR% I DGE 9. TOUR BOAT 10. CONVEYOR 11. OPEN SPACE 1.6 MEDUSA CHENE I I U' CEMENT CO. CONVERSION .4'. -NORTHEF RKING n PA ENGINEE u- -W -A mm a -1-jowitiou "clat AT CANAL 10 2 M )U-A El iENT 0. SE T RADE AREA CHENE PARK SITE DETROIT RIVER FIGURE 1.4: MAR I NA Aubin site. This alternative, hereinafter referred to as the "Marina/Lagoon Alternative", proposes a canal which terminates in a marina/lagoon on_ the Chene site only (Figure 1.5). In the event the St. Aubin site is delayed that acqUiSitiOfl Of 1P r or funding of the Chene Park continues before acqU i Si t ion of St. Aubin the Marina/Lagoon Alter- native can also be viewed as first phase construc- @,110 11 tion of the total eventual Marina/Canal Alterna- tive. These alternatives are described more fully below. Marina/Canal Alternative In this alternative a 1700 foot long canal is pro- Ito ,I posed. It order to maximize it's length, it be gins at a point nearest the east property line of the Chene Part- site that design and physical re- straints will allow and likewise ends at a point nearest the west property line of the St. Aubin JL Park s i te. The canal angles across the Chene site to Atwater Street (the angle maximizes flow) and parallels Atwater thrOUgh the Chene site and the proposed Medusa land trade area and into the cana 1. These devices include a land extension be- St. Aubin site. Transient boat parking aligns yond the harbor line which acts a--, a 11-;coop'l as the canal and the adjoining Atwater mall. At the well as a wave mitigatin_q mechanism. Ihis same St. Aubin site the canal broadens into a larger land extensiori also functions as an over-look view- basin where additional transient boat parking is. ing area for park users. Likewise thc entrance accommodated in a major marii-ia. to the St. Aubin marina, which also acts as an The marina is proposed to accept 30 ft., 45 ft. exit for the canal, requires surge and wave mi .ii and a few 60 ft. berths. Deoending tipon the ex- gating devices that extend beyond the harbor line and function as an overfook. Alternative configit-i- tent of excavation determined feasible, sixty to rations of both the entrance and exit to the canal .one hundred slips are accorturiodated in the St. Au- are investigated further in this study. bin marina. The remaining canal accommodates approximately 50 slips. Proposed marina facili- ties include a water supply system, litter recepta- In addition to boat parking for pleastire craft, cles, toilet facilities, pump-out facilities, sewage the canal accommodates a proposed tour boat con- receiving units, shops offering marina supplies, cessionaire at a point approximately midway and a possible marina _gas station. along its length. The tour boat is proposed to travel through the canal at regular intervals and The inlet to the canal on the Chene site requires may connect to Belle Isle, points downtown and to hydrological devices to encourage flow into the Windsor. lu it Access across the canal is accomplished. by three bridges. One of these bridges is designed as a limited access vehicular bridge for pork, main- tenance and security vehicles and for primar@ I ruck access to the Medusa Cemen t Company. This vehicular bridge is not available to the pub I ic. Fhe remaining two bridges, one at Chene Park and one at St. Aubin Park, accommodate pedes- trian users. Both hridges are ramped for bicycle and handirapped use and provide direct access to the Atwater Mail. The consequence of this alternative configuration i@. to add approximately one mile of accessible river edge to the parks project while at the same time linking two diverse sites in an exciting and functional way. CHENE I I PARK Fm-"; NORTHERN EWANEERING L @"%Lj%0, fl.. J", Lo @ AJ%Lj% do lop ----Now ER S ."I -p AT NTER qu CANAL 2 NN DIX CEI ENT M C6 LAGQON c 0 fill MEDUSA CEMENT CO. auutuou MEW DETROIT RIVER CHENE PARK SITE. LEGEND 1. ATWATER MALL 2. TRANSIENT BOAT PARKING 3. AMPHITHEATER 4. OVERLOOK/SCOOP 5. TOILET FACILITIES 6. PLAZA 7. PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE 8. OPEN SPACE FIGURE 1.5: MARINA/LAGOON ALTERNATIVE 1.10 Marina/Lagoon Alternative This alternative assumes the St. Aubin Park site VI is not acquired or acquisition is delayed. In this J to $1 #6 instance the configuration of the Chene Park s the same except that the canal terminates in a lagoon area at the west side of he site and A,- water is closed between Dubois and Chene Streets F only. The lagoon permits limited transient boat parking, but the boaters enter and exit at the same point. Because the entry and exit are com-' b i ned, f low is restricted which potentially causes stagnation. This problem is investigated further in this study. The tour boat would have facilities similar to those in the Marina/Canal Alternative except that they are provided at the west side of the lagoon adjacent to the Atwater Mail. This alternative does not require a land trade with the Medusa Cement Company and consequently the truck, maintenance and secur i ty vehicle It bridge is not required. The pedestrian bridges are likewise reduced from two to one. The re- maining bridge on the Chene site would create a immediate access to the center of the park rather .than requiring people to travel completely around the lagoon to gain access. The consequence of this alternative configuration Is to add approximately 2,000 feet of accessible river edge to the parks project. It does not, how- ever, link the park sites nor does it have the ex- tensive boat parking capacity of the first alterna- tive. 4A iL A, VIA h- 1071 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Technical Marina/Canal Configuration 2.0 1 2.1 INTRODUCTION canal entry. The marina/canal alternative re- quires that both entering locations be analyzed This chapter, investigates the marina/canal config- for, feasibility; whereas the second alternative, urations from three technical viewpoints: 1) wave terminating in a lagoon, only requires the Chene action impacts upon navigation and boat mooring; entry to be analyzed. Since the proposed Chene 2) hydrdraulic concerns for prevention of stagna- Street entry configuration alternatives are the tion; and 3) impacts of constructing beyond the same for both canal alternatives no separate harbor, line. These concerns are analyzed individ- wave action analysis was conducted. The wave ually for each of the two marina/canal configura- action results presented for the Chene Street tion alternatives. entry, therefore, apply equally to both marina alternatives. 2.2 WAVE ACTION CONCERNS In order to evaluate the feasibility of the pro- This phase of the report deals with the feasibili- posed canal and develop design criteria to miti- ty of the proposed canal and marina in terms of gate wave action it was necessary to conduct a the impact of wave action upon navigation and harbor model study. The use of model studies mooring. Proper navigation in the canal and at for designing harbors has been well established the entrances requires that waves in the canal be such that it would be unusual to design a new no larger than waves in the Detroit River and harbor without the aid of a model study (Ref- that wave reflections inside the canal be sup- erence 3). Preliminary design criteria for the pressed. Wave reflections result in crossing wave patterns which reduce maneuverability. Small craft marina requirements specify that wave heights be no greater than 1.5 feet and prefer- ably less than 1.0 feet where boats are to be moored (Reference 1). Concern over wave action at this step of the pro- ject is due largely to problems encountered with floating docks installed at the shoreline of the Detroit River near Cobo Hall. Although no docu- mentation could be found regarding this problem, it was the opinion of Detroit Harbormaster, Sar- gent B. Jiminesh, that problems occurred because the docks were unprotected from incoming waves and the waves were reflected by vertical walls be- hind the docks (Reference 2). Marina/ Canal Alternative Wave action concerns in this report examine both the St. Aubin canal entry and the Chene Street TABLE 2.1 canal entrances at St. AL11.3in and Chene Street COST COMPARISION OF ALTERNATIVE EDGE TREATMENT was determined by Dr. E.F. Brater, professor at the University of Michigan, Dr. D. C. Wiggert, RIVER SHORE- professor at Michigan State University and per- EDGE TREATMENT CANAL WALL' LINE WALL2 sonnel of Snell Environmental Group, Inc. This ALTERNATIVE $/LINEAL FOOT $/LINEAL FOOT information was forwarded to 5chervish, Vogel, Merz, P.C. and incorporated in the canal layout A - TWO LAYERED 901 945 so that alternative canal entrances could be de- RUBBLE MOUND veloped and analyzed in the model study. WALL WITH 0.5' CONCRETE CAP Alternative edge treatments are presented in Fig- B - TWO LAYERED 920 978 ure 2.1. Present day. estimates, including mater- RUBBLE MOUND ials, construction and excavation, for the wall WALL WITH 5' are giver) for each edge alternative in Table 2.1. CONCRETE CAP Alternatives A or B are considered necessary only B (MODIFIED) - HEAVY 896 NOT FEASIBLE for the canal entrances where wave action is of concern. Alternative C is not considered to lie RIP RAP ONLY feasible for canal walls at the entrances exposed C - RIP RAP 126 NOT FEASIBLE to high wave action. Alternatives A and B are D - VERTICAL WALL W/ 852 1275 identical except that the rubble of Alter-native A CONRETE CAP begins 0.5 feet below the surface instead of 5.0 feet as in Alternative B. Alternative A thereby E - VERTICAL., CUR- 988 1442 affords more wave protection and can be expected VILINEAR WALL W/ to function adequately for low, average and high CONCRETE CAP water conditions. Alternative B is expected to F - VERTICAL, ZIG 1230 1810 provide sufficient protection only during low ar ZAG WALL WITH averaqe water conditions; at high water the ver- CONCRETE CAP tical wall will not absorb wave action. G - RIP RAP, GRADE 641 NOT FEAS IBLE BEANI, STEPS AND WOOD DECK 0 - OVERLOOK EDGE, NOT 1230 1 VERT ICAL WALL W1 APPL.ICABLE Incl.udes materials, construction, and excavation CONCRETE CAP assuming vert ica I height of 14.5' from canal bottom to top of wall. Tr - TRANSITION EDGE, NOT 1000 RUBBLE CANAL APPLICABLE 2 Includes materials, construction, and excavation EDGE TRANSITION assuming vertical height of 29' from river bottom TO VERTICAL to top of wall. RIVE13 EDGE NOTE: Costs are present day costs. 2.2 FIGURE 2.1 @A=Er EDGE ALTERNATIVE A Cdc.le Alit-rocitive A is a two layered rubble mound wall with a 0.5 fool concrete cap formed on steel sheet pile. The bottom of the rubble wall is kq- composed of heavy rip-rap with the top layer of gpq ir arid quarry stone for aesthetic reasons. bouldt@rs Itie wall redtices the depth the sheet pile must be drivi--n and simplifies its construction. @v Application: use where edge construction reqtiires ha,-tj surfaces cilong edge and where rip rap is neuded Io dissipale, wave action. Proposed loca- lit),-Is are at the St. Aubin entrance and at the fountain, water play X -A@ miiiiiiial maiiitenance. Boulder-s i-riay IvIaif-iienance: Litter and debris IWI'iotlic at-Ijiisifnei Cictiji-tip will be veclk-iired. 2.3 FIGURE 2.1 7 r L-r'V-4 41t EDGE ALTERNATIVE B -and B (Modified) Edge Alternative B is similar to Alternative A ex- A- cept that a 5 foot concrete cap is used. This limits the distance required for the slope of the rubble wall. The bottom layer of the wall is com- posed of heavy rip-rap and the top laver of boulders and quarry stone for 'aesthetic reasons. B (Modified) eliminates the boulders and quarry P, stone when not visible. Application: use where hard surfaced edge is re- but limited space is available. Dissipa- quired, tion of waves is reduced due to lower rubble wall elevation. Proposed locations on the island are at " the St. Aubin pedestrian bridge and truck bridge. Ma i ntenance: mi nimal maintenance. Boulders may require periodic adjustment . Litter and debris clean-up will be necessary. 2.4 FIGURE 2.1 f: to C Nnlp EDGE AITERNATIVE C C d9c Alternative C is a rip-rap wall on a sloping .44 baiik with large 4-5 foot boulders above the vvc,,et, line lor visual reasons. Application. use where wave dissipation is re- qt.jired, btit 1-teavy near shore structural support is flot necestial This edge is not recommended -Y tiecir the. Detroit R i ver edge. It is to be used on the island @,ide as the predominant edge where spccial conditiot-is CIO not exist. it Mainteflance: a moderate amourit of maintenance reCILIii-f-d to adjust boulders and to clean iitter and debris froi-ik between boulders. .0 2.5 F I GURE 2.1 IML, L_ L U')" Cltiff:-T EDGE ALTERNATIVES D, E, F, AND 0 These edge types are all similar in section, but goo in All are vertical d i f teren Iplan configuration. -iout steel sheet pile edges wit[ rubble mound walls. V A p p I i c a t i o n stise these edge types where high ti. ed T' stabiiity and ge vertical walls are necessary T it - - -iere sloping rubble walls are impractical. I I or wl Wi Use of edge type F, zig zag construction, dissi- 14 pates wave action, but is not used since prefer- ence is given to rip-rap edge variations. Edge type D is used at the small island in the canal 3 at Chene Park; under the pedestrian bridge at St. Aubin Park on the Atwater side; and at the straight wall between the Cherie entry and Penn- Dixie Cement Company. Edge type 0 is used only at the overlook land extensions at the canal entries. IN-4 Nia i n lenance: very minimal maintenance. FIGURE 2.1 On@,P L?6C,41 V %0-00 EDGE ALTERNATIVE G Edge, Alleri-iAtive G is composed of a heavy rip t extending rap wall with a , wood deck structure over the rip-i-ap to allow for boat parking. In some iistafit-e!> it iti used in conjunction with a floatation clocking system. Ap p I i L a t i on use wherever boat parking is de- s i red 0 Steps down to the boardwalk allow for easier access to boats. The rip-rap wall miti- gates wave aiid wake action in the canal. 7 Maintenance: the rip-rap walls may require ad- jtistmerel, of the boulders and the docking system will be st-ibject to per,iodic maintenance and re- pair. Piling may require adjustmen t to keep erect. 41n 2.7 M. @o7 i., ....... .......... 14A451 Q1 WAFW:IWAr,;I: COtIl/tWWRI ilj.":Pit (o a, u1j; T a zu ow U31 wi ULM." i;, @A D: 4,1411, cAr I \1 & to Ionic* jjC0 GUAM - All %2 -MAIH IA A Zj -A 'A Ij -ILA1411 MAN: AIIF.01; 4A11:14E PAWS111: q1 M1104 lVlfW.!0ll: W(h)ii itivEn V FIGURE 2. IA: MARINA/CANAL ALTERNATIVE: EDGE TYPE LOCATIONS The selection of edge conditions for the Marina/ Canal Alternative were based upon edge func- i J: tion, wave dampening characteristics, aesthetics k 1:4 1:1 t and cost'. Due to the variety of functions, con- q 1 Kii@!- figurations and hydraulic requirements the edge conditions selected vary considerably from place 4 to place. Figure 2.IA shows the variety of edge !T, k conditions required for the Marina/Canal Alter- native. Edge type G is used most often because wave dampening characteristis of of the favorable the rip rap and its wood deck construction, which allows for boat dockage. Edge type C, rip rap -ie island because of its-- aesthetic appeal, wave construction, is 0 predominant edge along the dampening ability and its low cost. The edge type 0, used only in tfi-6- -overlooks, is sheet pile 14i IcIlkIll 111VIA4 construction and has the same characteristics as edges D, E, and F, but because it is the tran- sition -between the canal and the river it is FIGURE 2.1113: MARINA/LAGOON ALTERNATIVE: unique. The other edge types along the canal EDGE TYPE LOCATIONS 2.8 were selected for their various properties and ways Division of the Michigan Department of NatUr- clearance requirements because space did not al Resources. A wave gage was installed near permit for a sloping rip rap edge. Figure 2.1 the Bob-Lo Dock, beside the Trenton channel at gives the advantages and disadvantages of the Wyandotte, approximately 17 miles downstream from variOUS edges and their applicability. the proposed canal site. The gage recorded 1476 wave periods of five minute durations between The Marina/Lagoon Alternative, shown in Figure September and November, 1969. A maximum record- 2.1B, likewise has several edge conditions. These ed water height b@ the gage was 1.2 feet. Re- were selected on the same basis as the Marina/ corded wave periods were on the order of two to Canal Alternative. As above, edge type G is the four seconds. predominant edge used. Two types of waves are thought to be generated Waves on the Detroit River at the proposed canal by freighters. The most common, and the type site are caused from freighters, small craft ves- that occurs at the proposed canal site in the De- sels and wind, Time and financial constraints troil River, 'a re bow waves. The second type of did not permit wave measurements, hence existing wave that freighters can generate is a surge information and personal observations had to be wave resulting from the displacement of water in relied on for wave information. The only wave a restrictive channel. Surge waves are not ex- records uncovered were found in a "Wyandotte pected in the Detroit River at the proposed canal Wave Study" report (Reference 4) by the Water- site because the river is relatively large in com- 5_ 777r!@, 17 77 oA U A N A 13 A @A 2.9 parison to the volume of water displacement by freighters. Personnel of the U.S. Coast Guard and the Detroit Harbormaster feel that freighters can be expected to generate waves up to a maximum of 4 feet, (References 2 and 5). It is the opinion of experts at the University of Michigan, however, that freighter generated waves will not impact the pro- posed canal site as much as wind waves because wave dampening due to friction and energy trans- mission will occur between the shipping channel and the Detroit River shoreline (References 6 and 7). Energy transmission is the phenomenon where a train of waves will generate a new wave every wave period and the wave energy will be trans- mitted over the longer wave train, resulting in lower wave heights. Three unloaded freights ob- served by SEG staff on April 13, 1980, at Belle Isle, generated waves approximately 1 foot high and 20 feet in length. On June 1, 1980, SEG staff observed waves from Hart Plaza betwwen 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. A west wind on the order of 20 mph generated two foot waves in the River and no lar- ger waves were observed at the shoreline when freighters passed. Small craft waves up to 3 feet can be expected at the proposed canal site according to U.S. Coast Guard personnel. Because of the numerous small craft vessels operating in the vicinity of the ca- nal site, small craft waves may have a more sig- nificant impact on the canal than freighter waves. Wind wave estimates were determined based on the Sverdrup-Munk Bretschneider method as out- lined in the Shore Protection Manual, Volume 1, assuming sufficient wind duration to produce a fully arisen sea (Reference 8). With this assump- tion, wave heights and periods are dependent on wind speed and the effective fetch. The strongest one minute winds recorded for Lake St. Clair since 1940 were 70 mph from the south (Reference 9). It is not expected that wind in excess of 60 mph would blow for a sufficient dur- ation to develop fully arisen conditions at the site of the proposed canal. Gravity waves can be classified, as deep water, transitional or shallow water waves. Since the rel- ative depth (depth/wave length) is greater than one-half for the Detroit River deep water con- ditions occur and the waves are independent of water depth. The following two empirical equa- tions were used to determine wave heights and periods for deep water conditions (Reference 8): gH = .283 tanh [0.0125 gF 0.42] u2 u2 gT = 1.20 tanh [0.077 gF 0.25 TABLE 2.2 2U u2 WIND WAVE DATA FOR SOUTH AND EAST WINDS Where: H = Significant wave height in feet WIND WAVE WAVE WAVE WAVE T = Significant wave period in seconds SPEED HEIGHT PERIOD FREQUENCY F = Effective fetch in feet (MPH) (FT) (SEC) (CYCLES/SEC) U = Wind speed in feet/seconds g = Gravitational constant = 32.2 feet/ 40 2.3 3.0 .33 second2. 50 2.9 3.4 .28 60 3.6 3.7 .27 The significant wave height is defined as the av- erage height of the one-third highest waves. It TABLE 2.3 is about equal to the average height of the waves WIND WAVE DATA FOR SOUTHEAST WINDS as estimated by an experienced observer. The significant wave period is defined as the average WIND WIND WAVE WAVE WAVE of 10 to 15 successful prominent waves. SPEED HEIGHT PERIOD FREQUENCY LENGTH (MPH) (FT) (SEC) (CYCLES/SEC) (FT) Wave estimates at the proposed canal site, com- puted for south, southeast, and east winds of 40, 40 1.5 2.3 .43 27 50 and 60 mph are give in Tables 2.2 and 2.3. 50 1.9 2.6 .38 35 Table 2.2 is based on a 1.1 mile effective fetch 60 2.4 2.9 .34 43 .34 while 2.3 is based on a 0.5 mile fetch. In ref- erence to the proposed canal site, an east wind would be a wind blowing downriver parallel to the shoreline while a southeast wind would be a wind blowing upriver and a southeast wind would blow across the river from Canada. The wave heights listed below agree well with opinions of U. S. Coast Guard personnel who feel wind waves up to 3 feet can be expected on the Detroit River at the proposed canal location. Facilities at the University of Michigan Lake Hy- drautics Laboratory were used for the model study. Work was done under the direction of Dr. D.C. Wiggert, Associate Professor of Civil Engin- eering, Michigan State University, with assistance from Dr. E.F. Brater, Professor of Hydrautic Engi- neering, University of Michigan. Dr. Brater sug- gested that the model study focus on the canal en- trances so that a suitable entrance could be de- 2.11 signed to prevent significant wave action inside other wave conditions as well. the canal. Only the harbor entrances were exam- ined in the model study on the basis that it The four entry configuratiovis were each tested 'for would not be necessary to model the entire canal south (S), southeast (SE) and east (E) waves as if waves could be suppressed when initially enter-. shown in Figures 2.3 through 2.6 . Figures ing the canal. This allowed for a much larger 2.11 through 14.9 show harbor Alternative R of the model scale to be used, than if the entire canal St .- Aubin entrance Wider the three wave direc- were modeled. lions. Visual observations, photographs, and measurements were taken for each model configur- A tank, 8 feet by 8 feet, shown in Figure 2.2 was ation and wave orientation. Harbor modifications used for the study. The scale ratio of the model Such as rubble, zig zaq walls and reduced entran- was 100 to 1. This scale provided the largest mod- ce ways were also tested in order to seek opti-- el that could be built while still providing room mum harbor conditions. to maneuver the models into various positions to stimulate different wave directions. A total of four entry configurations were modeled. Two har- bor entrances, shown in Figures 2.3 and 2.4 were constructed to model the St. Aubin entry -while one model, shown in Figure 2.5 was built for the Chene entrance * The Chene entry model was built such that an entrance wall could be removed to simulate a second alternative entrance shown in Figure 2.6. The models were constructed of wood. LEGEND Rubble mound walls were simulated by tacking strips of mat material to canal walls. Wave ab- sorbers were installed around the walls of the 7- K5;, 2Z& _Te:!@@Tr tank to prevent waves reflecting from the tank walls. The wave height and wave frequency produced by Z I C- Z.6& TE-_07 M 1:&ff_ the wave machine were regulated according to Froude model scaling. A prototype depth of 10 feet, representing average ' water conditions, was F"-Z- ALA_ and seawalls were modeled to a prototype height maintainecl in the canal entrances during testing 4 feet above water. Prototype wave heights, wave periods and wave lengths of 4 feet, 3.4 se- WM@___ E)IRE-T_-@,Tr_-+-A conds and 60 feet were simulated in the model. Corresponding values used in the model were 0.04 feet, 0.34 seconds and 0.6 feet. Dr. Brater sug- gested that if conditions in the canal entratices are sa t i sf ac.tory for a steady train of these waves, the canal will perform satisfactorily for 2.12 Ttt - 0000 100010 X1 00,00100 PIT 00 FiGURE 2.3: ST. AUBIN ENTRY ALTERNATIVE A A L- L- r-.,5 F5 X2. 10000,00 E-,Y\Tff t-3,54@2N -Trr-@T A-Uff L AFBN. FIGURE 2.4: ST. AUBIN ENTRY ALTERNATIVE B 2.14 RAJA X2, TL5T Uzi FIGURE 2.5. CHENE CNTRY ALTERNATIVE A FIGURE 2.6: CHENE ENTRY ALTE Measurements were taken using a point gage with a vernier scale, capable of measuring to the near- est 0.001 feet. Wave heights were determined by measuring the still water level and wave crest for a train of ten to twenty waves and multiply- ing the difference by two. By measuring the first ten to twenty waves generated by the wave machine, reflections inside the harbor could be accounted for without including the resonace ef- fects produced from waves reflecting from the shoreline of the model. Although no analysis was conducted to define experimental error, on the basis of repeated observations, it is assumed to be about + 20%. The experimental error is due largely to the fact that the wave peaks measured at a particular location were not at all the same height. Therefore, the recorded wave peak was somewhat subjective on the part of the observer. Measurements were repeated several times to en- FIG. 2.8 sure consistency. FIG. 2.7 FIG. 2.9 2.16 TABLE 2.4 Wave height measurements were taken at two loca- ST. AUBIN ENTRY WAVE MEASUREMENTS tions for each model test. The measurements are (Relative to Deep Water Wave) summarized in Tables 2.4 and 2.5 as the ratio of the measured wave height to the wave height of the incoming deep water wave. Location of meas- urements are shown in Figures 2.3 through 2.6. ENTRANCE MODEL ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE Selected photographs are given in Figures 2.7 MODEL AND WAVE A B through 2.17 of this report. Additional measure- ORIENTATION s SE E S SE E ments and photographs are on file are Snell Envi- ronmental Group, Inc. in Lansing, Michigan. Visual observations of the model tests were used ZIG ZAG .39 .33 .39 - in conjunction with photographs and wave measure- RUBBLE .22 .50 .50 - ments to evaluate the performance of the canal en- trances. Whereas the measurements were limited ZIG ZAG to specific locations, the observations enabled one ENTRANCE .78 .61 - - .39 .33 to assess the effects of reflection, diffrac tion, re- EXTENSION fraction and dampening upon the harbor as a RUBBLE whole. It was deemed not necessary to employ ENTRANCE ..61 .56 .33 .39 .33 more sophisticated recording instrumentation to de- EXTENSION RUBBLE TABLE 2.5 ENTRANCE CHENE ENTRY WAVE MEASUREMENTS EXTENSION- .33 .39 (Relative to Deep Water Wave) REDUCED ENTRANCE ENTRANCE MODEL ALTERNAT 'IVE ALTERNATIVE ZIG ZAG MODEL AND WAVE A B ORIENTATION S SE E S SE E RUBBLE ZIG ZAG ZIG ZAG .23 .69 .38 .23 .85 .77. ENTRANCE .33 .22 - .17 RUBBLE .23 .54 .69 .23 .92 .54 EXTENSION ZIG ZAG RUBBLE ENTRANCE - - - .54 ENTRANCE .44 .06 - it .11 .11 a- EXTENSION CL EXTENS1014 RUBBLE RUBBLE ENTRANCE - - - .69 ENTRANCE .17 EXTENSION EXTENSION ZIG ZAG - .31 - - .62 - REDUCED EN'rRANCE RUBBLE - .46 - - .77 - 2.17 termine the exact magnitudes of the wave heights since the models served to show which arrange- ment was the most desirable from among several alternatives. Waves are reflected from straight walls so that the angle of incidence equals the angel of reflec- ed. Zig zag walls tend to have the same effect as straight walls except waves are reflected in multi-directions scattering the wave energy. When the reflected waves from straight or zig zag walls combine with waves entering the harbor, wave peaks and troughs are attenuated and standng waves can develop. Reflection patterns observed for straight walls and zig zag walls differed as expected. At some locations, lower wave lengths were observed in the harbor for straight walls than for zig zag walls while at other locations the opposite effect was seen. Rubble mound walls are constructed so that wave energy is absorbed FIG. 2.10 by porous rock structure and wave reflections are suppressed. This was similated and observed in the models by using a porous mat material. Rub- ble mound walls were found to be most effective when the direction of the incoming wave was per- pendicular to the wall. Wave heights in the proposed St. Aubin marina were found to be on the order of one-tenth the deep wave heights occurring in the Detroit River for both St. Aubin entry alternatives. On this basis, maximum prototype wave heights on the order of 0.5 feet are expected, which is well with- in acceptable wave height criteria for small craft marinas. Wave height measurements given in Tables 2.4 and 2.5 show waves measured in the harbors are smaller than waves in the river for all canal en- tries tested. Neither rubble walls nor zig zag walls are significantly better in terms of re- FIG. 2.11 2.18 f I G. 2.12 F I rs . 2.14 1 FiG. 2.15- 2.19 ........... clucing wave heights at the measured locations. Generally, however, rubble walls resulted in much calmer harbor conditions than either zig zag or straight walls, both of which cause cross wave is apparent in Figure 2.10 patterns; this effect to 2.15. Cross wave patterns and unstable con J, "'@.y clitions can be seen in the photographs of zig zag mode I s, while fewer reflections are apparent in the models with rubble walls. The lack of cross NF wave patterns in Figures 2.11, 2.13 and 2.15 in- Z@ dicates the rubble mound walls have absorbed the waves and prevented reflections. Cost estimates 9 iven in Table 2.1 indicate the vertical concrete apped wall is slightly lower than the cost of the c rubble mound wall. However, because the rubble wall affords more wave protection, it is recom- mended for locations exposed to high wave action. @A Wave overtopping, if prolonged, can cause soil P P. erosion and possible sidewall structural failure as well as interfere with the social functions of the riverfront edge. While wave overtopping of . .. ..... circular and zig zag walls was observed at the condi tions Detroit River shore I i ne for extreme -te (four feet waves simulated in tI model) overtop- ng is not expected to occur frequently enough p I t o conflict with recreational activity or cause for wave over- structural damage. The potential topping can be reduced by increasing seawall free- board or using rip rap to absorb wave energy while the potentia.1 -for soil erosion or structural failure can be avoided by providing adequate drainage for overtopping and surface run-off. 7, Overtopping is more noticeable at locations where 'A K wave energy is focused, such as the deep v-sha- -ies ped notcl formed by circular walls. For this raight walls have less potential overtop- reason, st MA ME OW a -ied 125 ping problems than zig zag or CirCLIlar notcl I'M 1KN� walls. As the overtopping was particularly severe 31' M9, at the deep circular wall notches, design modifi- cation to avoid deep notches is recommended. Fig ure 2.18 shows one manner in which the circular F 2.20 wall design can be used with modifications to alle- Entry Alternative B with rubble walls and pointed viate wave overtopping. entrance extension, as shown in Figure 2.4, is recommended for the St. Aubin entrance. Wave Wave diffraction is the changing in wave d i rec--. measurements presented in Table 2.4 are lower tion as waves pass t 'he end -of. a breakwater. This for Alternative B than for Alternative A. Although phenomena was observed in the models at circular some of the measurements tend to support zig zag wall breakwaters as shown in Figures 2.10 and walls being more desirable than rubble walls, 2.11. In the figure, waves follow the curvature rubble mound walls. are recommended because wave of the circular wall upon entering the harbor. reflections that hinder navigation are suppressed. This allows additional wave energy to enter the St. Aubin Alternative A entrance with the reduced harbor causing unstable conditions near.the circu- entrance, rubble walls and entrance extension lar walls. Experimental observations revealed dif- shown in Figure 2.3 is rec'ommended in the fraction at Circular walls can be minimized by de- event entrance B is not acceptable for aesthetic signing the circular wall breakwater with a more or functional reasons. poi.nted end tip as shown in Figures 2.3 and 2.4' and photograph, Figure 2.7. Alternatively, a series of smaller circular walls can be used to Marina/Lagoon Alternative form a more pointed end tip. This alternative has the same entry configuration The effects of reducing the harbor entrance width as the Marina/Canal Alternative.- This entry also was also examined. Significant improvements were acts as the exit and, therefore, no separate wave observed when the entrance way was reduced. action analysis was conducted. Test measurements for Chene entry Alternative A and B can be compared to see this effect. Wave _k, AAX L.A-A L A- measurements for Alternative A, the narrow en- t trance, are about half the height of the waves in the At ternative B model for incoming waves 1 -41' 'p directed perpendicular to the shoreline (SE test) WPIE: ovffffl 1--i 67T6 V1 r_ej Similar results were observed when the harbor en- AA Lk trance was reduced for the St. Aubin entries as shown in Figures 2.16 and 2.17. It is recom- )LA-L mended, therefore, that the harbor entrances be re- dUced to minimize the wave energy entering the PROPOSED OVERLOOK harbors. However, since reducing the harbor en- trance will constrain canal flow and boat traf- Y) fic a minimum width of 80 feet is suggested. Alternative A is- the recommended Chene harbor en- trance. Measurements given in Table 2.5 and ob- A-11 servat ions, support Alternative A as being more ef- fective in reducing wave action than Alternative f), I& V B. Rubble mound walls are suggested for por- tions of the east wall as shown in Figure 2.5. FIGURE 2.18 MODIFIED OVERLOOK 2.21 2.3 tANAL HYDRAULICS preliminary report by SEG is included in this re- porl,- noting that the canal design has changed Canal hydraulics is addressed because of concern only slightly (Reference 10). Results of a comput- over stagnation which could cause weeds, algae, er analysis of canal flow under low, average, foul odors, muck and fish kill. These problems and high flow conditions for both trapezoidal and can be avoided by providing sufficient oxygen ex- rectangular cross section shapes, as shown in Fig- change to minimize nutrients, pollutants and de- tire 2.19, are presented in Table 2.6. The analy- cayed matter. Oxygen can be exchanged with the sis indicated flow would be slightly greater for atmosphere either by mixing that which Occurs a rectangular shaped channel than a trapezoidal f roin the natural f low process or by artifical channel, however, either would provide enough means such as fountains and aerators. The ex- flow to avoid stagnation. The higher flow for the change mechanisms reduce organic deposits by rectangular channel is due to lower wetted perime- diffusing ammonia, carbon dioxide and othernutri- ter and -frictional effects. Travel time for water ents into the atmosphere, oxidizing iron and man- flowing through the canal would range between ganese and keeping phosphate precipitated. 1.7 and 3.3 hours depending on the channel Marina/Canal Alternative shape and water depth cond .ition. The hydraulic concern for this alternative is that Design criteria for the inlet at Chene Street and there be sufficient flow in the canal to avoid canal o6tlet at St. Aubin is selected based primar- stagnation. Previous information contained in a ily on wave action concern and secondly, on hy- TABLE 2.6 CANAL FLOW RESULTS OF COMPUTER ANALYSIS AVERAGE MAXIMUM MAXIMUM TRAVEL TIME CANAL VELOCITY VELOCITY VELOCITY THROUGH CROSS SECTION FLOW FLOW IN CANAL IN CANAL IN CANAL CANAL TYPE CONDITIONS CFS FT./SEC. FT./SEC. FT./SEC. (HOURS) TRAPEZOIDAL LOW 75 .20 .74 .10 3.3 TRAPEZOIDAL AVERAGE 125 .24 .75 .12 2.7 TRAPEZOIDAL HIGH 175 .24 .83 .13 2.6 RECTANGULAR LOW ISO .34 .83 .18 1.9 RECTANGULAR AVERAGE 200 .34 .85 .18 1.9 RECTANGULAR HIGH 300 .39 .96 .21 1.7 2.22 drau I i cf low consideration, The recommended in Section 2.2 of this canal entrances mentioned report are acceptable in terms of hydraulic ef- - - - --------- fects on the proposed canal. Proposed alternative edge treatments and costs to-1111 are given in Figure 2.1 and Table 2.1, respective- ly. Cost -estimates for the sloped , rip rap walls are much lower than verticle wall costs, however, the sloped wall requires more space and. does not permit boat docking. The recommended edge treat- in Figures 2.IA and ment configurations are given 2.113. Since the hydraulic performance of the al- ternatives edge treatments is relatively the same, RIO design is based on the local physical conditions, 1;R&P the planned function and activities of the perim- eter and cost. Aeration may be required in the marina. where flow is expected to be low. Design of the canal TRAPAZOIDAL SECTION should include aeration design of the marina, how- ever, the aeration system can be phased for con- struction and installed only in the event stagnant conditions occur. Bottom diffusers are recommend- ed for reasons given in Section 2.4 of this report, Sedimentation is likely to occur in the canal, but is difficult to predict. Provisions, therefore, - - ----------- - - should be made for the access of maintenance ma- chinery. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin- istration (NOAA) records indicate the maximum monthly water surface elevation fluctuated by 4.7 feet for gages neat, the proposed canal site dur- "7 ing the boating season since 1901. A 5 foot differ- '7 ence between high and low water i s recommended for design. To accommodate small craft and main- tenance vessels a minimum depth of 7 feet is re- nu-i quired. According to NOAA records the canal bed KA--n4j D shou I d be designed a t elevation 565.4 (USGS datum) to maintain a depth of at least 7 feet dur- ing the boating season. No hydraulic advantage RECTANGULAR 5ECTION V TO- Would be gained by designing the channel with a sloping bed, therefore, to minimize construction FIGURE 2.19 2.23 costs a horizontal slope of 0% is recommended. The transition between the canal and the Detroit River should be designed at a slope of 1:2 to in- sure stable channel conditions and avoid potential erosion. Marina/Lagoon Alternative A I-_ A number of circulation methods all can be employed 77 r7 for the Marina/Lagoon Alternative. These methods 7@-/7,- include the use of culv'erts the lagoon into the , pumping water from river, surface aeration and bottom aeration. Connection of the lagoon to the river by culvert will not provide adequate circu- lation due to the small head available and large wetted perimeter to area ratio of the culvert. ? WE Pumping, water from the canal to the river, al- though feasible, is not recommended because of high capital and operational costs. The estimated @FIG: 2.20: CANAL TRANSITION TO RIVER BOTTOM capital costs for a complete pump and piping sys- tem is approximately $60,000. Surface aeration is accomplished by means of a fountain while bottom aeration entails bubbling air upwards from Collection of su the bottom. Essentially, both processes function rface debris is also a potential similarly turning over water once or twice a day problem with the Marina/Lagoon Alternative. Bot- absorbing oxygen from the atmosphere. Bottom aer- tom -diffusers will dispurse- water to the canal ation is recommended for this canal alternative edge, thereby moving surface debris to a location because of the lower operational cost and noninter- where i t .can be collected by hand. ference with navigation. The bottom diffuser is 2.4 CONSTRUCTION BEYOND HARBOR LINE more efficient because bubbles rising to the sur- face drag water upwards through surface tension The alternative canal and marina configurations thereby moving a maximum volume of water with include expansion beyond the harbor line. This minimum power. Preliminary investigations indi- expansion, at both the Chene and St. Aubin en- cate 4 diffusers, a I Hp compressor and electrical tries, was done for three reasons: 1) to create facilities would be required and would cost ap- wave dampening Ichambers; 2) to encourage flow proximately $10,000. Operational costs are expec- into or out of the proposed canal; and, 3) to add ted to be $30.00 per month plus chemicals, if re- a scenic overlook function into the park for view- quired. Construction of the bottom circulation sys- ing up and down the river's edge. These exten- tem can be phased so that the system is imple- sions, for functional reasons explained below, mented only if found to be required. The sys- are a maximum of 75 feet beyond the harbor line. tern, however, should be designed at the time of The extensions were examined for. impact on De- final canal design. troit River flow, Detroit River navigation, and 2.24 cement boat docking. shore would raise the water level by only 0.01 ft. and increase average veloci.ties in the river at Marina/Canal Alternative the fill site by 0.16 ft./sec. The proposed Chene/ St. Aubin riverfront park may require filling 75 This alternative has extensions beyond the harbor feet into the Detroit River. On the basis of re- line at both the Chene Park (canal entry scoop) suits presented in the above mentioned ' report, and the St. Aubin Park (canal exit and marina this filling would have no- significant impact on entry). The Chene extension is a maximum of 75 f low in the Detroit River. feet beyond the harbor line; while the St. Aubin extension is approximately 45 feet. The proposed construction beyond the harbor line would impact small craft navigation in as much The impact on river flow of filling into the De- as it would necessitate increased awareness on troit River for expansion was examined in River- the part of boaters. Lighting and visibility front Capabilities Extension Analysis, by Coastal (height, color) would play significantly in reduc- ,Zone Laboratory (Reference 9). The study has de- ing potential hazards. Flashing lights, defining termined that there would be little or no change the entry points on both sides, in conjunction in the river hydraulics if the fill does not exceed with red lights along the river side will increase more than 200 feet offshore of the present river- visibility with a bright color, such as white, -for bank. A HEC-2 computer analysis of the Detroit the construction material. River by CZL found filling a distance 200 feet off- PE E NN DMI GEMENTC 220 0 0 220 0) CHENE PARK SITE ACC@eS DETROIT 00NWNft*ft*ftftftftft8 RIVER 0 FIG: 2.21: CEMENT BOAT DOCKING ALTERNATIVE 2.25 Other than visibility, the extensions should have as well as with the impacts of land extensions no impact on the navigation of small boats on the beyond the harborline. Wave analysis was con- Detroi t River. They also do not affect larger ducted using 1:100 scale models of the canal en- shipping vessels since the shipping channel is trances. Hydraulic concerns were examined using approximately 1600 feet away from the proposed a HEC-2 computer model of the proposed canal. extensions. The location of the Chene inlet will, The analyses indicate the canal as proposed is however, impact the navigation of freighters dock- technically feasible. Land extensions beyond the ing at the Penn-Dixie Cement Company. If a harbor line beneficially impact wave action con- freighter was docked parallel to the shore at cerns and canal f low. The extension at the Penn-Dixie, the ' land extension would be in its Chene entry requires a realignment of freighter path and the canal entry would be blocked to docking at the Penn-Dixie Cement Company. small craft. This potential problem was solved through conversations with the cement companies Conclusions of this chapter are as follows: where it was considered feasible to angle the freighter to the shore and thereby allow access (1) Waves affecting the canal will be generated to the canal. This angle poses no difficulty to f rom freighters, small craf t vessels and wind. loading and unloading operations and, in fact, Freighter wave heights are not expected to have enhances security since the vessel would not be a significant impact at the canal site because of directly against the shore and within reach of wave dampening due to friction and energy trans- the public. To maintain a minimum canal, entry mission. Small craft vessels can be expected to width of 80 feet and utilizing angle dimensions generate waves up to 3 feet at the canal site. as provided by the cement companies (equal to The maximum wind wave expected at the proposed approximately 22 degrees) limits the Chene entry canal site is 3.6 feet occuring from a 60 mph extension to 75 feet beyond the harbor line.. wind. Marina/Lagoon Alternative (2) Wave action in the proposed marina at St. This alternative as presently configured has iden- Aubin is minimal and would not be a hindrance tical impacts as the Marina/Canal Alternative ex- to moored b6ats. cept that there is no land extension proposed at (3) Wave reflections inside the canal entrance re- the St. Aubin site. The Chene entry extension is sult in cross-wave patterns and should be avoid- not as critical in promigating flow since the pro- ed for navigation purposes. The use of rubble posed aeration process in tne lagoon minimizes this need. Therefore, an extension of smaller dis- mound walls is the most effective means to reduce tance into the river is considered possible al- wave reflections inside the canal entrance. Ver- though the scenic overlook and 'wave dampening tical and zig zag canal sidewalls produce unde- functions are still. considered necessary. sirable reflections inside the' canal entrance. Gen- erally the zig zag will disperse the waves more than the vertical wall, but both walls create 2.5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS cross-wave patterns. This chapter dealt with the technical hydraulic (4) Significantly less wave action is observed in and wave concerns of the proposed marina/canal the canal when the canal entrance is narrowed. 2.26 (5) Potential for wave overtopping at the river wave action. A width of at least 80 feet how- shoreline is observed for zig zag walls and v- ever, is necessary for navigation. shapped notches formed by circular walls. (3) Rubble mound walls should be used for sea- (6) A HEC-2 computer analysis revealed there walls inside the harbor entrances where incoming would be sufficient canal flow to avoid stagna- waves would be reflected. The rubble walls t ion. Travel time mr-ough the canal would range should be constructed of two rock layers, on a between 1.7 and 3.3 hours, depending on the flow 1:1.5 slope. The rock armor should extend down in the Detroit River. Circulation is required for to a point 2 feet below mean low water level. The the second canal alternative which terminates in outside rock layer should be placed and consist a lagoon-like pond. of 3.7 cubic foot size quarry stone while the un- derneath layer should be 3 feet thick and com- (7) The maximum difference in average monthly posed of multi-size heavy rip rap. Toe headers water surface elevations during' the boating sea- of the larger stones should be placed along the son since 1901 is 4.7 feet. lower underwater edge. (8) No hydraulic advantage would be gained by (4) In order to suppress wave overtopping, designing the canal with a sloping bottom. deep, v-shaped notches formed by circular walls should be either avoided or filled with rubble. (9) Any of the proposed canal cross section and (5) Drainage facilities should be provided be- edge treatment alternatives is acceptable from a hind seawalls adjacent to the river shoreline to hydraulic flow standpoint. In protected areas of minimize soil erosion, to prevent hydraulic head the canal, where wave action is of no signifi- build-up behind the walls, and to prevent surface cance, channel cross section and edge treatment water rUn-Off over the exposed end face. design is based on local physical conditions, planned functions and activities of the perimeter (6) The circular wall breakwater of the St. Aubin and cost. Rip rap walls are far less costly than entrance should be designed with a pointed end vertical sheet pile walls, but require more space tip to minimize wave diffraction inside the and cannot be constructed where boat mooring Is harbor. to be provided. After consideration of the analyses, recommenda- (7) The channel bottom transition between the tions are made as follows: canal and the Detroit River should be a maximum slope of 1:2. A horizontal slope of 0% is accep- table in the canal between the canal inlet and (1) Alternative A is the preferred alternative for outlet. the Chene canal entrance. Alternative B is pre- ferred for the St. Aubin canal entrance; however, (8) The canal bottom should be constructed at Alternative A with a narrower entrance would be elevation 565.4 (USGS) to provide the 7 foot mini- as acceptable. mum canal depth at extreme low water condition required for small craft and maintenance vessels. (2) if aesthetically and economically acceptable, A 5 foot difference between low and high water. the canal entrances should be narrowed to reduce should be considered for the design. 2.27 (9) Bottom aera t ion i srecommended to avoid stagnation for the Mar-ina/Lagooh Alternative. The capital cost of the aeration system is approxi- mately $10,000 while operational costs are ex- pected to be $30 per month plus any required chemicals. 2.28 Resolution of Potential Industrial/ Recreational /Transportation/ Utility Conflicts 3.0 3.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter investigates the potential conflicts between the proposed marina/canal configurations, with their related recreational uses and adjoi- ning industrial uses, transportation systems and utility infrastructure. The operations of three in- dustries will be specifically analyzed: Consoli- dated Docking, Medusa Cement Company and Penn- Dixie Cement Company. Truck, rail and shipping operations to these companies and the routing needs of the Rex Trucking Company will be inves- tigated as well as pedestrian/bicycle, park main- tenance and security vehicle circulation. The pro- posed marina/canal configurations also conflict with underground utilities. These conflicts will be itemized and solutions proposed. Lastly, gen- eral concern with noise and dust and their im- pacts on recreational use will be investigated. 3.2 CONSOLIDATED DOCKING Consolidated Docking is the present owner of the majority of the proposed St. Aubin Park site. Its present use is to receive containerized bulk ma- terial from river barges originating in Windsor, Canada and transmitting them to trucks which carry the material to Jefferson Avenue and the state highway network. A boat slip has been re- cut into the site for barge access. The total area of this container port is 12.41 acres with an approximate employment of twenty. Marina/Canal Alternative Acquisition of this site is necessary for the devel- opment of this alternative. Negotiations for this acquisition and relocation are presently underway. The acquisition of Consolidated Docking will great- ly reduce the amount of truck traffic originating 3.1 from this area of the east riverfron.t. If acquisition of this site does not occur, both the concept for a canal and an Atwater mail will have to be abandoned and the major developments proposed in the original Linked Riverfront Parks Project study will have to be re-analyzed. Marina/Lagoon Alternative This alternative is. premised on not acquiring, or delay in acquiring, the Consolidated Docking site. In this instance the primary impact will be f rom the ex tens i ve. truck traf f ic generated by Consolidated Docking near the Chene P-ark site. MEDUSA CIMIKI Co. This traf f ic will have to be re-routed to St. Aubin Street and north to Jefferson Avenue as opposed to its present routing to Dubois Street. 3.3 MEDUSA CEMENT COMPANY FIGURE 3.11: MEDUSA SURVEY The Medusa Cement Company is a division of Me- dusa Corporation with main off ices located in and has approximately 265 feet of frontage on At- Cleveland, Ohio and with regional offices in South- water Street. This site is minimally used for stor- field, Michigan. The information in this section age and is primarily vacant except for a Grand was gathered from direct conversations with repre- Trunk Railroad siding which crosses it for access sentatives of Medusa, from the site visits of the to the site south of Atwater. operations, and from data and diagrams supplied by the Medusa Cement Company. The facilities on the south Atwater site consist of The terminal on Atwater is used as a temporary eight silos divided into 14 storage compartments. storage unit for bulk cement brought in by ship The silos, built in 1967, are approximately 143 and rail. The cement is transferred to trucks in feet high and are constructed of reinforced con- bulk or bag form for*shipping. crete. The trucks to be loaded are able to drive directly below the silos onto a scale. Trains side The Medusa Cement Company utilizes two sites in up adjacent to the silos for unloading. Ships the area. One is south of Atwater, the other di- dock parallel to the harbor line and unload by rectly north across Atwater. The site south of At- means of an air slide elevated conveyor system. water, located between the two -park, sites, is 2.43 acres in area with 221.35 feet of frontage on One additional structure on the site is a metal the Detroit River. This site contains the entire warehouse building approximately 16 feet high operations and facilities of Medusa. The second and 100 feet square built in 1974. This building site, north of Atwater, is approximately 1.2 acres is connected to the cement silos by an air slide 3.2 conveyor and is used for the packaging of cement into bag portions and for storage. The terminal operates year around due to the rail access which allows cement to be brought in when the shipping season is closed on the Detroit River. The peak periods of operation are May through October when an average of 52,000 tons RAIL (TAKES of cement are shipped per month. CEMENT CUT MAY BRING Marina/Canal Alternative CEMENT IN. In order for the canal in this alternative to con- WAREHOUSE nect Chene Park with St. Aubin Park a 135 foot PACKING PLANT wide section of the north portion of the Medusa site south of Atwater must be acquired. This por- TRUCK SERVICE tion is approximately .68 acres and contains the PICKS UP warehouse and packing building. There are two PACKAGED proposed land trade alternatives for acquiring CEMENT this portion and one sub-alternative. AIR SLIDE CONVEYOR 14 SILO COMPARTMENTS TRUCKS REMOVE CEMENT FROM SILOS AIR SLICE CONVEYOR TO BOAT BOAT DETROIT RIVER FIGURE 3-2: MEDUSA OPERATIONS RELATIONSHIPS TRUCK RAILROAD SPURS, NEW BRIDGE ON ST. RELOCATE PACKING PLANT AUBIN CONVEYOR AIR SLIDE LAND TRADED TO CITY SERVICE ROUTE TO CHENE PARK CEMENT SILOS BUFFER LAND TRADED TO MEDUSA MEDUSA The first alternative, "Land Trade/West", involves 30' EASEMENT CHALLENGER trading a portion of the St. Aubin site equal in size to the acquired parcel. This can be done in two ways. Land Trade/West "A" proposes trading a portion of the St. Aubin site approximately 288 feet wide, parallel to the Detroit River, and 120 DETROIT RIVER feet long. A public owned easement, minimally 30 feet wide, gives access to the river's edge. This easement would be closed to the public only while the Medusa Challenger is unloading. In this way the public would have access to the max- imum amount of edge while Medusa would gain, during unloading, access to land at the river's edge adjoining their ship. For truck access to Medusa operations a new truck bridge is pro- posed. In this alternative the bridge is on pub- lic property and also gives maintenance and security vehicles access to the parks without traversing Medusa property. This bridge is dis- FIGURE 3.3: LAND TRADE WEST "A" cussed in more detail later in chapter. 3.4 NEW RAILROAD SPURS RELOCATE PACKING PLANT TRUCK BRIDGE ON ST. AUBIN LAND TRADE TO CITY CONVEYOR AIR SLIDE SERVICE ROUTE TO ST. AUBIN PARK BUFFER CEMENT SILOS LAND TRADE TO MEDUSA Land Trade/West "B" proposes trading a portion of the St. Aubin site approximately 119 feet wide, parallel to the Detroit River, and 290 feet long. In this alternative the end of the proposed truck bridge is on Medusa property thereby giving Medusa less usable land and forcing park mainte- nance and security vehicles to travel through Me- dusa property to gain access to the parks. A thir- ty foot wide public easement at the river's edge is also proposed in this configuration. In either Land Trade/West alternatives, rail ac- cess to the Medusa site south of Atwater would be MEDUSA discontinued and replaced with an air slide con- CHALLENGER veyor to the Medusa site north of Atwater. Investi- gations showed that this conveyor is much more 30' EASEMENT feasible than building a train bridge across the canal since this bridge would require a prohibi- tive length of ramp for maintaining clearance over the canal. Likewise, the packing building FIGURE 3.4: LAND TRADE WEST "B" NEW RAILROAD SPURS RELOCATE PACKING PLANT CONVEYOR AIR SLIDE LAND TRADE TO CITY SERVICE ROUTE TO ST. AUBIN PARK BUFFER CEMENT SILOS LAND TRADED TO MEDUSA which is an all metal building, would be relo- cated to the site north of Atwater. The "Land Trade/East" alternative proposes that a portion of the Chene site be traded for Medusa land of approximately the same dimensions and configuration of Land Trade/West "B". In this al- MEDUSA 30' EASEMENT ternative the truck bridge would line up and be- CHALLENGER come an extension of Dubois Street which would remain the north/south truck route out of the DETROIT RIVER area. Land Trade/West "A" is the recommended alterna- tive because it provides more equitable and use- able land for the Medusa Cement Company; be- cause it trades a portion of the St.Abin site which is the larger of the two park sites; be- cause it keeps the proposed truck route on St. Aubin which has less impact on proposed new de- velopment of the Chene #2 and ajoining sites; FIGURE 3.5: LAND TRADE EAST 3.6 and because Land and Water Conservation funds have already been utilized to purchase the Cherie site while the St AUbin site has Not yet been purchased. Site improvements to Medusa Cement Company after the recommended land trade occurs include a truck bridge over the canal, relocaton of the packing plant, an air slide conveyor to the site north of Atwater, rail spur realignment, fencing and landscape buffering. The truck bridge is proposed to provide access to the Medusa Cement Company's loading facilities, primarily heavy truck traffic, and to provide ser- vice vehicles access to the island park. There is no additional right-of-way or easements re- quired for the Land Trade/West alternatives since the existing 72-foot right-of-way of St. Aubin Street is sufficient to accept the northerly re- tained approach roadway. An additional 10 feet of right-of-way on the east side and 15 feet of right-of-way on the west would be required for the Land Trade/East alternative due to the limi- lation of the existing 42-foot right-of-way on Dubois Street. The nature of the anticipated vehicular types util- izing the proposed structure would mandate a live load design criteria of HS-20, the standard Michi- gan Department of Transportation loading for State trunklines. The typical bridge section as illustrated provides for two 12-foot traffic lanes with 3-foot curb clear- ances for a total of 30 feet face-to-face of curb. A 5-foot sidewalk is proposed on the east side of the structure for Land Trade/West and on the west side for Land Trade/East to provide pedes- trian access to the island park for Medusa Cement. Company personnel and park service employees. A 2-foot 6-inch safety curb is called for on the opposite side of the structure. A traffic designed 3.7 concrete railing is designated on both sides of the bridge. For economic and aesthetic reasons, the type of superstructure selected is a variable depth, reinforced concrete T-beam arrangement con- tinuous over 3 spans and cast-in-place. The sub- structure units are reinforced concrete founded on either spread footings or piles as the soil conditions dicate. Reinforced concrete retaining walls are shown on the north appoach to elimi- nate requiring additional right-of-way in the case of Land Trade/West or to minimize acquiring additional right-of-way in the case of Land Trade/East. The concrete retaining walls on the north approach will also highlight the urban aspects of the Detroit side of the pack whereas the stoping sidefills of the south approach will be treated to blend with the natural flavor of the island side. The roadway vertical alignment, or grade, was es- tablished to facilitate the required 16-foot mini- CA- t-i 16, fj P46,-re-E FI-GURE 3.6: TRUCK/SERVICE 13RIDGE ELEVATION 1 3.8 MIN IME IME ME INIM SIM 311 C7 71 -L-A 10, CR mum underclearance for boat traffic on the pro- Medusa Cement Company operation. Drives for the posed canal. A design speed of 25 miles per hour park service vehicles intersect the south approach (mph) was selected. The critical grade consider- approximately 360 feet south of the Atwater Street ations Occur on the north approach to meet the ex- centerline. The service drive alignment and isting roadway elevation at the existing railroad grades will be adjusted to fit the constraints of crossing, approximately 250 feet north of the any land trade arrangements, and to blend with Atwater Street centerline, due to the cost involved the natural terrain of the park sites. in adjusting railroad grades. A six percent (6%) Construction costs of $640,000 for the proposed grade on the north approach was necessary to structure and approaches will be essentially the meet -the 16-foot minimum underclearance at the same for either land trade. However, cost of ad- proposed canal. The crest vertical curve at the bridge provides a stopping sight distance of clitional land acquisition along Dubois Street must 167 feet which is adequate for a 25 mph cMsign be added to the total costs of the Land Trade/ speed. The 6% grade on the south approach was East. chosen to minimize approach fill and to maintain The Medusa land trade alternatives dictate that the lowest profile possible. The south approach the existing railroad service to Medusa Cement grade could be flattened if deemed advisable Company's operation be discontinued from the ex- since it is the upgrade for loaded cement trucks. isting cement silos north to the north right-of- The south approach alignment is tied to the e . x- way line of Atwater Street. Removal of this por- isting ground elevation at the cement silos of the tion of the spur track is necessary since provid- Ing a railroad structure over the proposed canal would negate the value of the canal due to the 11" lack of vertical underclearance between such a -TAU structure and the canal water surface. Adjusting the railroad grades to accommodate acceptable 4". underclearance Would be extremely impractical if not impossible. Since rail transportation is a major part of the Medusa Cement Company's oper- X11 ation at this site, it is imperative that a method of transporting cement between the existing cement . . . . . . silos and a new, rail unloading facility north of Atwater Street be provided. It is proposed that either the existing rail unloading operations and the existing warehouse and packing building be elocated to the Medusa Cement Company's prop r er- ty immediately north of. Atwater Street or that new facilities to accomplish the same functions be con- structed on that site, whichever is most cost effec- tive. The most viable method of transporting ce- ment between the existing silos and the facilities north of Atwater Street is the utilization of ce- ment air slides such as those presently being used 3.10 to unload cement boats south of the existing ce- ment silos. Mr. Howard L. Simpson, Marine Mana- ger of Medusa Cement Company, stated that the air slide operation is very efficient and could handle the quantities of cement involved in their operations. He also stated that the air slides are cost effective in containing cement dust dur- ing transport. The minimum effective slope for air slides is limited to seven degrees (7o). Since cement has to be transported to and from the ce- ment silos, two (2) air slides are required with vertical conveyor towers at each end. The convey- or tower at the site north of Atwater Street will be approximately 48 feet tall and attached to the warehousing and packiing building. The convey- or tower to the south is the sme height and can be attached to the existing cement silos. Adequate vertical underclearance is provided under the air slide at Atwater Street north of the proposed ca- nal and at the service drive immediately south of of the proposed canal. It should be noted that MEDUSA SILOS CEMENT AIR NEW SLIDE CONVEYORS CONVEYOR TOWER RELOCATED WAREHOUSE MEDUSA LAND TRADE AREA ATWATER MEDUSA FIGURE 3.7 MEDUSA AIR SLIDE OVER CANAL 3.11 FIGURE 3.7: MEDUSA AIR vertical water-edge treatment is required on the. Total relocation and adjustment costs for the Me- south side of the proposed canal to accommodate dusa Cement Company are outlined below: the service drive and pathway. Site Improvements $3360000 Mr. Simpson indicated that railroad tracks for Conveyor Systems 200,000 storage of at least five (5) railroad cement trans- Truck Bridge 640,000 port cars, approximately 70 feet long, must be provided at the site north of Atwater Street. In Total $1,176,000 order to meet this requirement, it is recommended that two additional spur tracks be Installed par- Marina/Lagoon Alternative allel to and connecting with the existing spur at the northerly edge of the site. Because the canal does not cross Medusa property In this alternative no land trade is required. The three tracks would lie adjacent to and paral- Hence, no major relocation costs are incurred. lel with the east side of the relocated ware- Site impcovements incl6d"ing site clean-up, fenc- housing and packing building and would allow ing, landscaped buffer and painting the cement undertrack cement unloading operations to be con- silos are still recommended for compatability with ducted with minimum o .f railroad car switching. the proposed park. These improvements are esti- We feel this unloading operation would be supe- mated to cost $75,000. rior to the existing facility. 3.4 PENN-DIXIE CEMENT COMPANY The relocation or construction costs of the ware- housing and packing bui Iding, railcar un-. Penn-Dixie Cement Company is . located east of loading facility, and air slides would be essen- Chene Park south of Atwater on the Detroit River. tially the same for either land trade alternative. Penn-Dixie operations are affected minimally with the development of the park sites. The operations The machinery and equipment ' would be replaced. for shipping and storage of bulk cement are gener- The total estimated cost for this operation is ally similar to those at Medusa. The major Im- $80,000. pacts on Penn-Dixie involve their railroad spur, ship loading operations, and truck routes. The new plant would be connected to the silos by Marina/Canal Alternative .an air slide conveyor system. This would involve approximately 360 lineal feet of slide and the The railroad spur to Pe'nn-Dixie is currently not structure to carry it across the canal. The esti- in use, is in a dilapidated condition and would mated cost for this is approximately $200,000. require extensive improvements to use. Since rep- resentatives of Penn-Dixie expressed a desire to The rail spur, fencing, landscaped buffer -and maintain this line in case the future demands its other,general improvements such as building clean use, the rail spur poses a particular problem. up, access roads, site circulation and painting The alignment of the canal places the entry plaza graphics on the silos should cost approximately and drop-off to Chene Park at the foot of Chene $256,000. Street, Because the s pur crosses through this 3.12 area, conflicts may arise for pedestrian and vehic- ular crossing. If the rail dod come into use, however, the traffic would be so light that only minor precautions would be necessary, such as signage and special paving to increase awareness of the rail spur. Inconvenience to park users would be for a very short period of time while freight cars are moved into position. Ship loading operations would be affected because the ship overhangs the canal entry. Through con- versations with the cement companies, it was de- termined feasible to angle the ship out into the Detroit River. This frees the canal entry for small craft and gives added security to the ships at Penn-Dixie by being away from the shore and out of the reach of the public using the park. The truck routes to Penn-Dixie would be affected from the closing of Atwater Street between Orleans and Chene Street. The trucks would be rerouted up Jos. Campau Street directly to Jefferson Avenue with no serious interference to business. Marina/Lagoon Alternative This alternative would involve identical consider- ation as the Marina/Canal Alternative since the only land changes are on the west side of Chene Park and are not related or adjoining Penn-Dixie operations. 3.5 RECREATION, SERVICE AND SECURITY VEHICLES According to Mr. Carl Ackerman fo the Forestry and Landscape Division of the Recreation Depart- ment, the largest service vehicle used for park maintenance is 10 1/2 feet high and 8 feet wide weighing 17,000 pounds. Utilizing this design stan- dard, the proposed truck bridge across the canal in the Marina/Canal Alternative will be more than adequately designed for this load since it accom- modates larger and heavier cement trucks Ser- 3.13 ST. AUBIN PARK FIGURE 38: MARINA/CANAL SERVICE ACCESS DETOIT RIVER CHENE PARK vice vehicles will be able to gain access to all points in the park. The bridge will not require service/security vehicles to pass under it because the proposed design allows access off the bridge in both directions. ATWATER ST. ATWATER ST. The Marina/Lagoon Alternative allows for service vehicle access on grade. This route will primar- ily be a pedestrian route with a chain/bollard de- vice preventing vehicles other than maintenance LAGOON vehicles from access tothe Chene Park site. 3.6 PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESS The Linked Riverfront Parks Project proposed cre- ation of two major pedestrian/bicycle circulation systems. The Riverlink follows the river's edge wherever possible and the Interpretive Link winds CHENE PARK through the existing streets of the east riverfront area and includes access to Jefferson Avenue and FIGURE 3.9: MARINA/LAGOON SERVICE ACCESS 3.14 residential areas to the north. At the proposed Chene and St. Aubin part sites the Riverlink and Interpretive Link come together at the Atwater Mail. Access to the Mall from the north is pro- posed to follow Chene Street and Orleans Street. Vehicular parking for the park sites would lie on these north/south access routes north of Atwater Street with auto drop-off points occurring at each park site. Either of the proposed marina/canal alternative configurations will affect the movement of pedes- trians and bicyclists from the Atwater Mail or auto drop-off areas into the parks. Marina/Canal Alternative The canal, in this alternative, completely blocks pedestrian and bicycle access to the major por- tion of the parks. To accommodate access, two pedestrian bridges are proposed: a ramped, steel truss bridge at the Chene Park and a free form concrete bridge at the St. Aubin Park. Both bridges accommodate bicycles and handicapped access. The Chene bridge is estimated to cost $111,250 and the St. Aubin bridge is estimated to cost $74,000. Marina/Lagoon Alternative One pedestrian bridge - the Chene Park ramped, steel truss bridge - is proposed for this alter- native. This bridge will connect the entry plaza to the proposed water play feature on the east end of the Chene Park peninsula. This will elimi- nate the need to walk the distance around the boat lagoon to gain access to the peninsula and will also create a high viewing area to look at the entire park site. The bridge cost is the same as in the previous alternative. 3.15 3.7 TRUCK ROUTING parks their trucks on a site north of Atwater and west of Orleans. One of the primary issues identified by the Conversations were Linked Riverfront Parks study was the potential held with representatives of conflict between industrial truck traffic and new Rex Trucking Company to discuss the impact of land uses such as commerc'ial or residential. This The primary criteria , the closing of Atwater. ex- is especially true in the area of the Chene/St. pressed by this company is that any new route be Aubin parks. Presently trucks move east and within a maximum distance of one mile from their west along Atwater and movL- north along Rivard, present location to the farthest cement company, St. Aubin, Dubois, Chene and Jos. Campau (Penn-Dixie). Streets. Although Dubois is presently the desig- nated north/south truck route, lack of signage An alternate routing system was presented to Rex and enforcement minimizes the conf i nemen t of Trucking which proposed east/west travel along trucks to this route. Jefferson and north/south travel along Riopelle, St. Aubin and Jos. Campau. This route was pro- The primary generators of truck traffic in the posed for the following reasons: 1) traffic sig- parks area are Consolidated Dock i ng, Huron nals at Jefferson facilitate in turning large ce- Cemen t Company, Medusa Cement Company and ment trucks; 2) other east/west routes (Franklin, Penn-Dixie Cement Company. Truck traffic is Woodbridge) do not have adequate right-of-ways also generated by industries north of Atwater,but for truck routes and do not provide enough clear- this traffic is not directly affected by the pro- ance for the minimum turn i ng radii of cement posed Marina/Canal. trucks; 3) arty cast/west route south of Jefferson would conflict with proposed new developments in Marina/Canal Alternative the east riverfront area including the planned Interpretive Link; 4) the straightest possible Truck traffic in this alternative is affected in path is desirable to minimize turns; and 5) this three ways: 1) the closing of Atwater between route is within the one mile maximum distance Orleans and Chene removes a complete segment of criteria. This route, as well as the proposed the major east/west truck route; 2) the canal con- Medusa truck bridge, was found acceptable to the figuration and recommended land trade alternative Rex Trucking Comp'any. Costs incurred would be requires a truck bridge to Medusa and moves the minimal for new signage and a new traffic signal north/south truck route from Dubois to St. Aubin; light at Jefferson and Riopelle. and 3) t'lie acquisition of Consolidated Docking Marina/Lagoon Alternative drastically reduces the number of trucks gener- ated in the area. This alternative proposes the closing of Atwater Because Consolidated Docking is relocated, the between Dubois and Cherie only. It is still recom _ I mended that St. Aubin replace Dubois as the pri- primary concern is with truck access to the ce- mary north/south route to keep greater distance ment companies. The primary transporter of bulk between the extensive truck traffic at Consoli- cement from these companies is the Rex Trucking dated Docking and the users of Chene Park. Jef- Company. This company is located adjacent to ferson to Jos. Campau would remain the primary the Huron Cement Company on Atwater and also access to Penn-Dixie Cement Company. 3.16 E. JEFFERSON AVENUE Imimlol ININ win W ODBRIDG LIN FRANK Al,- ATER C ENE 2 A WATER CLOSEDuaw1mow Samum"'alft" X"w N AT wag- Ell TE CLOSED ATWATER III ST. AUBIN PARK CHENE PARK REX TRUCKING CO. HURON CEMENT CO. MEDUSA CEMENT CO. PENN D .IXIE CEMENT CO. DETROIT RIVER FIGURE 3.10: TRUCK ROUTES 3.17 3.8 UTILITY CONFLICTS non-processed sanitary sewage. 'The estimated con- struction cost to realign these sewers under the The conflicts Ihat arise between construction of canal assumes the worst condition. These costs the proposed marina/canal and public utilities could probably be reduced when further data is such as storm sewers, sanitary sewers, water available next spring. mains, gas lines and leads for each utility that are known to exist on the present site will be Marina/Canal Alternative addressed herein for each marina/canal alterna- tive. The sizes and locations of the public utili- The resolution of the conflicts that construction ties located on the site were obtained from the of the proposed canal may generate with public City of Detroit engineering records made available utilities will be analyzed at each major street in- to us and their accuracy is not hereby attested tersection in this area, working from east to west to except for that area on Atwater Street between namely Chene Street, Dubois Street, St. Aubin Chene Street and Dubois Street which was survey- Street, and Orleans Street. ed under previous development contracts. Both the Chene and St. A6bin sites conta Iin major A. Chene Street Utilities at Inlet combined overflow sewers. These are located on Storm Sewers: two 42-inch diameter storm sewers, the Chene Street, Dubois Street and Orleans Street with f low controls, located within Chene Street right-of-ways and extend through the park sites right-of-way and extending south of Atwater to the river. These sewers are activated when Street to the Detroit River. major rainfall overloads the city's combined sewer system and its filtering plant. When this 'Occurs Conta'ct with the City indicates that storm water stormwater carrying sanitary sewage is dis- flow in these sewers are restricted to 75% capac-; charged directly into the Detroit River creating ity. Based on sewer invert elevations of 672.6 point source pollution. To mitigate this problem, at Atwater Street and 871.0 at the river, a length a storm water retention and/or combined sewer of 450 feet and the 75% restriction- the maximum separation study is being conducted for the City f low is estimated at 30 cubic feet per second of Detroit by the consulting engineering firm of (cfs). Since the proposed canal inlet is located B I ack and Veatch. Their preliminary findings west of the storm sewers at the Detroit River's will not be released until September of 1980. it edge, the storm sewers will not cause an interfer- is known at this 'time that the report will not rec- ence. However, reconstructed outlets into the De- ommend total elimination of sewer overflows nor troi t River will be required due to the reworked discontinuation of any overf low sewers in the river edge treatment. It is anticipated that the canal study area. However, storm water flows to -relatively low flow of 30 cfs will not adversely the area will be greatly reduced by utilizing re- affect the canal inlet flow -or the canal water tention storage basins, quite likely near the pre- quality. sent Elmwood Cemetary. This reduced flow data will not be available until March of 1981. Until Gas Line: one abandoned 4-inch high pressure this data is ava.ilable, it is preliminarily recom- gas line located within the Chene Street right- mended that these overflow sewers not discharge way extends from Atwater Street an unknown directly into the canal since they presently carry distance. 3.18 15" Dia. Sewer 15" Dia. Sewer 6" Water 8" Dia. Sewer 16" Water 6" Water ATWATER ST. Q.H. Electric 16" Water Telephone Public Lighting Public Lighting 2-5'x4'-9" Storm 1-4'-9" Dia. Storm 1-5'-0" Dia Storm 1-12" Dia. Sanitary FIGURE 3.11: 1-3'-4x5'-0" Storm 1-3'-4"x5'-0" Storm 1-8" Fire Boat Line UTILITIES 1-5'-0"x7-0" Storm 1-5'-0"x7'-0" Storm Buried Electric lit The gas line does not interfere with the proposal not feel syphons are appropriate due primarily canal construction. to maintenance concerns. The estimated construct- B. Utilities at Dubois Street ion cost is $175,000. Storm Sewers: two 5-foot-by 4-foot-9-inch arch Option 2: construct new sewers along Atwater sewers and one 4-foot-9-inch diameter sewer, all Street to redirect sewer flows to the intersection located in the Dubois Street right-of-way, ex- of Chene Street and Atwater Street and reconstruct tending south from Atwater Street to the Detroit existing sewers from that intersection south River. Construction of the proposed canal will interfere to accomodate the increased flow. This option with these storm sewers. Based on sewers inlet elevations at 873.5 at Atwater Street and 872.0 at may adversely affect flows and water quality the Detroit River, a maximum flow of 330 cfs is at the proposed canal inlet due to the relatively anticipated. The following options were investi- high volume discharged into the Detroit River gated as resolutions to the sewer conflict: immediately upstream of the proposed inlet. Option 1: reconstruct the existing sewers Estimated construction cost is $990,000. under the proposed canal only as an inverted Option 3: reconstruct the existing sewer under sewer (siphon). Although this is cost effective, the proposed canal only with a vertical lift the Detroit Water and Sewer Department does pumping station at the south side of the proposed 3.19 canal. This option was eliminated due to the River. @Because it is abandoned this line. will not high initial construction costs and the high con- affect canal construction. tinual maintenance costs associated with lift sta- Buried Electric Service: an abandoned buried tions of the size necessary to handle the antici- electric service I ine is located i n the Dubo i s pated flows. The appearance of ' a lift station on Street right-of-way extending south of Atwater the island park would also be objectionable. Street an unknown distance. Because it is abandon- Option 4: construct new sewers along Atwater ed this - I i'ne* 'wi-I'l 'not' affect 1. canal construction. Street to redirect sewer flows to the intersection C. Utilities at St. Aubin Street of Orleans and Atwater Street and reconstruct Storm Sewers: one 54oot diameter storm sewer, existing sewers f rom that intersection south to r I the Detroit River. This option, Including picking within the St. Aubin Street right-of-way extending up the sewer flow from the St. Aubin sewer, is soutl.i of Atwater Street to the Detroit River. estimated to cost $1,900,000. Construction of the proposed canal Would interfere Option 5: outlet the sewers directly into the canal. with the existing sewer described above. Based This option involves minimal cost but would have on an assumed slope of 0.2%, the anticipated flow to- be studied in much greater depth to determine for the 5-foot diameter storm sewer is 108 cfs. if the marina area could be adequately flushed The following options were studied as a resolution of sanitary matter. The canal itself is self flush- to the storm sewer conflict: ing. Option 1: reconstruct the 'existing sewer under Option 4 is recommended 'as presently the most the proposed canal only utilizing an inverted viable Solution. Option 5 may have merit but sewer (siphon) as described in Option I at Dubois cannot be investigated fully until the Black and Street. Estimated construction cost is $70,000. Veatch study is complete. Option 2: construct a new sewer easterly on At- Sanitary Sewer: one 12-inch diameter sanitary water Street to Chene Street and Ihence Southerly sewer within the Dubois Street right-of-way ex- to the Detroit River. When this option is consid- tending South of Atwater Street a distance of 155 ered in conjunction with Option 2 at Dubois feet to a sanitary manhole. Street, i.e. increasing the sewer size from Dubois This sewer services the Medusa Cement Company; Street east to Chene Street and from Chene Street south to the river, the anticiapted increase in and will also service the proposed part<. We rec-: ommend reconstructing the 12-inch sewer under the, construction cost. is $500,000. .proposed canal from its south edge to the manhole. Option 3: reconstruct the existing sewe r under on the south side of Atwater Street and lifting the proposed canal only utilizing a vertical lift the 'sewerage to the existing sanitary sewer by pump station on the south side of the proposed means of a manhole type sanitary s'ewer lift canal. This option was eliminated for the same pump. This solution would also provide adequate reasons given in Option 3 at Dubois Street.* capacity to discharge other sanitary sewers re- Option 4: same as described at Dubois Street. qUired for the total park concept. The estimated Option 5: same as described at Dubois Street. construction cost is $36,000. Option It is recorrimended as at Dubois Street. Water Line: One abandoned 8-inch diameter fire boat line within the Dubois Street right-of-way ex.- D. Utilities at Orleans Street tending sotith from Atwater Street to the Detroit Storm Sewers: one 3-foot-4-inch by 5-foot box 3.20. storm sewer and one 5 foot by 7 foot box storm Utilities as Orleans Street: the existing utilities sewer within the Orleans Street right-of-way ex- will not conflict with proposed lagoon construc- lending south of Atwater Street to the Detroit River. tion. Construction of the proposed canal does not con- 3.9 NOISE AND DUST flict with the storm sewers at this location except at the extreme westerly portion of the canal out- The level of back ground and/or peak noise is a let in the marina area. Based on an assumed major potential conflict between recreational use sewer slope of 0.2%, the anticipated maximum flow and industrial use. The Federal Highway Admin- is 330 cfs. Resolution of any storm sewer con- istration recommended L10 design noise level for flict must be predicated an the final configuration recreational areas is 70 dBA; the recommended of the proposed canal outlet and marina facili- level for outdoor amphitheater is 60 dBA. It is ties. However, we feel a minimum amount of presumed that noise, per se, does not affect the sewer relocation would be required at the Detroit canal; in fact, the boat traffic in the canal is riverfront. Estimated construction costs associ- potentially a major generator of background ated with the sewer relocation will be addressed noise. The noise generated by industry sur- in the cost analysis of the Marina/Canal Alterna- rounding the parks may adversely impact the tive. In our opinion, the flow from the existing park quality. Therefore, noise readings were ob- storm sewers would have a minimal effect on the tained by the staff of Schimpeler-Corradino Asso- proposed marina operations and no adverse effect ciates, consulting engineering, at two different on the water quality. times of the year, under two different conditions. The first readings were taken in October, 1979 at Marina/1agoon Alternative ten locations. At the lime of these readings no cement unloading operations were occuring and, The identification and proposed resolution of poten- therefore, general background noise from sur- tial conflicts between the existing utilities and rounding industry is recorded. The results of construction of the Marina/Lagoon Alternative are these readings areas in Table 3.1. as follows: These readings indicate that even though this Utilities at Chene Park: identical to the Marina/ urban park cannot be considered quiet, the noise Canal Alternative. levels can generally be considered acceptable. Utilities at Dubois Street: identical to the Ma- There was some concern expressed that unaccep- rina/Canal Alternative based on anticipated con- table peak noise might be experienced during ce- struction of the proposed boat turnaround lagoon ment ship unloading operations. Therefore, on extending west of Dubois Street. Limiting con- August 8, 1980, additional noise level readings struction of the proposed boat turnaround lagoon were taken during the unloading of the Medusa entirely east of Dubois Street would result in no Challanger at the Medusa Cement Company - an conflict with the utilities at this location. operation that occurs about once a week. As illustrated below, L1O noise levels ranging from Utilities at St. Aubin Street: the existing utili- 59 dBA to 79 dBA were recorded. The higher ties will not conflict with proposed lagoon con- noise levels were associated with conveyor motors, struction. as well as background noise along the river. TABLE 3.1 noise specifically generated by the Conso . lidated NOISE MONITORING Docking operations cannot -be separated from the (WITHOUT SHIP UNLOADING OPERATIONS) readings. Station Staff of Schervish, Vogel, Merz, P.C. stood at the Location L (dBA) Location amphitheater loction during ship unloading oper- 10 ations on August B. Conversations were easily A 69 Center of carried on in a normal tone of voice; background A 63 Chene #2 noise was not disturbing. Si te Another potential conflict between recreational and B 64 Northeast industria 'I use is from dust. This dust is gener- B 63 Corner of ated by cement plant operations and by road Chene #1 dust caused by truck traffic. Visual observation of the park sites by SVM staff throughout the C 58 Southeast past year has indicated that dust does not C 59 Corner of appear to be a major ()roblem. On August 8, 1980 Chene #1 D 74 Northwest TABLE 3.2 D 77 Corner of NOISE MONITORING Orleans & (DURING SHIP UNLOADING OPERATIONS) Atwater Station E 65 North side Location L 10 (dBA) Location E 67 of Atwater 1 79 Along river F 71 Northwest 1 65 south of F 74 Corner of 1 66 amphi- Atwater & theater St. Aubin 2 71 Southwest 2 62 corner of 2 73 Chene #1 These noise levels are, again, generally accep- table except that with or without ship unloading 3 67 Along they exceed the recommended LIO level of 60 dBA 3 72 Atwater for amphitheaters. The proposed earth mounding,, contouring and landscaping should mitigate these 4 59 East edge high noise levels to some extent, but the poten- 4 74 of inlet, tial to hold certain types of performances at the 4 70 St. Aubin amphitheater might be limited. The amount of site 3.22 lit; DETROIT RIVER FIGURE 3.12: NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS the unloading operations of the Medusa Challenger 3.10 RAIL TRANSPORTATION were observed. The operation is under constant surveilance by an employee of Medusa Cement As this report was going to the printers, word Company from the top of the cement silos. At one was received that Conrail had embargoed rail point in the operations a conveyor malfunctioned shipping in the east riverfront area. We assume causing a small cloud of cement dust. The con- the reasons for this include the low volume of veyor was shut down immediately; the total dur- shipping and the cost of bringing the existing ation of dust was less than 60 seconds and in rail up to minimum safety standards (Conrail minimal amounts. During the normal course of un- personnel had to walk in front of the engines loading dust generated was totally controlled and when using this track). The elimination of rail not evident. service affects the Marina/Canal Alternative in that it assumes the warehouse building must be moved north of Atwater to gain rail service. Road dust can be easily controlled through a road wetting program, The Medusa Cement Com- Two potential solutions are apparent: 1) replace pany informed us that their plant in Charlevoix, the low volume rail service with truck service; Michigan is in a recreational area and that they or 2) run a new spur from Grand Trunk regularly wet the roads for dust. This same pro- Western Railroad to Medusa. If the latter is gram could be utilized on the truck route on St. feasible (which is questionable) then the Marina/ Aubin Street. Canal Alternative would not change. If the former 3.23 is feasible then the warehouse/packing building 5. The Marina/Canal Alternative requires a new could possibly be relocated on Medusa property air slide conveyor to cross the canal for serv _ south of Atwater. The cost of relocation would icing Medusa Cement operations north and south probably still remain the same because a new con- of Atwater. This conveyor and the relocation of veyor system to this building would be needed. the packing building was considered more feasible than building a railroad bridge over the canal. Although there is insufficient time to analyze the impact of the Conrail embargo, the cost of Medusa 6. Two pedestrian bridges are required by the -relocation is not drastically changed. It is as- Marina/Canal Alternative. One pedestrian bridge sumed that this embargo does not affect Medusa is recommended for the Marina/Lagoon Alternative. operations to the extent that they would have to abandon their operations. 7. No utility alterations are required for the Marina/Lagoon Alternative except for sewer recon- struction at the river's edge. 3.11 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS B. The Overflow sewers at Dubois Street and St. Aubin Street conflict with the canal in the Mar- This chapter investigated the potential conflicts ina/ Canal Alternative. .The recommended resolu- arising from industrial, recreat 'ional, utility and tion is to reconstruct the sewers along Atwater transportation concerns. The investigation deter- Street to Orleans Street and then south to the Det- inined that all conflicts can technically be re- roit River. solved. Cost impacts are summarized in Chapter 5. Major conclusions and recommendations are as 9. The sanitary sewer at Dubois will have to be fol lows: reconstructed under the canal in the Marina/Canal Alternative. 1. The Consolidated Docking site must be ac- quired for development of the Marina/Canal Alter- 10. The utilities at Orleans Street require no al- native. The Marina/Lagoon Alternative is prem7 terations outside of reconstruction of the outlet at ised on delay or inability of acquisition of this the river's edge. site. 111. Truck, pedestrian and bicycle circulation 2. A land-trade with Medusa Cement Company is concerns can be feasibly resolved for either necessary for the Marina/Canal Alternative. The marina/canal configuration. -Marina/Lagoon Alternative requires no land trade. 12. Industrial noise and dust pose no major con- 3. The Medusa Land Trade/West "A" is the recom- flict with recreational use. mended land trade alternative. 4. The Marina/Canal Alternative requires a new truck bridge for security and maintenance vehi- cle access to the park as well as access to the Medusa Cement Company. 3.24 I 11 11 I I I * I I 11 I I I I 1, Marina 4.0 1 4.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter investigaes the program, design, cost, and operations of the propsed transient boat parking areas represented in the alternative marina/canal configurations. The need for tran- sient boat parking facilities near downtown Detroit was confirmed by a Marina Owner's Confer- ence sponsored by the Detroit Recreation Depart- ment. Marina design criteria was gathered from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. The mix of boat types and operations and main- tenance costs were derived from a review of existing State of Michigan and City of Detroit marinas. 4.2 MARINA PROGRAM The need for marinas with access to downtown Detroit has long been considered. The attempt to install such a marina at Cobo Hall failed because of its inability to deal with wave action con- cerns. This failure has dampened enthusiasm for other attempts to create a downtown marina, but it has not diminished the need for such a marina. The concept of boats being able to park near downtown and attend restaurants, hockey games, theaters, shopping and other city ameni- ties is an appealing one. A conference on marina development and oper- ations, sponsored by the Detroit Recreation Depart- ment, was held May 29, 1980. Attendance included representatives of local yacht clubs, boating organizations, private and publicly owned marinas, the Waterways Devision of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Coast Guard, the City Planning Department, the Com- munity and Economic Development Department, Pub- lic Services, the Recreation Department, and Scher- vish, Vogel, Merz, P.C. The focus of this meeting was on present and future development 4.1 along the Detroit river-front and on the concept of a transient marina at the Chene/St. Aubin park sites. The general consensus of this conference i'. @n though -e is a slight -ownwarld -tat ther was tl even d trend in seasonal marina usage there is a very strong neecl for transient marina facilities with flecreational tie-Lip in the City of Detroit. The Cherie/St. AUU) i n park concept proposes a transient marina as opposed to a seasonal marina for several reasons: 1. Seasonal marinas Would serve only a few people while transient marinas Would p.rov i cle through turn-over, a ma x i mum number of people w i th access to clowntown and the proposed recreational /entertainment center proposed for the East River- front. 2. TV ie Chene/St. AU'bin sites are not large enough to facilitate a full service seasonal ma- marina slips at Wyandotte total only four spaces. 3. Seasonal marinas are planned by the City or The Metropolitan Beach Marina contains 172 tran- private developers in other locations (Greyhaven, sient spaces, but is 1007o occupied on at I weekends Marina City, Riverfront West). in season. 4. The only designated transient marinas near In order to maximize potential usage, any marina Detroit are at Wyandott'e (12 miles away) and at designed for Detroit should accommodate the CkAr_ Metropol i tan Beach (21 miles away). Memor i a I ren I trend to sailboats (the present ra t io i s Marina i n the City of Detroit makes available .about 35% to 65% powerboals). - It was considered transient spaces only if they don't obtain 100% infeasible to accommodate sailboats totally occupancy or) a sepsonal basis. through. the canal since, most clearances would make the fixed pedestrian bridges improbably The Michigan Harbors Guide-of the Michigan State high; while pedestrian draw bridges would conipli- Waterways Commi ssion of the Department of cate the ease of boat movement through the canal Natural Resotirces states that commission spon- sored harbors have been located in such a way Mr. Keith Wilson of the Michigan Department of that no boater will t:ver- be more than about 15. Natural ReSOUr'CeS further stated that if the ma- shore I i ne mi les f rorii a safe harbor. I n the. rina accommodated 30 foot, 45 foot and 60 foot Detroit area there is no lack of safe harbors In craft in the ratio of 45/45/10 it Would adequately which to take refuge, but the nearest transient accomi-Tiodate pleasure craft on the Detroit River. 4.2 CHENE PARK SITE ST. AUBIN PARK SITE DETROIT RIVER FIGURE 4.1: BOAT SPACES: MARINA/CANAL ALTERNATIVE The rationale presented above in conjunction with MARINA/CANAL ALTERNATIVE the design criteria presented in section 4.3 was MAXIMUM BOAT SPACES AVAILABLE used to program each of the marina/canal config- uration alternatives. 30' 40' 45' 60' TOTAL Marina/Canal Alternative St. Aubin Basin 32 30 8 70 (slip parking The program for boat parking slips in this alter- open to sailboats) native is based on the assumption that there is a Chene Basin 12 12 need for transient slips greater than the maximum (slip parking not number of boats that could ever be accommodated open to sailboats) on the combined Chene/St. Aubin sites. Therefore, Canal Edge 8 8 the design assumes that all land area not pro- (open to sailboats) grammed for other recreational uses would be ex- cavated and used for boat parking. This gener- Canal Edge 30 30 ated the following table of available parking (not open to spaces: sailboats) Total 44 38 30 8 120 4.3 GLOBE TRADING WAREHOUSE CONVERSION GLOBE TRADING WAREHOUSE CONVERSION CO CONVERSION CO COVERSION ATWATER ST. ATWATER ST. HURON HURON CEMENT CEMENT CO GLOBE CO COMPLEX TRANSIENT TRANSIENT MARINA MARINA MEDUSA MEDUSA CEMENT CO CEMENT CO DETROIT RIVER DETROIT RIVER FIGURE. 4.2 POTENTIAL GLOBE THEATER SITE FIGURE 4.3 REDUED MARINA The construction cost for marina slips in the Chene/St. Aubin basins are estimated to be $3,500/slip exclusive of dredging and seawall con- struction (these costs are included elsewhere in this report and are summarized in Chapter 5). The 82 slips in the Chene and St. Aubin basin would totally cost approximately $287,000, which includes 30 amp electric and water service to each slip, floatation docking, ice control devices and lighting. The additional cost of boat parking along the remainder of the canal is negligible since this boat parking is parallel to the edge and the wood deck is priced as part of the sea- wall edge price. For several reasons, maximizing the number of boat slips in the St. Aubin basin may not be de- sirable. The Waterboard site is programmed for private development and is potentially the site of the proposed Wayne State University Globe Theatre (Further discussion of this concept is found in Chapter 5). This theatre may require an expand- ed Waterboard site thereby reducing the potential size of the marina, Figure 4.2. The theater, on the other hand, would create even additional need for transient boat slips. Likewise, the Rec- reation Department may desire, because of pro- gramming demands, that the useable land area of the St. Aubin Park be increased for other viable park functions that are more compelling than tran- sient boat parking. This will be easier to deter- mine when surrounding land use plans for new development are finalized. Assuming a desire to reduce marina size, an alternative plan was gen- erated which reduces the number of St. Aubin basin slips from 70 to 53, Figure 4.3; even more reductions are, of course, possible. Marina/Lagoon Alternative Without the development of the St. Aubin site, the number of boats accommodated by this alternative TOUR BOAT 6 @ 40 ft. is drastically reduced from the first alternative. A total of 32 spaces are provided, 18 in slips and 14 parallel to the canal edge. The 18 slips 18 @ 30 ft would cost approximately $105,000 exclusive of seawall and dredging. No 60 foot boats are accommodated except insofar as they can occupy 8 @ 40 ft. two 40 foot spaces along the canal edge. NO PARKING 4.3 DESIGN CRITERIA The design and layout of the marina/canal config- uration alternatives take into consideration cur- CHENE PARK SITE DETROIT RIVER rent trends in boating and marina operations and recognized marina criteria for site size and pro- gram. FIGURE 4.4: BOAT SPACES: MARINA/LAGOON The following criteria were derived through con- sultations with Mr. Keith Wilson of the Departmen of Natural Resources and the Bureau of Environ- mental Health accepted design criteria and gen- eral practice: 1) for overnight stays at transient marinas water MARINNA/LAGOON ALTERNATIVE and electric utilities are provided; BOAT SPACES AVAILABLE 2) gas is not necessary, but may be provided for 30' 40' TOTAL convenience; Chene Basin 18 18 3) sewage pump-out facilities are a requirement of the Department of Public Health when parking (slip parking not 15 vessels or more; open to sailboats) 4) the Department of Public Health also regulates Canal Edge 8 8 (open to sailboats) water supply systems, hose lines, litter contain- Canal Edge 6 6 ers, toilet facilities, and sewage receiving units; (not open to sailboats) 5) in the State of Michigan, boat slips are de- Total 18 14 32 signed to accommodate 60',45', and 30' long boats 4.5 6) the rule for sizing marina fairway widths is: 15) water fluctuation is not always accomodated in the design. Often the deck elevation is fixed under 30'...twice the length of boat and ladders or steps are provided to board the over 30'...one and one half times the length boats; and of the boat; 16) if boat parking occurs along a sheet piling 7) service piers to slips are usually 8' to 10' edge, 6" x 6" wood 'fenders' on 8' centers are wide; used to protect the boat from the piling. 8) catwalks to individual boats are usually 3' 4.4 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE wide; 9) boaters have problems navigating any docking The information contained in this section was surface that is not flat; gathered from the Bureau of Public Health docu- ment on marina facilities; Keith Wilson, Chief of 10) openings to the Detroit River at the entrance the Michigan State Waterways Commission of the De- and exit to the canal Should be 80' to 100' wide; partment of Natural Resources; William Sherman, Supervisor Of Metro Beach Metro Park; and Hira 11) water depth for the marina and canal are con- Harrington, Harbor Master of the Port Austin Tran- tingent upon the type of vessel to be accommo- sient Marina. dated: 4' depth ... pleasure power boats; 6' depth ... non-fixed keel sailboats; 10' depth ... fixed keel sailboats; 12) the Department of Natural Resources marinas do not exceed 6' to 7' in depth; 13) height of bridges can be used to control size of boats desired beyond the bridge. Specific lengths of boats and clearances needed are as follows: 20' 1ength ... 6' clearance; 25' length ... 9' clearance; 30' length ... 11' clearance; 45' 1ength ... 16' clearance; 60' length . 18' clearance; 14) boat parking is directly influenced by the fluctuation of the water surface elevation. To account for this fluctuation, two solutions are used: 1) floating docks or catwalks with guide- posts, attached to sliding ladders; 2) manually adjustable catwalks which are changed as the water fluctuates; 4.6 fo operate transient marinas certain facilities will require additional toil-el fixtures. -must be provided. These include restrooms, sew- age, pump-out station, harbor master office and The Marina/Lagoon Alternative, with 32 slips, slip utilities. The Marina/Canal Alternative con- will require the following toilet facilities: taining 120 slips will require the following toilet facilities-. Male Fema I e Male Female Water Closets 2 2 Urinals 0 - Water Closets 2 4 Lavatories 2 2 Urinals 2 - Showers I I Lavatories 4 4 Showers 2 2 To house these facilities would require a struc- ture of approximately 220 S.F. and cost an esti- To heuse these facilities will require a structure mated $18, 700. of approximately 690 S.F. and would cost an esti- mated $58,000. The operation of marina restroom facilities can be on a pay basis or on a key deposit basis. Auto- Any other facilities provided on site such. as res-' matic pay showers are used at Metro Beach Metro taurants, concessions, parkland or amph i thea ter Park, but are subject to vandalism. The state op- pie X. :.X-X F I GURE 4.5: TYPICAL PIER STRUCTURE 4.7 erated transient marinas use keys lent to boaters with a deposit of one dollar. This method keeps the users of the restrooms limited to boaters, but requires an operator to collect fees and distribute keys. Since the restrooms will probably be built in con- junction with other park toilet and concession fa- cilities, keyed showers are recommended to limit their use. Marinas are required to install pump-out facili- ties. This facility must be capable of lifting sew- age not less than 12 feet under vacuum and de- liver it to the receiving unit free from spillage. Pump out facilities at state operated facilities charge $3.25 per use and are operated by em- ployed personnel of the marina. At Metro Beach pump out facilities were boat-owner operated by means of a coin box, but due to mechanical com- 4.8 plications and boat owner inexperience and abuse it was converted to operation by personnel of the marina (in this case, the Harbor Master Station operates the facility). The cost of the pump out facility is included in the overall marina costs. A Harbor Master office, from which the harbor master can easily supervise the marina facility, is required. From this station fees would be col- lected, records kept, the pump-facility operated and the marina patrolled. A slip to shore radio may be provided to work in conjunction with the Coast Guard as is done at state operated tran- sient marinas. This sttion may be built in con- junction with the toilet facilities or may be a free standing office. To reduce utility and con- struction costs and increase security of the rest- rooms it is recommended that the office be built in conjunction with the toilet facilities and is estimated to add 150 S.F. to the structure and cost $15,000. This facility would be similar for both marina/canal configurations. Utilities to the marina will include lighting, utili- ties to the toilet/office facility, and utilities to the individual wells. The lighting will be pro- vided in conjunction with the general park light- ing and will be automatically controlled in the mechanical space of the Harbor Master Office/ toilet facilities building. This building will re- quire electric, water, gas, telephone and sewer connections. The marina transient docking facili- ties will include 30 amp electric and water con- nections. Several methods exist for collection of transient marina fees including hourly parking meters, coin operated electric service, and half day or daily rate: 1) Hourly Parking Meters: parking meters may be installed at each mooring location and charge .50 cents an hour for parking. This method has sev- eral drawbacks in that it requires constant super- vision by the Harbor Master to guarantee the meter has been paid and that some boaters do not pay until immediately before inspection. Until this season, Metro Beach employed this method of payment; but converted to half day and daily rates. Some distant wells still remain on the meter system for the convenience of boaters who did not wish to stay an entire half day. Charging varies between marinas. The state oper- ated marinas charge per 12 hours (or nightly) based on the size of the boat. The charge at the Port Austin marina is shown below: 2) Half Day and Daily Rates: Metro Beach and state operated transient marinas operate on this method. The boater arrives at the marina, docks, and then registers at the Harbor Master's office and pays the required fee. The boater re- ceives a tag to display in a conspicuous window of his craft. This method reduces the need for constant supervision and provides more accurate means of record keeping for future needs. Per Night Charge at Port Austin Marina 20 Foot Boat $3.25/Night 30 Foot Boat $6.25/Night 40 Foot Boat $9.25/Night 50 Foot Boat $12.25/Night 60 Foot Boat $15.50/Night 60+Foot Boat $20.75/Night Docking fees at Metro Beach Metro Park are shown below: Dock Fees at Metro Beach 10AM to 4PM $3.25 4PM to 10PM $3.25 Overnight $5.00 3) Coin Operated Electric Service: William Sher- man of Metro Beach recommended coin operated electric service. This method operates the elec- tric service on an hourly basis when .50 cents is in- serted for each hour. It is recommended that since the users of the marina/canal will not only visit the parks, but also surrounding commercial/entertainment facili- ties including the Central Business District, hour- ly fee structures are not necessary. A half day/ daily rate similar to that used at Metro Beach seems preferrable. This type of operation will only require one full time person to collect fees, run the sewage pump-out, supervise the parking, operate the radio and keep records. At peak pe- riods such as weekends or holidays, two people may be required; one to operate the Harbor Mas- ter's station, the other to suprvise the marina. 4.9 Maintenance of a seas-oryal marina has three as- f) install air bubblers around docks to minimize pects: seasonal maintenance, periodic maintenance damage; and special maintenance: In the spring, all that was closed down in the 1. Seasonal maintenance involves closing down the fall most be opened. Also, damage and vandalism marina* in the fall and opening the marina in the that may have occurred throughout the winter spring. In the fall the following must be done: must be repaired and cleaned tip. a) turn off electric and seal boxes to reduce van 2. Periodic maintenance includes work done on a dalism; continuing basis throughout the season to main- tain a safe and clean marina. Items include: b) empty the pump Out facility and seal; a) refuse removal; c) turn off water and drain lines; b) litter pick up; d) clean, turn off water, drain and close toilet c),minor clock repair; facilities; e) store waste baskets, fire extinguishers and d) electric and light inspection; and other equipment; and e) ernply PUMP-OUt facility. 7 77'@ Alf 'A ta 4.10 3. Special Maintenance includes large scale and special repairs and improvements to keep the marina operable. Items include: a) dredging; b) mooring post replacement; and c) repair of major damage. 4.5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter dealt with the need for and program- ming of the proposed transient marina. Design criteria, operations and maintenance of marinas were investigated. Major conclusions and recom- mendations are as follows: 1) a transient marina is recommended as more viable than a seasonal marina; 2) the need for transient space cannot be ful- filled by maximum use of the Chene/St. Aubin sties, however, maximum site utilization may not be desirable relative to other programmed recrea- tional uses or new private development; 3) sailboat parking should be accommodated, but it is not feasible, due to bridge restrictions, to allow sailboats to traverse the entire canal; 4) the marina should accommodate primarily 30 foot and 45 foot boats to maximize potential usage; 5) a Harbor Master office, restroom facilities and sewage pump-out station should be built in con- junction with the marina; and 6) half day and daily rate fee schedules should be utilized as opposed to hourly meters. 4.11 I 1 I 11 I I I I I I I I I I Economic Impacts 5.0 1 5.1 INTRODUCTION grassy field on the riverfront near Belle Isle which is generally underutilized). On the -other It is difficult, if not impossible, to do an objec- hand, developing the Chene/St. Aubin Park as tive cost-benefit analysis of an urban open totally hard-paved and urban is not called for space. A part-,, occupying valuable urban land, by surrounding existing or proposed density. It does not typically create revenue; it is de- is not directly in the dense Central Business Dis- veloped, rather, by the public for the public trict and does not have to fulfill the need for an good. A park does, however, provide a direct intense urban part< of the nature of Hart Plaza. amenity to surrounding land uses, thereby in- creasing their value and potentially spawning The proposed Chene/51. Aubin Park lies between new development. This is the basic assumption the intensely developed Belle Isle "rural" part,, of the Linked Riverfront Parks Project, albeit and the intensely developed Hart Plaza "urban" unusual to look at. recreation as a catalyst for part-,, both in distance and in concept. Conse- new development. quently, the Chene/St. Aubin Park. has the poten- tial of relieving the tremendous pressure on these The Linked Riverfront Parks Project has, even be- two parks and thereby gain significant use. This fore construction of the first park, generated in- would especially be. true if the proposed linkage terest in east riverfroht development. The pro- system between Hart Plaza and Belle Isle was de- posed Wayne State Univer@Jty Globe Theater is the veloped. first direct spin-off of the parks project; adap- tive re-use studies are being performed on ware- The key to the success of both Belle Isle and houses adjoining the park sites; and attempts to Hart Plaza is in their intensity. It is the ma- assemble land for new and converted housing has rina/canal which is a prime ingredient in making begun at least in part due to the proposed the Chene/St. Aubin Park "intense" and something parks. Intuitively, it can be assumed that the more than a "grassy field". This intensity in- city's commitment to provide urban amenities help creases not only park use,but also brings people spawn new development. to the commercial establishments that presently exist in the east riverfront (especially res- The program for the Chene/St. Aubin part- has taurants) and spurs development of new commer- both intensive recreation functions (the marina/ cial, entertainment and residential uses. Hart canal, water play feature, amphitheater and Plaza was utilized by approximately 6.5 million stage, facilities for docking, restaurant barges people in 1979 and Belle isle by approximately 8 or concert barges, etc.) and more traditional million people. If the Chene/St. Aubin Part< is passive recreational functions (picnicing, fishing, somewhere in between these two parks it might jogging, strol I ing, bicycling, viewing, etc.). have a use of 200,000 peop le/acre/ year or 4.5 This categorizes the park as both natural (rural) million people. This potential use 'has signifi- and intense (urban). A I though a completely cant economic impacts on the surrounding area. natural park is a necessary amenity, the close proximity of the 928 acre Belle Isle Part< dimin- In addition, the park provides the potential of re- ishes the potential impact and usefullness of a lieving the overcrowding of both Belle Isle and totally natural Chene/St. Aubin Vark (Gabriel Hart Plaza during major special events such as' Richard Park, for example, is essentially a The Freedom Festival, ethnic festivals, fireworks, displays, concerts and the like. Although the B. Excavation marina/canal is estimated to contribute only 75,000 of the users during boating season, it is 220,000 CY @ $I/CY $ 220,000 still a major amenity that will add to the excite- (Excavated material to ment of the par@k and draw people well beyond be wasted on site) the boa t users. The Marina/Canal A.Iternative Sub-Total $ 220,0 will add 'one mile of publically accessible river's edge to the city. This new edge will not only in- crease boater access, but will also provide prom- enade, bicycle path, ice skating, tour boat and C. Canal Seawall other water related functions to the park in a way that is a scalar change from the wider De- Edge Type A: 4201 @ $901/Ft. $ 378,420 troit River to the more intimate canal. Edge Type B (Mod) 4301 @ $896/Ft. $ 385,280 Edge Type C: 920' @ $126/Ft. $ 115,920 It is strongly felt that for the reasons given Edge Type D: 900' @ $852/Ft. $ 766,800 above, the constructiori cost of the marina/canal Edge Type D (river): 160' @ $1275/Ft. $ 204,000 is far outweighed by not only the general public Edge Type G: 2960' @ $641/Ft. $1,897,360 benef i ts, but the potential economic benefits as Overlook: 725' @ $1230/F t. $ 891,750 well. Transition: 150' @ $1000/Ft. $ 1501000 Sub-Tota 1 $4,789, 530 5.2 CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF MARINA/CANAL IMPROVEMENTS D. Marina The following summary of construction costs are Floatation Docking System, of those costs directly attributable to the marina/ utilities, etc. canal aspects of total part< development exclusive 82 slips @ $3,500/slip: $ 287@000 of those costs related to Medusa relocation and re- Off ice/Restroom/Shower Building: 53,000 conf igurat ion. The costs are based on 1980 esti- Sub-Total $ 340,000 ma tes; escalating factors must be applied for future construction. Marina/Canal Alternative E. Pedestrian Bridges A. Utilities Chene Bridge $ 1 12,250 St. Aubin Bridge t74,000 Chene $ -0- Sub-Tota 1 $ 186, 256 Dubois/St. Aubin/ 1,900,000 Or-leans Total Construction Costs: Sub-Total $1,900,6-0-50 Marina/Canal Alternative $7)435,780 5.2 Marina/Lagoon Alternative A. Utilities $ -0- B. Excavation 58,000 Cy @ $1/yard $ 58,000 (Excavated material will be wasted on site) Sub-Total $ 58,000 C. Canal Seawall Edge Type A: 180' @ $901/Ft. $162,180 Edge Type C: 250' @ $126/Ft. $ 31,500 Edge Type D: 200' @ $852/Ft. $170,400 Edge Type D (river): 160' @ $1275/Ft. $204,000 Edge Type G: 1030' @ $641/Ft. $660,230 Overlook 350' @ $1230/Ft. $430,500 Transition: 150' @ $1000/Ft. $150,000 Sub-Total $1,808,810 D. Marina Floatation Docking System, utilities, etc. 18 slip @ $3,500/Slip: $ 63,000 Office/Restroom/Shower Building 33,700 Sub-Total $ 96,700 E. Pedestrian Bridge Chene Bridge $111,250 Sub-Total $111,250 F. Total Construction Cost Marina/Lagoon Alternative $2,074,760 5.3 CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF MEDUSA IMPROVEMENTS The Medusa Cement Company has been extremely cooperative in providing information contained in this report. Every attempt has been made to deal directly with any concerns or conflicts that Medusa might have relative to park development. The potential exists for a truly unique cooper- ation and compatibility between recreation and industrial use - a combination that is possibly more exciting than Gas Works Park in Seattle. One of the more interesting functions of the Chene/St. Aubin Park will be the ability of the public to watch an industrial process unfold, from ship docking and unloading to truck trans- port off the site. Interpretive signage, graphics and telescopes are being programmed into Phase I of Chene Park to heighten this function. Assum- ing that Medusa concerns are dealt with in a feasible manner, the marina/canal and park de- velopment are of benefit to Medusa in several ways: 1) they are economically viable and wish to stay in Detroit and this cooperation strength- ens their commitment to the city; 2) being liter- ally in the middle of a public park enhances their public image, making the public more aware of cement industry contributions; 3) improved truck routing and safety; 4) improved access to the entire length of the Medusa Challanger; 5) improved security; 6) improved total environment; and 7) potentially more efficient operations. Con- struction costs for all improvements to Medusa property, the proposed land trade and realign- ment of operations are summarized below: Marina/Canal Alternative A. Truck Bridge $640,000 B. Conveyor System 200,000 C. Site Improvements 336,000 Total $1,176,000 5.3 Marina/Lagoon alternative (disbursements) and occupancy must be deter- mined. A. Truck Bridge -0- B. Conveyor System -0- Marina/Canal Alternative C. Site Improvements $ 751000 It Is assumed that the typical boating season is Total $ 75,000 20 weeks and 22 weekends. Based on Metro Beach figures, it can be concluded that weekend occu- INA/CANAL pancy (not including overnight) will be 100% for 5.4 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF MAR 3 days and weekly occupancy will be 5070 for 4 AND MEDUSA IMPROVEMENTS days (not including overnight). In twenty weeks, at two turnovers a day and 50% occupancy, the Marina/Canal Alternative 120 slips of the Marina/Canal Alternative will have a total weekly occupancy of 9600 half day A. Marina/Canal Improvements $7,435,780 users. Using the same rationale, and 100% occu- B. Medusa Improvements 111761000 pancy, the total weekend -occupancy will be 15,840 users. Total half-day users will be 25,440. Total Cost: $8,611,780 Assuming three people/boa-i this will bring 75,000 (1980) people/year to the park. Based on surveys of state marinas, and assuming Marina/Lagoon Alternative higher expenses in the City of Detroit, the follow- A. Marina/Lagoon .Improvements $2,074,760 ing estimated yearly operation costs were derived: B. Medusa Improvements 75P000 A. Salaries: $35,000 B. Utilities: $ 4,800 Total Cost: $2,149,760 C. Maintenance: $24,000 (1980) 5.5 MARINA REVENUE Tot.al Expenses $63,800. Assuming 2@,440 half day users, $2.50/half day It is assumed that all marina operations (boat would have to be changed to break even. This is slip charges, concessions, sewage pump-out, coin- well below $5.00/half day and, therefore, more -operated electrical, keyed showers, etc.) are self- money could be charged to defray the cost of the supporting, i.e. they minimally cover expenses. initial capital investment or to accumulate capital The primary feasibility concern would be that for major repair requirements and times of re- boat slip charges do not become excessive where duced occupancy. boaters refuse to use them. Based on the $3.25/ half day rate at Metro Beach it is assumed that Marina/Lagoon Alternative a downtown transient marina could accept a half- day rate of at least $5.00. In order to deter- Using the same rationale as the Marina/Cana-I mine if this is feasible an estimate of expenses Alternative, this alternative will generate a total 5.4 of 10,600 half day users or 31,800 people. Oper- bility, LWCF monies are not enough to complete ation costs, however, will be somewhat higher per the whole -project. A commitment more on the slip because the number of slips are reduced,but order of 2.5 million dollars a year is required. certain costs stay fixed: Additional monies from Waterways Division Funds (DNR) could be utilized--for marina clockage sys- A. Salaries: $30,000 tems and other marina amenities. Community Block B. Utilities: $ 2,080 Grant Funds, Public Works monies, or even gen- C. Maintenance: $10,400. eral revenue bonds might possibly add to this total. Total $42,480 The costs of Medusa improvements are assumed to Assuming 10,600 half day users, $4.00/half day be primari ly a burden - of the public sector since would have to be charged to break even. This the reconfiguration is required both for a public is below $5.00/half day and, therefore, feasible; park and to better utilize land for future private although less attractive than the larger marina of development. Assuming the benefits to Medusa the first alternative. are great enough, however, Medusa might be willing to invest their own money into certain 5A FUNDING POTENTIALS improvements, especially site improvements. The truck bridge could be financed through state and/ The Linked Riverfront Parks Project study laid or federal 'highway funds especially if the St. ou I, in detail, potential funding sources for all Aubin truck route is designated a spur of the major elements of the park system, including the state or federal highway system. Community Block majority of construction elements contained in this Grant Funds or Urban Development Action Grants study. To date only Coastal Zone Management could be utilized to defray si te improvements, Program funds (for planning), Land and Water building relocation, and other costs associated Conservation Funds, and city matching funds with the acquisition of Medusa property for 'the have been allocated for park construction, Other proposed land trade. Participation and a firm funding sources will have to be tapped to bring resourc@ commitment would be required from Me- the marina/canal and total park development to dusa to utilize UDAG funds. fruition. It is strongly fell that with a firm commitment on the part of the city, funds can be found to build Land and Water Conservation Funds, assuming the entire park concept and that the return to availability, can continue to be used for park de- the city would far outweigh these costs. velopment. In particular, at the present rate of park funding (1.2 million/year including city 5.7 OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT match), LWCF monies can build a majority of the canal seawall if it can be phased in at least It has been assumed that the development of a ma- two parts. For this reason, if the Marina/Canal rina/canal, in conjunction with the Chene/St. Alternative is implemented, it is recommended that Aubin park, would spur other economic develop- the Marina/Canal Alternative be constructed as ments by the private sector. All sites aligning Phase I of the final Marina/Canal Alternative. Un- Atwater directly north of the canal, including the less present funding levels are raised, a possi- city-owned Chene #2 and Ai nsworth sites, are 5.5 prime for redevelopment. Two feasibility -studies are presently underway that address part of this P potential development. One study is of the pro- posed Globe Theater; and the other is for the pro- posed adapti.ve re-use of the Globe Trading Com- pany warehouse. Globe Theater Wayne State University, through their Theater De- partment, is exploring the economic and architec- tural feasibility of reconstructing a replica of the authentic Shakespearean Globe Theater. An inter- national symposium, held at Wayne State Univer- sity, was the final catalyst for attempting this cy. reconstruction. At that symposium the City of Detroi t offered help in finding a site for th, theater in the Linked Riverfront Parks Project area. Preliminary efforts have focused on the feasibility of utilizing the Waterboard portion of the St. Aubin Park site as the location of the Globe Theater. This site is attractive to the pro- ponents of the Globe for several reasons: I)- it is located on the Detroit River, which allows for a historical relationship similar to its original GLOBE TRADING location near the Thames; 2) 1 t will be adjacent CO CONVOISION WARE14OUSE CONVERSION to a major new park system; 3) the proposed ma- 4 9 rina/canal allows boat access to the theater A (which historically was the means of access) and adds to the "festive" nature of the theater; 4) the Globe Trading Company warehouse across the street has the potential of housing ancillary func- tions; 5) the proposed Detroit subway system will HL*" have a stop within walking distance; and 6) C&AENT GI, co EX numerous restaurants are within walking dis- tance. TRANS11 N MAR MEDLJSA TMF"T ro The possible development of the marina/canal makes this site very attractive to Wayne State University. The placemen't of the Globe, however, OCIHOIT RIVER may call for the reconfiguration of the Water- 0@1 board site. In this instance, the marina might FIGURE 5.11: POTENTIAL GLOBE SITE 5.6 be pushed further east, thereby reducing the number of boat slips by approximately twenty. The possible impact of the Globe Theater on ma- rina design is shown in plan illustration. This same plan also indicates an alternative alignment of the canal through the St. Aubin marina basin. In this instance the marina is on the "island"; part of the park, which has the advantage of greater marina control, but the disadvantage of greater walking distance from from the marina to sur- rounding developments. The boat entry configur- ation is essentially the same as in the marina/ canal alternative and, therefore, wave action con- cerns are similarily resolved. Globe Trading Company Warehouse An adaptive re-use feasibility study of the Globe Trading Company is presently being performed by Landmark Design Services, Inc. under a Coastal Zone Management grant. Preliminary results of this study show the Globe Trading Company as primarily commercial/retail in use with res- taurants predominating. This function would greatly enhanced by the closing of Atwater, the development of the marina/canal and the con- struction of the Globe Theater. This building can also, potentially, be partially utilized by an- cillary Globe Theater functions. Boaters would be able to park directly next to indoor and out- door restaurants and see a theater performance before or after dinner. 5.7 Summary 6.0 6.1 FEASIBILITY OF MARINA/CANAL CONFIGURATIONS It is the conclusion of this study that the alter- native marina/canal configurations are technically feasible with only minor modifications. Both wave action and hydraulic concerns are adequately addressed on the proposed designs. Potential in- dustrial, recreational, transportation and utility conflicts can be resolved within reasonable con- straints and in a manner compatible to overall park development. With a commitment on the part of the City of De- troit and the Medusa Cement Company, and a channeling of available public funding sources, the alternative marina/canal configurations are economically viable. In conjunction with private developer investment surrounding the park site, the parks have the potential of catalyzing new de- velopment throughout the east riverfront area. 6.2 IMPACT ON CHENE PHASE I DESIGN At the present time, working drawings are being prepared for the first phase of construction on Chene Park to begin in the summer of 1981. Phase I work includes basic grading, fill, utility and seawall construction. This study has altered Phase I design in several ways. A proposed re- tention basin will now take on the configuration of the proposed marina/lagoon. This shape has diminished the area for development of the amphi- theater and, therefore, the north side of the amphitheater hill is steeper requiring some re- tainage; this, combined with reducing the number of bridges from two to one on the Chene site, moved the proposed location of the water play feature north and west. In this location, the water play feature is still the focus of the pedes- trian bridge, but can act as a retainage system for the amphitheater hill; likewise, if surface aeration is required in the lagoon, a portion of 6.1 the water play feature can be utilized for this. two segments can be constructed in Phase 2 of Because of retainage and aeration, the water St. Aubin Park. This final link involves sewer play feature is now more sensibly built In Phase relocation and Medusa improvements. 2 construction as an integral and necessary part of park development rather than in Phase 3 con- Each proposed phase can stand alone as a f unc- struction as a separate element. ioning park, lagoon or marina. Table 6.1 shows the various park construction phases and costs' 6.3 APPLICABILITY TO OTHER SITES associated with the marina/canal. Figure 6.2 aligns these phases to the marina/canal alternat- The analysis and information in Chapter 2 and 4 ive plan. of this study is generally applicable to other waterfront sites in the City of Detroit. Even though the Chene/St.. Aubin part< is in a less re- TABLE 6.1- strictive channel than many other riverfront sites (and, therefore, . surge is not considered as TABLE 6.1 critical as bow waves and wind waves) the entry MARINA/CANAL PHASE COST and exit design criteria can be applied to ma- rinas anywhere along the Detroit River, including I CHENE PARK restrictive channels, to mitigate against wave Phase I action. The design criteria for marinas is like- Phase 2 wise applicable elsewhere. The various cost Marina/Lagoon $2,074,760 studies for the feasibility of different seawall Medusa Improvements 75,000 edge conditions are also applicable to other sites Total $2,149,760 assuming similar soil conditions. Because of the, nature of the data generated, this report may be ST. AUBIN PARK used as a general guide to marina design on the Phase I entire -Detroit riverfront. .Marina Construction $2,6521860 Sub-Total $2,652,860 6.4 PHASING Phase 2 Canal Construction $ 808,160 The marina/canal is easily phased into three seg- Sewer Relocation 1,900,000 ments. This is considered necessary to allow for Medusa Improvements 11101,000 land acquisition, funding, private development Sub-Total $3$809,160 .and planning and because of the costs associated Total $6,462,020 with sewer relocation and Medusa improvements. ' I These phases of marina/canal construction are TOTAL MARINA/CANAL $8,6111780 blended with the four proposed phases of park construction. - The marina/lagoon alternative can be constructed in Phase 2 of Chene Park; the Figure 6.1 shows how these various park and major marina can be constructed in Phase I of marina/ca,nal phases coordinate with development St. Aubin Park; and the final link between these surrounding the park sites such as the Globe 6@2 Playhouse, the Globe Trading Company and the Atwater Mall. The marina/lagoon is shown under construction in the spring of 1982 with the total marina/canal completed by 1985. SCHEDULE 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Chene Park Phase One Chene Park Phase Two Chene II Site - Parking St. Aubin Park Phase One St. Aubin Park Phase Two Globe Playhouse Phase One Globe Playhouse Phase Two Globe Playhouse Phase Three Relocate Orleans Sewer for Globe Major Sewer Adjustments Medusa Improvements Establish Truck Routes Chene Street Entry Orleans Street Entry Close Atwater 1 Close Atwater 2 Atwater Mall Construction L.H.P.P. Linkage Globe Trading Co. Conversion Warehouse conversion Chene II/Ainsworth Development Atwater Residential Parks Davis Development SEMTA Parking Structure FIGURE 6.1: TIMING SCHEDULE 6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS The major recommendations of this study are as follows: 1) assign an individual from the City of Detroit to coordinate and oversee land acqui- sition, consultants, governmental agencies, City departments, private developers, public and pri- vate sector funding sources and affected indus- tries for realization of the total park concept; 2) immediately and actively begin proceedings to acquire the Consolidated Docking site; 3) immedi- ately begin negotiations with the Medusa Cement Company concerning the recommended land trade, truck bridge and other related items that affect canal construction; 4) increase city commitment and intensify additional funding sources for pub- lic improvements beyond basic recreational as- pects, i.e. truck bridge, marina, Medusa relo- cation, Atwater Mall, water play feature, etc; 5) commit to construction of the total marina/canal alternative as phased in 6.4; 6) finalize program- ming of the St. Aubin Park and choose a marina alternative which maximizes transient boat park- ing in blanace with ohter park functions; and 7) construct the canal entry and exit as proposed in this study to mitigate against wave action and to promulgate flow. 6.3 6.6 CONCLUSION The construction of the Chene/St. Aubin marina/ canal is important because of the positive im- pacts it will have on the parks, the total concept of the Linked Riverfront Parks Project and de- velopment in the east riverfront and Central Business District of the City of Detroit. It will provide public access to the riverfront not only for the people of Detroit, but also to tourists, con- ventioneers and other regional and out-of-state visitors. It's uniqueness in combining industry and recreation will make this park nationally notable and will reinforce the Detroit renaissance; a renaissance that does not copy the efforts of other cities. Based on this challenging concept, the study has proposed ways of solving concerns and conflicts that might stand in the way of bringing the ma- rina/canal to full fruition. Wave action concerns including surge, hydraulic concerns, and engi- neering aspects of the proposed design are shown to be solvable problems. Conflicts with utilities, transportation systems and industrial land uses are resolved. The need for and programming of a downtown transient marina is accomplished through a clear rationale. And finally, the economic impacts of such a venture are shown to be in the best interest of the city. This study, through these analyses, should clear the way for the commitment to construct the Chene/St. Aubin Park marina/canal. FIGURE 6.2: PARK AND MARINA/CANAL PHASING GLOBE TRADING WAREHOUSE CONVERSION MEDUSA CHENE II NORTHERN CO CONVERSION CEMENT CO PARKING ENGINEERING ATWATER ST ATWATER ST CANAL HURON CEMENT TRANSIENT MEDUSA CO MARINA CEMENT CO LAND TRADE AREA ST AUBIN PARK S ST. AUBIN PARK ST. AUBIN PARK CHENE PARK CHENE PARK PHASE ONE PHASE TWO PHASE ONE PHASE 6.4 REFERENCES I LeMehaute, Bernard, "Wave Agitation Criteria for Harbors", Ports 177, Volume 1, pp. 366-- 372. American Society of Civil Engineers, 1977 2. Personal Communication, Sargent B. Jiminesh, Detroit Harbormaster. 3. Brater, E.F. and H.W. King, "Handbook of Hy- draulics" 6th ed., pp. t0-59, McGraw-H i I I Book Co., New York, 1976 4. Michigan Department of Natural Resburces. Wy- andotte Wave Study, 1969 5. Personal Communication, Petty Officer Garner Marine Inspection Office, U.S. Coast Guard 6. Personal Communication Dr. E.F. Brater, Pro- fessor of Hydraulics, University of Michigan. 7. Personal Communication, Dr. R.B. Couch, Pro- fessor of Naval Architecture, University of Michigan. 8. U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Cen- ter, Shore Protection Manual, Volumes I and 11. Fort Belvoir, Virginia, 1973 9. University of Michigan Coastal Zone Labor- atory, Draft. Riverfront Capabilities Expan- sion Analysis. Ann Arbor, Michigan, July, 1979. 10. Snel IEnvironmental Group, Inc. Hydraulic Study Chene/St. Aubin Riverfront Canal. Lan- sing, Michigan, 1979 PLANNING TEAM Recreation Department Harriet Saperstein, Pricnipal Planner Edward Viall, Chief Landscape Architect Schervish, Vogel, Merz, P.C. David W. Schervish, AIA, ASLA, Project Manager Stephen Vogel, AIA Kenneth Berendt Rainy Hamilton Robert Holmes Randall Machelski Snell Environmental Group, Inc. Donald Emery, P.E. Al Halbeisen, Project Engineer Dr. Sam Nalluswani, P.E. James Walker, Project Engineer University of Michigan Dr. Ernest Brater, P.E. Michigan State University Dr. David Wiggert, P.E. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Michigan Department of Natural Resources Chris Shafer David Warner Michigan State Waterways Commission Keith Wilson Raymond Lawrence Recreation Department Daniel Krichbaum, Director Ted Jordan Harriet Saperstein Edward Viall Joseph Eckert Ray Bennet Loretta Brown Carl Ackerman Betsy Reich Planning Department Robert Hoffman Community & Economic Development Department Greg Sun Candice Sweda Robert Holland Huran Clinton Metropolitan Authority Richard Chadwick William Sherman Medusa Cement Company Howard Simpson Albert Jacoby Jim Graham Jim Urbanski John Fildew Penn-Dixie Cement Company David Williams Frank Trombetta Black & Veatch Tom Decker Fred Lenone Bob Pierce United States Coast Guard CWO John Powers Huron Cement Company Thomas Gruss Rex Trucking Company Tom House Renaissance Excursions Josephine Bennet Bayview Yacht Club Ed Zemmin, Rear Commodore Detroit Yacht Club Ross Fowler Cusumano's and Tommy's Marina Josephine Cusumano Kean's Detroit Yacht Harbor John Kean Craig Becker The Roostertail Sal Marino Gail Petto Landmark Planning Arthur Ziegler Ellis Schmidlapp Vigliotti Realty Ralph Vigliotti Tom Vigilotti Water and Sewer Department Lyle Duke Charles Gray Dave Dunham WAREHO GLOBE TRADING CO. CONVERSION X1, ATWATER ST Zxj'@D ov @OR A, ZT CEMENT r-dy-HURON Go. ITA AR P','A Al 'Ar NAh @, Rlk Wso k)I "N Li 14 ST AUBIN PARK SITE