863 24 26018 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/00e01d5eabdc5e9ac590ef7b29a40bb5.jpg 5a0a20d7c2d35591d328544f76ae53f2 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_EastmanAlbum_2_1909-1911_019 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1910-07-15 Title A name given to the resource Saugatuck looking northeast Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of Saugatuck, Michigan, looking northeast. Subject The topic of the resource Saugatuck (Mich.) Michigan Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3dc29a7b7b6541e06ffa018e146506bd.jpg dab647db3e0c98b8dadedfb857f30c24 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Summers in Saugatuck-Douglas Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Kutsche Office of Local History Description An account of the resource Collection contains images and documents digitized and collected through the project "Stories of Summer," supported by a National Endowment for the Humanities Common Heritage Grant. The collection aims to document the twin lakeshore communities of Saugatuck and Douglas, Michigan, as they transformed through the state's bustling tourism industry and acceptance of minorities. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1910s-2010s Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Douglas (Mich.) Michigan, Lake Allegan County (Mich.) Beaches Sand dunes Outdoor recreation Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries. Allendale, Michigan Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Saugatuck-Douglas History Center Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Stories of Summer (Common Heritage project) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Text Language A language of the resource English Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-07_SD-70s-coll_0058 Title A name given to the resource Saugatuck Rest Area from a Distance Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of the Saugatuck Rest Area as seen from a distance on a winter's day. The building is located in a wooded area with an empty parking lot in the background. Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich) Allegan County (Mich) Snow Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Digital file contributed by the Saugatuck Douglas History Center as part of the Stories of Summer project. Relation A related resource Stories of Summer (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3e6c3652de941d50c9188ddde7dfa189.jpg 48fde1362a33878029dab975ffb931c9 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Summers in Saugatuck-Douglas Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Kutsche Office of Local History Description An account of the resource Collection contains images and documents digitized and collected through the project "Stories of Summer," supported by a National Endowment for the Humanities Common Heritage Grant. The collection aims to document the twin lakeshore communities of Saugatuck and Douglas, Michigan, as they transformed through the state's bustling tourism industry and acceptance of minorities. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1910s-2010s Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Douglas (Mich.) Michigan, Lake Allegan County (Mich.) Beaches Sand dunes Outdoor recreation Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries. Allendale, Michigan Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Saugatuck-Douglas History Center Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Stories of Summer (Common Heritage project) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Text Language A language of the resource English Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-07_SD-70s-coll_0057 Title A name given to the resource Saugatuck Rest Area in Wintertime Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph featuring two individuals standing outside of the Saugatuck Rest Area while taking a look at the Travel Service Directory and the Public Recreation Facilties information posters. A pay phone can also be seen outside the building. The ground if covered in snow and both individuals are wearing winter coats. Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich) Allegan County (Mich) Snow Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Digital file contributed by the Saugatuck Douglas History Center as part of the Stories of Summer project. Relation A related resource Stories of Summer (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/83a6bdef834e75ae71cd46a284223fa3.jpg b0791bc4b309d79c43c636292b73e349 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Summers in Saugatuck-Douglas Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Kutsche Office of Local History Description An account of the resource Collection contains images and documents digitized and collected through the project "Stories of Summer," supported by a National Endowment for the Humanities Common Heritage Grant. The collection aims to document the twin lakeshore communities of Saugatuck and Douglas, Michigan, as they transformed through the state's bustling tourism industry and acceptance of minorities. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1910s-2010s Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Douglas (Mich.) Michigan, Lake Allegan County (Mich.) Beaches Sand dunes Outdoor recreation Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries. Allendale, Michigan Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Saugatuck-Douglas History Center Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Stories of Summer (Common Heritage project) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Text Language A language of the resource English Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-07_SD-Walsh-J_0075 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Walsh, Jerri Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1967-04 Title A name given to the resource Saugatuck sand dunes covered in snow Description An account of the resource Photograph of snow-covered sand among Saugatuck's dunes. The photograph appears to be taken in the area near the original lighthouse, among the dunes just north of Oval Beach. Developed circa April 1967 Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Allegan County (Mich.) Sand dunes Michigan, Lake Snow Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Digital file contributed by Jerri Walsh as part of the Stories of Summer project. Relation A related resource Stories of Summer (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/833081f90eef475430daf32ba983c9ad.pdf c63c72fdc0bb034e82e27c4ce6ff26ad PDF Text Text SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Prepared By The Saugatuck Township Planning Commission And Board Of Trustees �SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Prepared by the Saugatuck Township Planning Commissiqn in cooperation with the Township Board cif. Ttµ.stees in cooperation with: Coastal Zone Management Program Land and Water Management Division Department of Natural Resources and with the assistance of: Planning & Zoning Center, 302 S. Waverly Road Lansing, MI 4891 7 (51 7) 886-0555 Inc. November 1989 This document was prepared in part through.financial assistance provided by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration authorized by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. �The following individuals participated in the preparation of this plan: SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP Planning Commission Andy Jager, Frank Pluta, Gene Olsen, Herb Klemm•, Teny Locatis, Rex Felker, Robert Miller, and Jean Vanderberg. Township Board Teny Bums, Carole Schreckengust, Patricia Birkholz, Frank Pluta, Mary Lou Novak, and Tom Murdoch•. [• no longer serving] PLANNING & ZONING CENTER, INC. Sta.ff of Planning & 7-<:ming Center, Inc. who assisted with the preparation of this plan are: Mark A Wyckoff (President). Kristine M. Williams (Community Planner). Timothy J. McCauley (Community Planner/Geographic Information System Specialist), William Bogle (Graphic Artist), Carolyn Freebury (Office Manager). and John Warbach (Environmental Planner). �Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF MAPS LIST OF TABLES INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................. i Chapter l GOALS, OBJECTIVES & POLICIES: 1HE AREAWIDE POLICY PI.AN ...................................................................... 1-.l Chapter 2 7- . . . DEMOGRAPHICS ................................................................................ .' ....... : 2-t Chapter3 1HE ECONOMY....................................................................... , .... :............... 3-1 Chapter4 NATURAL RESOURCES AND 1HE ENVIRONMENT...................... :................ 4-1 Chapter lS EXISTING I.AND COVERAND USE .......·-··· .. ··········-······· .. ········ ·······-····· ·· .. ·· 5-1 Chapter 6 PUBLIC FACILIDES AND SERVICES ............................................................ 6-1 Chapter 7 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE................................................................. 7-1 Chapter 8 WATERFRONT.............................................................................................. 8-1 Chapter 9 GROWfH AND DEVEWPMENT TRENDS..................................................... 9-1 Chapter 10 FuruRE I.AND USE .................................................................................... 10-1 Chapter 11 INfERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION .. ............... ..................... ............... 11-1 Chapter 12 STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION ....... ................................... ............... 12-1 APPENDIX A References APPENDIXB Demographic, Economic and Housing Data APPENDIXC Public Opinion Survey Responses APPENDIXD Soil Types - Tri-Community Area �Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan LIST OF FIGURES NUMBER 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.15 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.15 3.6 3.7 4.1 8.1 9.1 9.2 9.3 TITLE Age Cohorts (1960 & 1980) - Area Age Cohorts (1980) - Allegan County Age Cohorts (1980) - Saugatuck Township Educational Background in 1980 - Persons 25 and Over. Tri-Community Area Saugatuck Public School Enrollments Grades K-12 Saugatuck Public School Enrollments Elementary and High Schools Employment By Sector in 1980 - Tri-Community Area and Allegan County Average Annual Employment - Tri-Community Area Monthly Employment -Tri-Commnity Area, 1988 Tourism Related Employment, 1988 -Allegan County Real Property SEV, 1988 - Saugatuck Twp. & Douglas Annual Real Property SEV - Tri-Community Area (1980-1987) Percent In Poverty By Age - Tri-Community Area (1980) Kalamazoo River Basin Linkage Plan Subdivision Trends - Changes From 1954-1984 Retiree Migration Trends Population Trend - Saugatuck Township PAGE 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-3 2-3 2-4 3 -2 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-5 3-5 3-5 4-2 8-7 9-2 9-2 9-3 �Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan LIST OF MAPS NUMBER TITLE PAGE Introduction 2.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.15 4.6 4.7 4.7a 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.13 IS.I IS.2 IS.3 15.4 ~ ".-/ 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.15 6.6 7.1 7.2 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.15 8.ISa 9.1 10.1 10.2 Location ii Streets and Roads V Lot Lines vi School Districts {note: all maps are found at the end of each Chapter) Topography Watercourses Floodplains Wetlands Basement Limitations Septic Limitations Septic Limitations On-Site Wastewater Limitations Most Suitable Soils Hydric Soils Prime Farmlands Groundwater Vulnerability Water Wells High Risk Erosion Areas Critical Dune Areas Woodlands Land Use/ Cover Existing Land Use By Parcel PA 116 and Unique Farmlands Planning Areas Public Facilities Water System Sewer System Gas Mains Street Classifications Act 51 Roads Outdoor Recreation Sites Bike Paths Watersheds No-Wake Areas Saugatuck Harbor Marinas Street Ends/Parks Street Ends/Parks Residential Construction Permits Future Land Use Entry Points �Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan LIST OF TABLES NUMBER 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.1 4.2 5.1 5.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 9.1 9.2 TITLE Population (1950-1980) Educational Status - Persons 25 and Over School Enrollments - Saugatuck School District Impact of Travel On Allegan County, 1986 Maj or Employers Employment By Industry - 1980 Employment By Occupation - 1980 Average Annual Unemployment Rate Per Capita Income, Allegan County Income and Poverty Characteristics Tri-Community Area Summary of Relevant Climate Conditions Land Cover Codes for Protected Wetlands Existing Land Use State Historic Sites Non-Park Public Facilities and Public Property Inventory Projected Saugatuck Township Wastewater Flows County Drains Existing Traffic Counts Tons Generated per Day By Land Use Solid Waste Composition Per Capita Waste Generated Summer Recreation Programs Inventory of Outdoor Recreation Parkland Inventory Proposed Recreation Projects - Tri-Community Area Planned Acquisitions/Improvements to Parks and Open Spaces Recreation Needs In The Tri-Community Area 1988 Public Opinion Survey Kalamazoo River Exceedance Flows (1929-1985) Kalamazoo River Water Quality NPDES Permits Issured In The Tri-Community Area Lake Michigan Lake Levels Rate of Population Change Projected Population - 1970-1980 Trend PAGE 2-1 2-2 2-3 3-1 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-6 3-6 4-1 4-3 5-1 5-4 6-1 6-2 6-3 6-4 6-7 6-7 6-7 7-1 7-3 7-4 7-6 7-7 7-7 8-2 8-3 8-5 8-5 9-1 9-3 ~ �9.3 9.4 9.!S 9.6 9.7 9.8 12.1 Projected Number of Households Percentage of Population By Density Type New Households By Density Type Future Residential Land Needs Available Acreage By Land Use Type Population 2010 - Build-Out Scenario Under Zoning In Effect Recreation Facilities - Minimum Size 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-4 9-4 9-4 12-4 :., �vi ;fj.~i t ~l: ; i . _, ' • I ,, ,. ,. .f r;.,fl ~1-! ht : Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �V !· ';~· i-. '!i •• l•: ~:. bri ,. ~ . : I •.1 :1 :,'}, ..,, ,;_, . ' ''. ~4 '' i;. ~ ; .. ~')i ' 1, ,) j ' l~ - ' ·•'./ ,~ ..w . ~ ·J\--- l ), , J11 ,( ~ i ,··.~.u,; - 0 ~ .J~ q..' ~ }' "• 1. 1:,_7] I ..... -=-.._" ~ 14 l•' I .. I l ., ..l --,-'• ; I•, ,• '· ! \ 22 i :,: ~ ~ o,, .. ~ 6 ( w • 23 ~ o,., ,.,.,."- -~--~ !·,': 2 :' .. • , 0 29 ~ 28 . 27 25 .~ ·········· !-·· ,: ta.STH AVE. '\ 1 , ,. i. { 35 ~ \ T 3N , R 6W Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �i INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW The purpose of this Plan is to provide a policy and decision making guide regarding all future land and infrastructure development within Saugatuck Township. Within the Plan, key planning issues are identified; a clear set of goals and policies are outlined; future land uses are described and mapped; and specific implementation measures are recommended. All future land uses and policies presented in this Plan were developed based on a blending of the natural capability of the land to sustain certain types of development; the important natural functions played by unique land and water resources in the area; the relative future need for residential, commercial, and industrial uses; the existing land use distribution; and the desires of local residents and public officials as expressed through direct interviews a public opinion smvey, town meetings, and public hearings. This Plan was prepared by the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc., under the direction of the Saugatuck Township Planning Commission. Financial support was provided by the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources. Coastal Zone Management Program. There are three critical components to using this plan as a decision making guide. First, are the goals, objectives and policies in Chapter 1. Second, is the future land use map and associated descriptive information presented in Chapter 10. Third, is the supporting documentation found in Chapters 2-9. Although this Plan states specific land use development policy and proposes specific land use arrangements, it has no regulatory power. It is prepared as a foundation for and depends primarily on the Township zoning ordinance (and other local tools) for its implementation. This Plan is intended as support for the achievement of the following public objectives, among others: • to conserve and protect property values by preventing incompatible uses from locating adjacent to each other; • to protect and preserve the natural resources, unique character, and environmental quality of the area; • to maintain and enhance the employment and tax base of the area: • to promote an orderly development process by which public officials and ctttzens are given an opportunity to monitor change and review proposed development; and • to provide information from which to gain a better understanding of the area, its interdependencies and interrelationships and upon which to base future land use and public investment decisions. This Plan is unique in that it was prepared concurrently with plans in Saugatuck and Douglas. It was prepared in light of the issues, problems and opportunities that the three communities face together, rather than being done in isolation as is more frequently the norm. While the Township Planning Commission oversaw the production of this plan, the Township Board was also directly involved in its preparation. Chapter 11 proposes that the Joint Planning Committee established to prepare a Joint Plan for Saugatuck, Douglas. and Saugatuck Township (tri-community area) be continued and that this Plan be updated at a minimum of every five years. The contents of this Plan draw directly from previously adopted planning documents. There has been no effort made to explicitly footnote when material has been so used. A number of engineering and technical documents prepared by outside consultants over the past decade have also been relied upon. They are referenced in Appendix A. SPATIAL LOCATION The maps on the following page show the location of Saugatuck Township on the shores of Lake Michigan. This location along 1-196 makes it easily accessible to travelers from across North America. The shoreline along the Kalamazoo River, Lake Kalamazoo, and Lake Michigan and the beautiful sand dunes and wide beaches make this a tourist mecca and an attractive place for retirement. The trade area for commercial businesses in the three communities is quite small. Local residents tend to only do daily and weekly shopping Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �u j - ;. , j l Kent County Ottawa County GRaplds Allegan County -' Van Buren County Barry County Gmazoa Kalamazoo ·county SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �m locally as Holland, Grand Rapids, and Kalamazoo are nearby for wider selections of consumer goods. Three school districts seive the area but the largest number of students within the planning area attend the Saugatuck School District. KEY FACTORS GUIDING THIS PLAN potentially negative effect on both tourists and residents. This Plan proposes keeping the scale and intensity of such future changes low and proposes a variety of mitigation techniques to prevent adverse impacts on the environment or on the character of the area from these kinds of changes. Third, a balance of future land uses is necessary to enhance the stability of the community during poor economic times and to broaden the population base. Presently there is a significant lack of housing in the area that is affordable for families with children. That. in concert with a decline in children generally (and an increase in the elderly) has severely impacted the Saugatuck School District. If all future land use decisions were made based exclusively on minimal alteration of the natural environment or maintenance of the existing community character, then over time, the community would become more vulnerable to economic downturn, which usually hits tourist communities very hard. Thus, a balance must be sought between what otherwise become competing goals (economic development and environmental protection/ community character). This will present a serious challenge in the future. The pressure will be great to "sell the farm" for developments which promise new jobs/tax base. And while these are important, the long term impact of such proposals (in a particular location) could be very negative and not worth the tradeoff. All such decisions need to be made primarily based on long term considerations, rather than short term ones. Three considerations played prominent roles in fashioning the contents of this Plan just as they do in the Joint Plan. These are based on widely held public opinions, past and present investment by public and private entities and a growing recognition among citizens of the interdependence of the three communities. First, Saugatuck, Douglas and Saugatuck Township function as a single economic, and social unit. Many people live in one of the three communities and work in another of the three. Most people live in one and shop with some frequency in another. School children, by in large, attend the same schools. Local cultural, conseivancy and retiree activities are jointly supported by residents of all three communities. Several public services are jointly provided including the Interurban bus service, sewer and water (at least between Douglas and Saugatuck) and fire protection. The Kalamazoo River and Lake Kalamazoo connect all three communities, as do the · local road network. Sometimes it seems, only the three units of government are separate. Yet despite these interrelationships, each community maintains a strong separate identity among many citizens of the three entities. Even many neighborhoods have strong separate identities (e.g. the hill, the lakeshore, MAPS Silver Lake, etc.). This provides an important richness and depth to the area, but it can also Except as otheiwise noted, all the full page be· politically divisive. maps presented in this Plan were produced Second, tourism is the primary engine drivusing C-Map software. This is a PC based coming the local economy. Despite several industrial puter program initiated by William Enslin, Manemployers that provide important diversity to ager of the Center for Remote Sensing at the area's economy, it is the dollars brought in Michigan State University. All the data on the by tourists and seasonal residents that fuel maps was digitized either by Tim McCauley of most of the local wages and local purchasing. · the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. or was The environmental splendor and wide range of downloaded from the Michigan Resource Invenactivities open to tourists are the primary attractory Program (MRIP) database maintained on tion. But no less significant is the small town the State's mainframe computer system by the character of the area. This character, often deDepartment of Natural Resources. scribed as "cute" or "quaint" by tourists, is Several advantages are realized by computhighly favored by visitors and deeply cherished erizing this data. Typically, geographic informaby local citizens. As a result, any intensive or tion is only available on paper maps at widely poorly planned alterations to the natural envivarying scales. which makes it difficult to comronment, or homogenization of the character of _ pare data sets for planning purposes. With Cthe individual communities is likely to have a Map, all of the maps can be viewed and printed Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �iv at any scale via a variety of different media (color plotter, laser or ink jet printer, or dot matrix printer). Information can also be combined (or overlaid) so that composite maps can be created and compared in a fraction of the time and ex;pense n ormally required to obtain the same results . Another m ajor advantage of computer mapping is the ability to update maps continuou sly, so that an up-to-date map is always available. There are three different base maps that have been used in mapping this information: 1) a base map prepared by the DNR which was digitized from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map series for the area; 2) a lot line m ap created by digitizing the lots of record u sed for assessing purposes in the three c:ammunities; and 3) a soils base map derived fr.om the SCS Allegan County Soil Survey. None 0 of.these base maps are exactly identical as they originate from different sources. All of the land c.over and use based information and topography is keyed to the DNR/USGS base map. All of th e soils related data is keyed to the soils base (which was interpreted and mapped by the SCS from nonrectified aerial photos, so there is some distortion at the edges of each photo frame). The existing land use, sewer and water line maps are keyed to the lot line base map. A transparent copy of the DNR/USGS base map and the lot line base map follow. These can be overlaid on any of the maps in this Plan, but the "fit" will be best when overlaying informaUon that it was used as the base for. Please note that t he extent of the Kalamazoo River on each base is noticeably different and is related to the water levels at the time the inventory or survey was conducted. We have "corrected" the DNR/USGS base map to include Silver Lake, which is merely s hown as a wetland (not an open water body) on USGS maps. A transparency can easily be made by photocopying any of these maps in order to overlay several levels of information. Using CMap on a color monitor, up to ten levels of information can be overlaid on the screen at once, including "zooming" in on any area first (e.g. as would be desirable when examining a specific parcel). While the accuracy of all of this data is very satisfactory for land use planning purposes (especially when contrasted with traditional techniques), none of it is sufficiently detailed to be absolutely reliable at the parcel level. As a result, detailed site analyses of soils, topography, drainage, etc. are still necessary any time specific site designs are being prepared. All computerized data is on file locally and accessible via C-Map for local use and updating. Contact the zoning administrator or clerk for further information. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �V ta9T'H AVL T a 25 " 27 28 ,' __,... AV&. C, •, ' 33 34 T3N,R 6W Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �Saugatuck Township Comprehenstve Plan �1-1 Chapter 1 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & POLICIES: THE SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP POLICY PLAN G oals, objectives, and policies are the foundation of a comprehensive plan. They address the key problems and opportunities of a community and help establish a direction and strategies for future community development and growth. Goals establish general direction, objectives represent tasks to be pursued, and policies are decision guides. The goals, objectives, and policies embodied in this plan were prepared through an extensive process of leadership smveys, public opinion smveys, meetings with local officials, and town meetings. The first step in this process was a survey of area leaders- including members of the Township Planning Commission, Township Board, prominent members of the private sector. and other citizens identified in the individual surveys. Leaders were asked their views on the major problems and opportunities facing the Township and the tri-community area, and the results were tabulated and presented to Township officials. These results served as the basis for initiating a public opinion survey. Citizen views on local planning issues were obtained through public opinion surveys mailed to every property owner in the Township and distributed in each rental complex. Survey questions were prepared for the Township through consultations with the Township Planning Commission and Township Board. Dr. Brent Steel, Oakland University, conducted and tabulated the survey. The response rate of 38% in Saugatuck Township was very high considering the length (about 1 hour completion time) and type of survey and thus responses probably represent the majority view. Most respondents were homeowners in their mid-fifties, registered to vote, who are long-term residents and plan to live in the area for ten or more years. Survey results are shown in Appendix A. Results of the citizen opinion survey and leadership survey were used to identify issues for discussion at the first town meeting. This meeting was a "futuring" session where participants were asked to imagine how they would like the community to be in the year 2000. Partici- pants were separated into groups and asked to prepare of list of their "prouds" and "sorries" in Saugatuck Township, and things from the past which they would like to preserve. The lists were compared and then all engaged in an imaging exercise where groups were established according to topic area and were asked to imagine that element of the Township in the year 2000. This futurtng process identified key issues and community elements which were pulled together to form a vision and direction for the Township in the year 2000. A draft policy plan, with defined goals and objectives, was then prepared based on this futurtng process and the survey results. The draft was refined through a series of meetings with local officials and then presented to Township citizens in a second town meeting. Citizen comments were reviewed by Township officials and incorporated into the policy plan. Following completion of the draft policy plan, data and trends in the Township were analyzed. This analysis supported the direction of the policy plan and was first evaluated by the Township Planning Commission, and then by Township citizens at the third town meeting. Next, key elements of the plan and proposed strategies to cany it out were first reviewed by the Township Planning Commission, and then by Township citizens at the fourth and final town meeting. These goals and policies also look beyond local boundaries to the issues which affect the region. This was accomplished through the joint comprehensive planning process, where representatives of the City of Saugatuck and the Village of Douglas participated in the preparation of joint goals and policies for the region. Thus, these goals and policies are premised on a pledge to mutually cooperate in guiding development consistent with the adopted goals and objectives of the Joint Plan. Thus, the broad based input of area officials, leaders, and citizens, plus detailed analysis of local trends and land use characteristics have formed the goals, objectives, and policies that comprise the policy portion of this compre- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1-2 hensive plan. These goals and policies will serve as a guide for land use and infrastructure decisions in Saugatuck Township. With time, some elements may need to be changed, others added, and still others removed from the list. Before amendatory action is taken. however, the impact of the proposed changes should be considered comprehensively in relation to the entire plan. and the joint plan. It is intended that the goals and policies be consulted whenever considering future land use decisions. TOWNSHIP CHARACTER Goal: Retain, enhance. and restore where possible the quiet. scenic, and rural character of the Township. Policy: Protect existing rural areas not served by sewer and water through presexvation of open space and agricultural activity intermixed with very low density residential land uses. Objective: Increase enforcement of existing ordinances and regulations to better preserve the established character of the Township and promote official goals, objectives. and policies. GROWfH MANAGEMENT Goal: Guide development in a manner which is orderly. consistent with the planned expansion of public services and facilities. and strives to presexve the scenic beauty. foster the wise use of natural resources, protect environmentally sensitive areas, and enhance the special character of each community. Policy: Encourage development in locations which are consistent with the capacity of existing and planned public services and facilities. and cost effective in relation to service extension. Policy: Preserve wetlands, woodlots, and other wildlife areas wherever possible. Policy: Review all plans by other public entities for expansion and improvement of existing road and street networks for Impacts on growth patterns and for consistency with the goals, objectives, and policies of this plan. Policy: Encourage new land uses and densities/ intensities of development which are consistent with and complement the character. economic base. and Image of the area. and which are sited consistent with this plan and zoning regulations. Policy: Consider the impact of land use planning and zoning changes on Saugatuck and Douglas, and discuss proposed changes with the affected jurisdiction(s) prior to making such changes. A common procedure for such communication shall be established and followed. Policy: Promote site planning and design of new development which is consistent with the established character of the Township and compatible with existing neighborhoods. Objective: Improve the visual appearance of entrances into the Township through landscape designs. signs, and land development which promote the vitality and character of the Township without clutter or safety hazards. Objective: Explore the possibility of establishing a sign ordinance which is consistent with the City of Saugatuck and Village of Douglas. Objective: Develop a program to plant and maintain trees along Blue Star Highway and to encourage their maintenance along other roads in the Township, especially along I-196. LAND USE & COMMUNI'IY FACILITIES Goal: Promote the balanced, efficient. and economical use of land in a manner which minimizes land use conflicts within and across municipal borders, and provides for a wide range of land uses in appropriate locations to meet the diverse needs of area residents. Policy: Insure compatible land use planning and zoning across municipal borders and minimize land use conflicts by coordinating planning and zoning, separating incompatible uses and requiring buffers where necessary. Policy: Discourage sprawl and scattered development through planned expansion of roads and public utilities and through zoning regulations which limit intensive development to areas where adequate public services are available. Policy: Encourage the preservation and restoration of historically significant structures. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1-3 Policy: Provide for necessary community facilities (i.e. schools, garages. fire halls. etc .) consistent with this plan and capital improvement programming. Objective: Promote agriculture through a variety of activities. (such as farm tours, lectures, farm week. etc.) which educate residents about the importance of agriculture to the area. Policy: Coordinate Capital Improvement Programming with the City of Saugatuck and Village of Douglas. Policy: Discourage the establishment of high density livestock and poultry operations (see Chapter 10). Policy: Encourage approaches to site design which take natural features of the property, such as soils. topography. hydrology, and natural vegetation, into account and which use the land most effectively and efficiently by maximizing open space, preserving scenic vistas, conserving energy, and pursuing any other public goals and policies identified in this plan. Policy: Advise developers during site plan review to contact the State Archaeologist, Bureau of History (51 7-373-6358) to determine if the project may affect a known archaeological site. AGRICULTURE Goal: Maintain a variety of agricultural operations and promote the preservation of existing farms and farmland through coordinated planning and development regulations. public incentives, and educational strategies. Policy: Discourage the conversion of prime agricultural land to other uses. Policy: Discourage spot development of non-agricultural activities in agricultural areas to preserve the economic viability of farming and maintain the rural character of the Township. In particular, residential development lining county roads in agricultural areas. that is unrelated to agricultural activities, shall not be permitted. Objective: Encourage farmers on lands well suited to agriculture to enroll their property in the Michigan Farmland Preservation Act, Act 116 PA of 1974. as amended. Objective: Encourage the expansion of specialty farms and related activities which enhance the tourism and recreation potential of the area (e.g "you pick". farmers markets, farm tours, etc.). ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal: Strengthen and expand upon the area's economic base through strategies which attract new businesses, strengthen existing businesses, and enhance the tourism potential of the area consistent with the character of the Township and its ability to provide needed public services. Policy: Identify potential sites for industrial development and alternative means of financing necessary public improvements and marketing of the sites (i.e. tax increment financing, special assessments, state grants and loans, etc.) Policy: Support efforts to foster tourism by preserving the scenic beauty of the environment, expanding recreation opportunities, improving tourist attractions. and preparing promotional materials which highlight the attractions of the Township. Policy: Promote better communication and cooperation between the public and private sector. COMMERCIAL Goal: Encourage the development of commercial land uses in appropriate locations which serve the current and future needs of residents and tourists, are of a character consistent with community design guidelines, and which promote public safety through prevention of traffic hazards and other threats to public health. safety, and general welfare. Policy: Encourage new commercial development to locate adjacent to existing commercial areas. Policy: Encourage the design and location of neighborhood commercial centers in a manner which complements and does not conflict with adjoining residential areas. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1-4 Policy: Promote the development of small, commercial centers off of major roads, rather than lot by lot commercial strips. phasizes the design guidelines contained in this plan. Policy: Avoid separate parking lots for each business where feasible and encourage centrally placed parking lots which serve several businesses. INDUSTRIAL Policy: Discourage unsafe and unsightly strip commercial development through design and landscaping requirements including but not limited to berms, planting, rear parking, clustered shopping areas, and/ or shared access. Goal: Increase the amount of non-polluting light industry in the Township without damaging the environment, spoiling the scenic beauty of the area. or overburdening local roads. utilities, or other public services. Policy: Improve existing commercial areas. Policy: Encourage new industries to locate contiguous to existing industrial areas and in locations with existing or planned sewer, water, electric, and solid waste disposal services to minimize service costs and negative impacts on other land uses. Policy: Improve the quality, vitality, and value of Township commercial districts through sign regulations which control the design and location of signs. Policy: Identify appropriate locations for small industrial parks which conform to the design guidelines contained in this plan, the joint plan, and local zoning regulations. Blue Star Highway Policy: Encourage industrial development in the area on the east side of Blue Star Highway, adjacent to the commercial area and north of exit 36. Policy: Encourage new commercial uses to locate contiguous to existing commercial development in Douglas and as sewer and water become available, along other sections of Blue Star Highway. Policy: Establish large frontage requirements for commercial property along Blue Star Highway to prevent traffic hazards as the land uses change. Policy: Require frontage roads for commercial strip development along Blue Star Highway wherever feasible. Objective: Prepare a subarea plan and design concept for the Blue Star Highway commercial corridor which identifies appropriate land uses and is consistent with the design guidelines, goals, objectives, and policies contained in this plan. Freeway Interchange Areas Policy: Encourage appropriate highway service commercial development in the freeway interchange areas on Blue Star Highway. Objective: Prepare a subarea plan and design concept for the freeway interchange areas which identifies appropriate land uses and em- Objective: Implement site plan requirements for light industries which are designed to incorporate generous amounts of open space, attractive landscaping, and buffering from adjacent non-industrial uses. Policy: Require the separation of industrial sites from residential areas through buffers made up of any combination of parking, commercial uses, parks, parkways, open space, or farmland. HOUSING/RESIDENTIAL Goal: Encourage a variety of residential types in a wide range of prices which are consistent with the needs of a changing population and compatible with the character of existing residences in the vicinity. Policy: Explore alternative measures to reduce housing costs and make home ownership more affordable, such as zoning regulations and other programs which are designed to reduce the cost of constructing new housing. Policy: Maintain "rural residential" with a large minimum lot size as the primary residen- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan I �1-5 tial land use in the township in those areas where sewer and water are not available or planned, but not in prime agricultural areas. Policy: Encourage new rural residential development to locate adjacent to existing rural residential uses and away from agricultural uses to minimize sprawl and spot development in agricultural areas. Policy: Provide land through zoning for garden apartments, duplexes, and higher density single family residential development near existing and planned public services, facilities, and shopping areas. Policy: Allow pole barns in rural residential districts subject to height, setback, and location requirements in the local wning ordinance. Policy: Allow only quiet, low traffic, low intensity home occupations in residential areas to preserve their stability and tranquility. Policy: Provide street lights and sidewalks in residential areas where there is a demonstrated need and according to the ability of residents to finance such improvements. Objective: Adopt and enforce a basic property maintenance code and building code. Policy: Require development projects deemed appropriate in and adjacent to special environments to mitigate any negative impacts on such environments. Policy: Encourage acquisition of special environments of significant public value by public agencies or nonprofit conservancy organizations for the purposes of preservation. WATERFRONT Goal: Protect and enhance the natural aesthetic values and recreation potential of all waterfront areas for the enjoyment of area citizens. Policy: Promote the preservation of open space and natural areas along the Kalamazoo River, Kalamazoo Lake, Goshorn Lake, Lake Michigan and connecting streams, creeks, and drainageways to protect and enhance the scenic beauty of these waterfront areas, and permit the continuity of these existing open spaces to remain. Policy: Some waterfront lands may be developed to meet residential and commercial needs, enhance local tax base, and contribute to paying for local public service costs associated with their use and development, consistent with environmental protection policies in this plan, where such development would contribute to local quality of life. SPECIAL ENVIRONMENTS & OPEN SPACE Goal: Protect special environments and open spaces, including but not limited to sand dunes, wetlands, and critical wildlife habitat, from the harmful effects of incompatible development actMty by limiting the type and intensity of land development in those areas. Objective: Identify development limitations on special environments through a tiered classification system which classifies these environments based on their value to the ecosystem, unique attributes, the presence of endangered plant and wildlife species, and other characteristics deemed significant. Objective: Devise regulations for land development in special environments which permit development consistent with identified protection objectives and which complement state and federal regulations for special environments. Policy: Maximize public access, both physically and visually, by acquiring prime waterfront open space whenever feasible. Policy: Acquire scenic easements wherever public values dictate the maintenance of visual access to the waterfront and the property is not available for purchase. Policy: Limit the height and intensity of new development along waterfront areas to preserve visual access and the natural beauty of the waterfront for the broader public. Policy: Explore the conversion of road ends which abut water bodies for use as safe public access to the water for fishing, viewing, and launching of small water crafts. Policy: Maintain a natural greenbelt along the Kalamazoo River and its tributaries. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1-6 RECREATION Goal: Enhance the well-being of area residents by providing a variety of opportunities for relaxation, rest, activity, and education through a well balanced system of private and public park and recreational facilities and activities located to serve identified needs of the area. Objective: Identify and explore opportunities to cooperate with other jurisdictions and agencies, including Allegan County and the Department of Natural Resources Recreation Division, on recreation projects which would benefit area residents and strengthen the tourism industry. Objective: Examine the feasibility of, and establish if feasible, a jointly owned and operated community center to serve residents of all ages in all three communities. Objective: Examine the feasibility of expanding low cost opportunities for public beach and campground facilities for area citizens with boat launching sites, bike paths, cross-country ski trails, and docks for shore fishing. Objective: Develop a system of cross-country ski trails together with the Village of Douglas and the City of Saugatuck, and other jurisdictions/ agencies if possible, through the use of local funds, grants and loans, and capital improvement programming. Objective: Survey the transportation network and identify need for maintenance and improvements. Objective: Prepare a capital improvement budget for financing transportation maintenance and improvements. Objective: Prepare a capital improvements program to schedule and prioritize improvements and maintenance. Policy: Implement traffic controls and design features that will increase the efficiency and safety of major arterials, including but not limited to: traffic signals, deceleration lanes, limiting driveways, minimum standards for driveway spacing, uniform sign regulations, shared or alternate access, left and right tum lanes, and speed limit adjustments. Policy: Promote the resurfacing and restriping of Blue Star Highway and the adoption of a uniform 45 mph speed limit to improve traffic safety and flow. Goal: Encourage a wide variety of transportation means, such as walking, biking, and public transportation, to meet the diverse needs of area residents. Policy: Promote pedestrian and bike travel through a coordinated network of bikepaths, trails, and sidewalks. Policy: Encourage local government participation in activities designed to enhance the area's seasonal festivals. Objective: Develop an areawide bikepath through local funds, grants and loans, and capital improvement programming. Policy: Retain, maintain, and improve all existing publicly owned parks so that they continue to meet the diverse recreation needs of area citizens and tourists. Policy: Maintain the sidewalk system and require developers to provide sidewalks in appropriate locations through subdivision regulations. Objective: Investigate developing a joint public marina and launch facility where federal and state funding is available to assist with financing such a venture. Policy: Promote regularly scheduled, affordable, and dependable public transportation to increase the mobility and quality of life of those who depend on public transportation. TRANSPORTATION Objective: Encourage expansion of the interurban system consistent with municipal means to finance the increased service and an identified public need. Goal: Maintain a safe, effective, and eflkient road network and improve roads to promote growth in a way that is consistent with land use goals, objectives and policies. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1-7 Policy: Strive to keep Lakeshore Drive scenic, residential, and open to motorized and nonmotorized traffic. Objective: Establish alternatives for insuring that homeowners along Lakeshore Drive have access to their property if erosion of Lakeshore Drive cannot be abated. Objective: Apply the boulevard concept to Bluestar Highway between freeway exits #36 and #41 to control access, improve traffic safety and flow. and improve the visual appearance of this highly travelled corridor which provides the principal means of access to each of the three jurisdictions. WATER AND SEWER Goal: Insure a safe and adequate water supply for the area, and environmentally sound sewage treatment which are efficiently provided and cost effective. Policy: Provide a reliable supply of safe, clean, and good-tasting drinking water. Policy: Minimize the potential for groundwater contamination through planning and zoning which is consistent with the capacity and limitations of the land and available services. Objective: Prepare and implement a plan for the carefully timed provision of sewer and water service in the area consistent with the development goals and objectives of this plan. Objective: Devise alternative mechanisms for financing sewer and water expansions which are financially sound and equitable. Objective: Investigate refashioning the Kalamazoo Lake Sewer and Water Authority into an independent authority, in order to insure that the needs of area citizen's for quality utility services are met. Policy: Promote a joint agreement with the City of Saugatuck and Village of Douglas to plan and implement areawide sewer and water service, including full participation in the Kalamazoo Lake Sewer & Water Authority. scheduled when affordable. and implemented when necessary to meet an identified need in the area rather than on a speculative basis. POLICE, FIRE, & EMERGENCY SERVICES Goal: Provide police. fire, and emergency services consistent with public need and the ability to finance improvements in the most cost effective manner. Policy: Consolidate police. fire , and other emergency services across the three communities to eliminate overlap in service and expenditures and improve service delivery. Objective: Evaluate the feasibility of 24 hour medical service which serves all three communities to be provided by a public or private entity. SOCIAL SERVICES Goal: Those social services which are efficient to provide at the local level should be provided to meet the needs of area residents. Objective: Explore the possibility of establishing support programs for older adults through the use of volunteers for assistance with household chores. personal care. and home repair to help them remain independent. shorten hospital stays. and lower health care costs. Policy: Support efforts to establish community day care center(s) in appropriate locations to provide quality and affordable day care to working parents. WASTE MANAGEMENT Goal: Insure the safe, effective, and efficient disposal of solid waste and toxic substances. Policy: Encourage the reduction of solid waste through recycling, composting, waste-toenergy projects. Policy: Manage disposal of solid waste and location of solid waste facilities in accordance with the Allegan County Solid Waste Management Plan prepared under PA 641 of 1978. Policy: Insure that the expansion of sewer and water service into an area is consistent with the planned intensity of land use for that area, Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1-8 Objective: Adopt regulations for on-site storage and transportation of hazardous waste which require: • Secondary containment for on-site storage of hazardous waste; • No transfer of hazardous waste over open ground; • Arrangements for inspection of. and monitoring underground storage tanks; • Existing underground storage tanks must provide spill protection around the fill pipe by 1998 in accordance with 1988 EPA standards. • All existing underground storage tanks must install leak detection systems within 5 years in accordance with 1988 EPA standards; Objective: Encourage the development and use of biodegradable containers. ENERGY Goal: Promote site design and building which is energy efficient and encourage energy conservation through good land use planning and wise public building management. Objective: Prepare energy guidelines or standards which address landscaping. solar access. solar energy systems. sidewalks, subdivision layout. proximity to goods and services. etc .. and encourage or implement these through wning and subdivision regulations. Policy: Require developers to provide sidewalks in appropriate locations through subdivision regulations. Policy: Encourage higher density residential development near areas with shopping and services to limit the number and length of trips generated from that development. Objective: Establish an educational program (i.e. "energy awareness week") in cooperation with the local school system. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �- 'Jj 2-1 Chapter2 DEMOGRAPffiCS POPULATION SIZE The Township's population has more than doubled since 1950. reaching an estimated 1,910 people in 1986 according to U.S. Census population estimates. This represents a 107% increase from 1950 to 1980. The Township's growth of 40% since 1970 has been especially dramatic compared to the gradual population gains of the City and Village (see Table 2 .1). SEASONAL POPULATION The population of each community in the trt-community area swells during the summer when seasonal residents and tourists return. The 1980 census estimates that 116 (14%) of the Township's 850 total housing units are vacant. seasonal, and migratory. Nearly all of these (106) are detached single family units. An engineering study prepared by Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr & Huber for the Kalamazoo Lake Sewer & Water Authority (KLSWA) estimates that the total trt-community area population is comprised of one-third seasonal residents and two-thirds permanent residents and that the weekend daytime population during the summer is about 2,500 persons. Although sewer and water demand typically grows with population, the study found that demand for sewer and water in the trt-community area increased about 300/4 between 19801986, whereas population increased by an average of 20%. This reflects the impact of the seasonal and tourist population on local services. HOUSEHOIDS AND AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE Until recently, the average household size in the United States has continued to shrink due to an aging population, higher divorce rates: postponed marriages, and lower birth rates. In keeping with state and national trends, the average household size in the trt-community area declined, going from 2.98 in 1960 to 2 .39 in 1980. The average household size in the Township was 2.69. Smaller household size means a greater number of households. lf the average household size in 1960 held true today, there would be about 300 fewer individual households in the area. The number of households is an excellent gauge of the demand for land and services. As household size decreases, the additional households create further demand for land, housing, transportation, and public utilities. Although household size has declined substantially over the past few decades. national trends suggest that it will soon cease its decline. Nationwide the average household size has reached a plateau and state demographers predict that Michigan will follow suit. AGE DISTRIBUTION Historical age cohort data is available on a regional basis and a comparison of age cohorts in the trt-community area between 1960 and 1980 reveals a large drop in the proportion of young children, with a corresponding increase in the childbearing cohort (20 to 30 year olds) and 45-54 year olds. The proportion of retirees to the total population, however, has remained constant (see Figure 2 . 1). This is out of keeping with statewide trends and suggests that the area TABLE 2.1 POPULATION ( 1950-1980) COMMUNTIY Saugatuck Saugatuck Township Douglas AREAWIDE 1950 770 845 447 2,062 1960 927 1,133 602 2,662 1970 1,022 1,254 813 3,089 Sourt:e: U.S. Ce:n&Js Bureau Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan 1980 1,079 1,753 948 3,780 CHANGE 40% 107% 112% 83% �, 2-2 FIGURE 2.2 FIGURE 2.1 AGE COHORTS (1980) AGE COHORTS (1960 & 1980) ALLEGAN COUNTY ARE A § ,mm, 1!l60 -,gee 19 p E 17 R 13 C E N ,, T 7 17 15 9 p E R 15 C E N T 11 13 9 5.+-----,...--,----r--"T""""'-----...--,--...... 5-14 Q-4 15-24 3-1---~-...--~---.--~-~----, 0-14 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-« 45-5' 55-64 65+ 25-34 35-« 45-5' 55-64 65+ AGE GROUP AGE GROUP the area's senior population: the City of Saugatuck comprises 37% (despite its small size): and the Village of Douglas. 24%. FIGURE 2.3 AGE COHORTS (1980) EDUCATION SAUGATUCK TWP. 18 p E R Saugatuck Township has a well educated citizeruy. An analysis of those aged 25 and older 1n 1980 reveals that 31.3% have completed 1 or more years of college (see Figure 2.4). Table 2.2 contains complete information on the educational status of persons 25 years old and over by jurisdiction. 14 12 c 10 E N a T 6 4+-~-~-...--~-~--.---, Q-4 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-« 45-5' 55-64 65+ AGE GROUP SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS has experienced high in-migration of retirees through time. Retirees are attracted by the area's special resort quality, small town character, and scenic beauty. Figure 2.2 and 2.3 depicts the 1980 age c·ohort distribution 1n the Township (not including the City and Village}, and Allegan County, for comparison. In accordance with countywide trends. the Township has a small cohort of infants and toddlers. The most striking characteristic of the Township is its huge cohort of 45-54 year olds and senior citizens. In regional terms, Saugatuck Township comprises 39% of Three school districts, Fennville Public School District, the Saugatuck Public School District, and the Hamilton Public School District, serve the Township (see Map 2.1). The Hamilton School District includes only a small area of the northeast corner of the Township. The Fennville School District covers the southern half of the Township, and the Saugatuck Public School District covers the central portion of the Township, plus Douglas and Saugatuck. Thus, the Saugatuck Public School District serves the majority of the area's households. TABLE 2.2 EDUCATIONAL STATUS PERSONS 25 YEARS OLD AND OVER SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP Elementary 1-3 years HS 4 years HS 1-3 years College 4+ years College 185 199 373 157 188 SAUGATUCK CTIY 57 97 276 137 196 DOUGLAS 73 84 213 123 84 AREA 315 380 862 417 468 ,,,--...., r -._J Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �2-3 FIGURE 2.4 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND IN 1980 PERSONS 25 AND OVER, TRI-COMMUNITY AREA 40 p 35 [ill] TOWNSHIP 30 • CITY [Z:l VILLAGE 25 E R C E N T 20 15 10 5 0 ELEMENTARY 1-3 YRS H.S. 4 YRS H.S. FIGURE 2.5 SAUGATUCK PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS GRADES K-12 BOO E 750 N R 700 0 L L M E N T 1-3 YRS COLL. 4 YRS COLL and high school enrollments. however, the data reveal a 17% increase in elementary school enrollments since the 1983-84 school year. and a 28% decrease in high school enrollments over the same period (see Figure 2.6). School enrollment data appears in Table 2.3. Future elementary and high school enrollments were projected by the Saugatuck Public 650 TABLE 2.3 SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS SAUGATUCK PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT 600 550 500 -+--,--.....-..........--.---.-...........................,................................... 13-14 75-76 n -78 1s-eo 81-82 83-84 85-86 87-68 YEAR School enrollment data for Saugatuck High School and Douglas Elementary. the two schools which comprise the Saugatuck Public School system, illustrate the impact of areawide demographic trends on the local school system. Between 1973 and 1989, enrollments in the Saugatuck Public School system, grades K-12 , went from 770 students to 511- a 34% decline (see Figure 2.5). When divided into elementary YEAR K-6 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 326 307 306 252 232 259 250 275 299 296 Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan 7-12 329 322 299 290 303 296 277 265 246 215 TOTAL 655 629 605 542 535 555 527 540 545 511 �r 2-4 FIGURE 2.6 SAUGATUCK PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS ELEMENTARY AND HIGH SCHOOLS 360 340 E N R 0 L L M E N T 320 300 280 I I 260 240 220 PROJECTIONS \ ~ 200 180+-----.-...--,--.--""T"""~-T""""--.--,r--r---r--..---r---, 79-80 81-82 83-84 85-86 87-88 89-90 91-92 93-94 YEAR School system. These projections. illustrated in Figure 2.6. show an upturn in high school enrollments in 1991 with a continued climb in elementary school enrolhnents. Total projected 1994 enrollments. however. are still 23% less than 1973-7 4 levels. FUTURE TRENDS If local demographic trends follow those projected for the county as they have in the past, then the overall proportion of retirees in the area will expand much faster than that of school age children. The Michigan Department of Management and Budget projects that Allegan County's school age population will grow only 3% by the year 2000. while senior citizens will increase by 30%. The area's small cohort of infants and children. large cohort of middle aged to elderly. and high rate of retiree in-migration suggest this will be equally true in the Township. These figures reveal the need to plan for the needs of an aging community. as well as initiate efforts to attract families with children into the area. The large cohort of individuals in their childbearing years in the Township and the Village should result in a natural increase in young children. but because couples are having fewer children. school enrolhnents will probably expand only slightly. The Saugatuck Public School system is not likely to meet its potential capacity for enrollments unless a sequence of events or actions attracts new families with young children into the area. Two key factors will be the availability of affordable housing and nearby employment opportunities. In the meantime, schools must use space and resources efficiently as they experience tighter budgets and small enrollments. Many of the demographic characteristics shown here have been analyzed based on 1980 census information. These trends should be updated when the 1990 census information is available. See Appendix B for more demographic information from the 1980 census. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �N A H OL MAP 2.1 PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS Saugatuck ~ Fennville D Hamilton DATA SOURCE: Respective School Districts Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml August 1989 SA I , DOUG �3-1 Chapter3 THE ECONOMY large wetlands abounding with wildlife; orchards and specialty farms; and a scenic location on Lake Michigan encompassing Silver, Goshorn, Kalamazoo and Oxbow lakes, and the Kalamazoo River. The area also has a reputation as a cultural center which serves as an artists' retreat. The Ox Bow Art Workshop and the Red Barn theater add to the area's cultural ambience. Although it is located in Laketown Township, the Saugatuck Dunes State Park serves as another tourist attraction to the trt-community area. The Park offers no camping and thus many visitors stay in the trt-community area. Visitor counts from the Michigan Department of Resources, Parks Division, reveal that the park has increased in popularity since the 70's. Visitor counts performed by the Parks Division show that 47,463 people visited Saugatuck Dunes State Park in FY 1988- a 3()()0/4 increase in park ECONOMIC BASE Tourism Tourism fuels the economy of the tri-community area, with associated boating, restaurant, lodging, and strong retail sectors. Although the City of Saugatuck is seen as the resort center of the area, the entire area benefits from and contributes to the tourist trade. The Village of Douglas has boating and lodging facilities which capitalize on tourism, but its commercial sector is primarily oriented towards local clientele. The Township has a small commercial sector which compliments that of the Village, but it is primarily seasonal residential and rural, with a large agricultural area to the south. The area's resort flair is defined by: historic buildings- including quaint bed and breakfast inns; the many festivals; outstanding boating; Oval Beach; downtown Saugatuck; sand dunes: TABLE 3.1 IMPACT OF TRAVEL ON ALLEGAN COUNTY, 1986 TOT.TRAVEL TRAVEL EXPENDITURES GENER. PAYROLL $42,413,000 .$/Jobs .56% % of State Total 29.52% %change 1983-86 TRAVEL GENER. EMPLOYMENT STATE TAX RECEIIYfS LOCAL TAX RECEIPTS 869jobs .62% 18.39% $2,191,000 .71% 27.98% $363,000 .49% 32.48% $7,689,000 .49% 37.87% Source: U.S. Travel Data Center, "The Economic Impact of Travel on Michigan Countle..· TABLE 3.2 MAJOR EMPLOYERS PRODUCT/SERVICE Hansen Machine Haworth Harbors Health Facility Enterprise Hinge Douglas Marine Tafts Supermarket Paramount Tool Co., Inc. Rich Products Metal Stampings Office Furniture Nursing Home Manufacturing Marina Supermarket Machinery Pies EMPLOYEES 43 238 78 12 21 32 24 85 Source: Allegan County Promotional Alliance Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �3-2 FIGURE 3.1 EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR IN 1980 TRI-COMMUNITY AREA AND ALLEGAN COUNTY PUBLIC fill CITY ■ VILLAGE ~ TOWNSHIP @ COUNTY SERVICES FIN/INS/REAL EST RETAIL WHOLESALE TRANS/COMM/UTIL MANUFACTURING CONSTRUCTION AGRICULTURE 0 10 5 15 20 25 30 35 40 PERCENT attendance since 1979, when it attracted only 11, 714 visitors. How much money does travel and tourism generate in the tri-community area? Although current travel and tourism statistics are not available for the tri-community area, studies conducted for Allegan County reveal the tremendous impact of travel and tourism on local economies in the County. This is especially true for Saugatuck-Douglas-the major resort center in the County. A study prepared for the Michigan Travel Bureau by the U.S. Travel Data Center in 1986 found that travellers spent $42.4 million in Allegan County in 1986, generating $7.7 million for payroll, 869 Jobs, $2 .1 million in state tax receipts, and $363,000 in local tax receipts. This ranks Allegan County 33rd out of Michigan's 83 counties in travel and tourism revenues. Selected data from this study is reproduced in Table 3.1 . TABLE 3.3 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY - 1980 TOTAL Agriculture Construction Manufacturing TCU • Wholesale Trade Retail Trade FIRE•• Services Public Admin. CTIY VILIAGE 547 9 30 156 25 13 146 21 125 22 433 16 27 169 10 7 67 15 96 26 TOWNSHIP 689 37 75 274 17 20 106 39 107 14 • Transportation, Communicatiion, Utillities •• Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Source: 1980 U.S. Census of Population, General Social and Economic Characteristics. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan AREA 1,669 62 132 599 52 40 .319 75 328 62 COUNIY 34,025 2,041 2,009 13,033 1,407 1,398 5,017 1,126 7,105 889 �3-3 TABLE 3.4 EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION - 1980 TITTAL Manag. & Admin Prof. Technical Sales Clerical Service Farm, Fishing Crafts & Repair Machine Operators Laborers, Mat. Moving CITY VILIAGE TOWNSHIP AREA COUN1Y 547 77 87 70 72 13 66 433 34 62 24 45 73 13 70 60 90 39 22 685 43 74 83 74 73 43 144 120 31 1,665 154 223 170 189 231 126 210 270 92 34,025 2 ,315 3 ,319 2,696 4,189 4,300 1,885 5,447 6,129 3,745 63 Source: 1980 U.S . Census of Population, General Social and Economic Characteristics. Manqfacturing Manufacturing is central to the year-round stability of the area's economy. Although there are few manufacturing firms, they provide a high percentage of area jobs. Major area employers are listed in Table 3.2. Agriculture Agriculture is another strong component of the area's economic base. No data exists on farm earnings at the Township level, but Michigan Department of Agriculture statistics on Allegan County reveal the importance of farming to the county's economic base. Between 1980 and 1986, agricultural net income nearly doubled, going from 12.8 million. to over 24 million. Farm investments went from 92 thousand per farm in 1974 to 236 thousand in 1982. The market value of products sold by Allegan County farmers in 1987 totaled over $120 million and Allegan County farmers supported local business and industry by purchasing over $103 million of supplies and services. Fruit farming is a rapidly growing agricultural enterprise in the County. Allegan County ranks within the top five producers of blueberries, peaches, grapes, pears, nectarines, potatoes, cauliflower, milk cows, and hogs and pigs. Between 1982 and 1986, the number of fruit farms increased 86%. Based on increases in overall acreage, growth in the fruit sector appears to be strongest for peaches, dwarf apples. and blueberries. The Township contains a large amount of prime farmland (see Map 4 .10). There are a number of fruit farms growing peaches, apples, cherries, and some blueberries. Com, wheat, and soybeans are other major cash crops. Some farms also have livestock- primarily hogs and dairy cattle. Nurseries are a strong agri-business in the area. Rich Products, a major employer in the area, is another category of agri-business, which was attracted to the region because of its many fruit farms. The future of agri-industry is bright in light of Michigan Department of Commerce efforts to promote and expand food processing industries in the state. EMPLOYMENT Table 3 .3 breaks down employment by economic sector for the trt-cornmunity area and the county in 1980. This information is illustrated in graphic form in Figure 3.1. Manufacturing employs the most people in each of the three communities. Yet employment in other sectors varies. Forty percent of Township residents are employed in the manufacturing sector, with the next largest proportion employed in the retail (15%) and service sectors (16%). Construction is fourth, employing 11 % of Township workers- a much larger proportion than in the region and County. Financial/insurance/real estate services is fifth at 6%. Although nearly all of the region's farming occurs in the Township. 1980 employment by sector shows that the proportion of the labor force employed in agriculture (5%) is low compared to the amount of agricultural actMty, and only slightly higher than the Village of Douglas. Many farmers have alternative sources of income outside of farming, causing the census to count them in another employment sector. Table 3.4 breaks down employment by occupation in 1980. The Township has the highest Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �3-4 FIGURE 3.3 FIGURE 3.2 AVERAGE ANNUAL EMPLOYMENT MONTHLY EMPLOYMENT TRI-COMMUNITY AREA TRI-COMMUNITY AREA, 1988 2.8 2700 T 2.6 H 2.4 0 2.2 E 2.0 M u s A 2650 p 1.8 L 0 2600 2550 N D 1.4 y 2500 s 1.2 M 2450 1.0+-----------1984 1986 1988 1990 1980 1982 YEAR E N 2400 T 2350 proportion of crafts and repair personnel in the region, representing employment generated by Broward Marine, Inc. - a major builder ofluxury boats. Machine operators are second, and sales workers- probably employed in the City and Village- are the third largest employment category in the Township. The proportion of professional/technical and service workers is also high. 2300+---.---,,-.----r---.---,,-.----r---.---,,~ J F M A M J J MONTH FIGURE 3.4 TOURISM RELATED EMPLOYMENT, 1988 ALLEGAN COUNTY Average Annual Employment and Unemployment Unemployment has declined dramatically with Michigan's economic growth of the late 80's. Table 3 .5 reveals average annual unemployment rates in the area since the last statewide recession. (Employment data is not available for individual communities in the trtcommunity area. The Michigan Employment Security Commission aggregates it for Saugatuck Township, the Village of Douglas, and the City of Saugatuck.) The trt-community area has a TABLE 3.5 AVERAGE ANNUAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE 1ri-Communitv 1982 15.2 14.7 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 10.8 11.3 6.5 5.8 1988 5.2 County 14.8 14.3 10.5 10.9 7.3 5.6 5.1 State 15.5 14.2 11.2 9.9 8.8 8 .2 7.6 Source: MESC, Bureau of Research & Statistics, Field Analysl.9 Unit A S O N D 1.2 E 1.0 MT 0.8 L o 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 p H au y ! MN ED Ns T IOOlffl1 slightly higher rate of unemployment than Allegan County, although since 1986 the unemployment rate has dipped below that of the state revealing local or regional economic growth. Average annual employment in the tri-community area bottomed out in 1986. This reflected the loss of American Twisting, which employed about 20 people, and the burning of Broward Marine (about 100 employees) and Brighton Metal (about 10 employees). Yet in 1987. areawide employment jumped dramatically. During that year Broward Marine reopened its doors; Rich Products, Harbor Health Facilities. Paramount Tools and other area busi- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �3-3 FIGURE 3.6 ANNUALREALPROPERTYSEV TRI-COMMUNITY AREA (1980-87) 70 60 M S~ E LI VoN 50 40 s 30 = Saugatuck - Douglas = Township* - Township** 20 10~~=="""T"""--,r----r-------.----, 1980 1981 1982 1983 19841985 1986 1987 YEAR • not including Village(s) •• including Douglas through 1987 and Saugatuck through 1984 nesses increased employment; a number of small businesses and two restaurants opened; and perhaps most significantly, Haworth Corporation expanded adding two new departments. Contributing to this was the state and regional economic boom, and corresponding increases in construction and spending. Figure 3.2 illustrates this trend. Figure 3.3 reveals the impact of tourism on employment in the tri-community area during the summer months. The high number ofJobs created during the summer months are primarily unskilled Jobs in the service/retail sector, especially eating and FIGURE 3.7 Seasonal Employment Local employment increases each summer as tourists flood into the trt-community area. . FIGURE 3.5 PERCENT IN POVERTY BY AGE TRI.COMMUNITY AREA (1980) ,. REAL PROPERTY SEV (1988) SAUGATIJCK TOWNSHIP & VIUAGE OF DOUGLAS 10 p E R C E N T DEVELOPMENTAL 1% AGRICULTURAL 5% [ill TOWNSHIP ■ CITY ~ VILLAGE .. •• so ,. ,. INDUSTRIAL 2% ... LE8811WOS5 AGE Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �3-6 drinking establishments and various other recreation-oriented uses. Figure 3.4 reveals the explosion in summer employment for tourismrelated industries in Allegan County. This increase creates a high demand for teenage employees. Tri-community area businesses note the difficulty of filling these Jobs, and the need to import seasonal labor. This is yet another impact of the demographic make-up of the area (i.e. the low number of teenage children). New industry and affordable housing in the area could attract families with children who. in tum. could staff area businesses during peak summer months. assessed at a higher rate due to their high development potential. comprised 1 % ($430,733) (see Figure 3.5) . Figure 3.6 illustrates changes in annual real property SEV between 1980 and 1987 for the Township. The City of Saugatuck was included in the Township's tax base prior to 1985, when it became a city. This explains the sharp drop in SEV for the Township between 1984 and 1985. SEV's are also shown for the Township minus the Village(s) . The figure shows straight line growth in the Township's tax base since 1980. More complete information on annual Sev's and 1988 breakdowns can be found in Appendix B. TAX BASE Residential uses make up the bulk of the area's tax base. Tax base information is aggregated for the Township and Village of Douglas. In 1988, residential uses comprised 76% of the property tax base for the Township and Village of Douglas ($43,730,725). Commercial uses comprised 16% ($9,402,800) . Agriculture comprised 5% ($2,661,790). Industrial comprised 2% (%1,126,200). Developmental, a recently created category which refers to lands which are INCOME Between 1979 and 1985, census estimates show Saugatuck Township moving from 7th to 6th place in terms of per capita income in the County with a 40.4% increase in per capita income (see Table 3.6). (Per capita income in 1979 was $7,688 for the state and $6. 7 44 for the county; in 1985 it was $10,902 for the state and $9,346 for the county.) TABLE 3.6 PER CAPITA INCOME ($), ALLEGAN COUNTY (TOP TEN) Saugatuck Laketown Township Holland Gunplain Township Otsego Township Plainwell Saugatuck Township Allegan Township Leighton Township Fillmore Township 1979 9031 8332 8125 8074 7437 7396 7286 7170 7051 7015 Laketown Township Saugatuck Holland Gunplain Township Otsego Township Saugatuck Township Douglas Fillmore Township Plainwell Leighton Township 1985 13,013 12,631 11,608 10,947 10,239 10,228 10,150 10,120 9,886 9,539 Source: 1985 Per Capital Income Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau TABLE 3.7 INCOME & POVERTY CHARACTERISTICS TRI-COMMUNITY AREA (1980) Median HH income % in poverty Income 200% of poverty level & above TOWNSHIP CTTY VILLAGE COUN1Y 16,412 7.1% 74% 15,182 8.6% 75% 14,963 11.3% 73% 17,906 8.00/4 71% Source: 1980 Census of Population Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �3-7 Table 3. 7 reveals selected income and poverty characteristics by jurisdiction in the tricommunity area. Although the per capita income in the Township has been consistently higher than that of the county, the median household income of $16,412, is lower. The median household income is the point at which 500/2 of the households earn more and 500/2 earn less. This statistic is more representative oflocal trends as it is less easily distorted by a few high income wage earners. Poverty data correspond with median household income. As median income goes up, the proportion in poverty goes down. Figure 3.7 reveals the proportion of those in poverty by age. (The poverty level used by the 1980 census in recording this data was an annual income of $3,778 for those under 65, and $3 ,689 for those 65 and over.) It reveals that a high proportion of the poor are elderly. especially in the Township. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �4-1 Chapter4 NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENT CLIMATE Weather conditions affect the Township's economic base. Variations in average conditions, especially during the summer months, can cause fluctuations in tourism and outdoor recreation activities, upon which the local economy is dependent. Prevailing winds determine lakeshore and sand dune erosion patterns, which impose limitations on development along the Lake Michigan shore . Below, in Table 4 . 1, is relevant climatic information for the area. These conditions generally do not pose limitations on growth in the Township except along the Lake Michigan shore, where natural forces can cause rapid and extensive erosion of beaches and sand dunes. The climate is also considered favorable for growing certain fruits, such as apples and blueberries. GEOLOGY Saugatuck Township is located on the southwestern flank of the Michigan Basin, which is a bedrock feature centered in the middle of the Lower Peninsula. The sandstone and shale bedrock is overlain by glacial deposits from 50 to 400 feet thick. There are no outcroppings of the bedrock. The proximity of the bedrock to the surface of the ground does not impose limitations for normal excavating or construction. Glacial deposits consist primarily of sandy lakebed deposits located between two major physiographic formations: the Lake Border Moraine, which is adjacent to Lake Michigan, and the Valparaiso Moraine, which extends through the center of the county, from north to south. Oil and gas drilling in the area occurred mostly during the period from late l 930's to the early l 950's. At present. there are no producing wells in Saugatuck Township . TOPOGRAPHY Most of Saugatuck Township is relatively flat, but local variations in elevation of up to 150 feet exist in some places between uplands and the floodplain of the Kalamazoo River. There are also considerable local differences in elevation in the extreme northwest portions of the Township in the sand dunes between the Kalamazoo River and Lake Michigan. Areas of abrupt local variations in elevation appear as dark areas on the topographic map (Map 4.1). Steep slopes present impressive scenery and pose increased maintenance and construction costs as well as safety risks. This is especially true with unstable landforms such as sand dunes. Generally, slopes exceeding 7% should not be developed intensively, while slopes of more than 12% should not be developed at all because of erosion and storm water runoff problems. TABLE 4.1 SUMMARY OF RELEVANT CLIMATE CONDITIONS CLIMATE VARIABLES AVERAGE CONDITION EXTREME CONDITION Coldest Months (January-February) Hotest Month (July) Annual Average Temperature Average Rainfall Average Growing Season Average Annual Snowfall Elevation Above Sealevel Prevailing Winds 23.3° F- 25.1° F 71.5° F 48.3° F 35.7 inches 153 days 79.7 inches 590 feet Westerly -11° F - -35° F 96° F - 106° F Source: USDA Soil Survey, Allegan County Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �4-2 DRAINAGE Most of the Township lies within the Kalamazoo River Basin, which begins near Jackson and extends westward into Saugatuck Township (see Figure 4.1) . The extreme southwestern portion of the Township drains directly into Lake Michigan. All of the watercourses within the Township drain into the Kalamazoo River, which flows westward through the middle of the Township and into Lake Michigan. Tannery Creek, Peach Orchard Creek, Silver Creek and Goshorn Creek are all short-run streams that flow into the Kalamazoo River. A network of County drains facilitates the removal of runoff from flat areas with poorly drained soils in the southern half of the Township. The sand and clay bluffs along Lake Michigan in Section 20 are being eroded by groundwater which flows through the sandy topsoil and onto the less permeable clay layer. The water flows out the side of the bluff, undermining the sandy upper layer. A County drain has been proposed which would be placed parallel to the bluff and collect runoff for discharge at one point into Lake Michigan. Most other areas of the Township drain fairly well. All watercourses, including county drains, are found on Map 4 .2 . FIGURE 4.1 KALAMAZOO RIVER BASIN Lake Huron FLOODPLAINS Areas adjacent to creeks. streams and rivers are susceptible to periodic flooding that can cause extensive damage to buildings and can pose a substantial threat to public health and safety. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has mapped the boundaries of the 100 year floodplain in Saugatuck Township . Those boundaries are denoted by the shaded areas on Map 4 .3 and is the area that would be inundated during an Intermediate Regional Flood. The Federal Flood Insurance Program has established guidelines for use and development of floodplain areas. Those regulations indicate that development in floodplains should be restricted to open space , recreational or agricultural uses. Installation of public utilities and permanent construction for residential , commercial or industrial uses should not occur in floodplain areas. WETLANDS There are many wetlands in Saugatuck Township. Most are contiguous to or hydrologically connected to Lake Michigan, rivers, streams, or creeks. Wetlands are valuable in storing floodwaters, recharging groundwater, and removing sediment and other pollutants. They are also habitat for a wide variety of plants and animals, including a large rookery of Great Blue Herons along the Kalamazoo River. Because wetlands are a valuable natural resource, they are protected by Public Act 203 of 1979. PA 203 requires that permits be acquired from the Michigan Department ofNatural Resources (DNR) prior to altering or filling a regulated wetland. The Wetland Protection Act defines wetlands as "land characterized by the presence of water at a .frequency and duration sufficient to support and that under normal circumstances does support wetland vegetation or aquatic life and is commonly referred to as a bog, swamp, or marsh and is contiguous to the Great Lakes, an fnland lake or pond. or a river or stream." Lake Erle Regulated wetlands include all wetland areas greater than 5 acres or those contiguous to waterways. Wetlands which are hydrologically connected (i.e. via groundwater) to waterways are also regulated. Activities exempted from the provisions of the Act include farming, grazing of animals, farm or stock ponds, lumbering, maintenance of existing nonconforming structures, maintenance or improvement of ex- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �4-3 TABLE4.2 LAND COVER CODES FOR PROTECTED WETLANDS IN TRI-COMMUNITY AREA CODE DESCRIPTION 31 32 412 414 421 429 611 612 621 622 Herbaceous Rangeland* Shrub Rangeland* Upland Hardwoods Lowland Hardwoods Upland Conifers Lowland Conifers Wooded Swanps Shrub Swamps Marshland Meadow Mud Flats Source: Michigan DNR Land Cover/Use Classification System • Wetlands are sometimes, but not always associated with these land cover types. isting roads and streets within existing rightsof-way. maintenance or operation of pipelines less than six inches in diameter. and maintenance or operation of electric transmission and distribution power lines. Permits will not be issued if a feasible or prudent alternative to developing a wetland exists. An inventory of wetlands based on the DNR's land use\cover inventory are illustrated on Map 4.4. Table 4.2 shows the land use\cover codes pertaining to regulated wetlands in the area. Herbaceous and shrub rangelands may not actually meet the statutory definition of wetland, so on site inspections will be necessary to establish whether a wetland indeed exists in such areas. Areas of hydric soils in the southcentral part of the Township would likely be classified as wetlands if they were not in agricultural use and served by county drains. Of Township residents responding to the 1988 Public Opinion Survey, over 70% indicated that they are in favor of no new development in wetland areas. son.s A modem soil survey was completed for Allegan County by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in March, 1987. The soil types present in Saugatuck Township are shown on the map and table in Appendix D. Each soil type has unique characteristics which pose opportunities for some uses and limitations for others. The most important characteristics making the soil suitable or unsuitable for development are lim- itations on dwellings with basements, limitations on septic tank absorption fields. and suitability for farming. Soil limitations have been classified into three categories, which are described below. • Slight: Relatively free of limitations or limitations are easily overcome. • Moderate: Limitations need to be considered, but can be overcome with good management and careful design. • Severe: Limitations are severe enough to make use questionable. Large areas of soils in the Township have severe limitations on residential and urban development. The degree of soil limitations reflects the hardship and expense of developing the land. Fortunately. most of the soils which are not suited for intensive residential development are also considered prime farmland soils by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Basement Limitations Limitations for dwellings with basements are shown on Map 4 .5. Some soils impose severe limitations on basements because of excessive wetness, low strength. excessive slope. or shrink-swell potential. These areas are found primarily in the northeast comer and in the southern half of the Township. Septic Limitations Soils in most of Saugatuck Township impose severe limitations on septic tank absorption fields for a wide variety of reasons. The permeability of soils in the area ranges from very poorly drained to excessively drained. There are only a few very small areas which are neither poorly nor excessively drained. do not have a high water table, and are therefore well suited for septic tank absorption fields. These areas are located in the southeast comer of the Township and in the southwestern portion of Douglas. Most parts of the Township that are likely to experience future growth have moderate to severe limitations for on-site septic systems. Map 4.6 shows the septic limitations for the Township. This map suggests the need for municipal sewers to accommodate new development in many areas. The degree of soil limitations reflects the hardship and expense of developing that land for a particular use. Those soils classified as "severe" have varying degrees of development potential based on the nature of the limitation. Map 4. 7 provides this more detailed analysis of Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �4-4 severe limitations on septic tank absorption fields. The "severe" soils have been categorized as follows: A. Sandy, moderate to rapid permeability B. Rapid permeability, wetness and high water table C. Wet, ponding, heavier (clay) soils, slow permeability D. Very wet soils, organics, wetlands, floodplains, unable to support septic fields. Soils in categories B and D are not able to support septic fields because of extreme wetness. Soils in category A are classified as "severe" by the Soil Conservation Service, however the Allegan County Health Department considers them to have only moderate limitations for septic systems. They can be made suitable for development by increasing the distance between the septic system and the water table. Soils with moderate and slight limitations also appear on Map 4 .7. Soils that are most suitable for development, with respect to basement and septic limitations, are shown in Map 4.8 . Some areas of Saugatuck Township have been designated by the Allegan County Health Department as unsuitable for new development without sewers. Among these areas are Blue Star Highway from Douglas south to the freeway exit, 129th Street south of Douglas. and along Old Allegan Road in Section 10 east of Saugatuck. Permits for commercial and single family uses have been denied in all of these areas due to on-site soil conditions. The Health Department has also outlined areas with particularly severe limitations for septic fields (see Map 4.7a). These are in Sections 3 and 4 and the Goshorn Lake area, which have highly permeable soils and a high water table. and large portions of the southern half of the Township, which have heavy clay soils. Health Department officials do not recommend further development of these areas without sewers. Standards for Septic Systems The Allegan County Health Department has established certain standards for septic systems. These standards apply somewhat different site characteristics when determining the degree of limitations for septic systems. compared to the Soil Conservation Service approach, which focuses on soil types and slope. Below is a review of these Health Department standards by development type. Single Family Residential Before a permit is considered, there must be at least four feet of dry soils between the bottom of the septic system and the water table . In addition. there must be one foot between the existing ground surface and the seasonal water table, and two feet between the existing ground surface and the clay. Special permits will be considered only if the site size is at least two acres and the septic system is put on top of four feet of sand. Residential sites that fail to meet those requirements will not be issued septic system permits. All Other Residential, Plus Commercial These fall under State guidelines of two feet between the existing ground surface and the water table and four feet of dry soil between the bottom of the septic system and the water table. No special permits are issued for these uses. Most of the land along the entire length of Blue Star Highway does not meet these State standards and has been denied commercial permits (refer to Map 4. 7a). Public sewers will be necessary. Hydric Soils Hydric soils are another limitation on development. They are very poorly drained. saturate easily and retain large quantities of water. If artificially drained, they are often suitable for farmland use. Map 4.9 shows where these soils are. In Saugatuck Township, most of the hydric soils are found near watercourses and correspond to present or former wetlands. There is a large area of hydric soils in the southwest portion of the Township which is currently being farmed. Residential, commercial and industrial development in areas containing hydric soils should be discouraged. Prime Farmland Prime farmland soil types have been identified by the Soil Conservation Service as those best suited for food production; they require minimal soil enhancement measures such as irrigation and fertilizer. There is a very large area of prime farmland soils in the south central portion of the Township. These areas contribute significantly to the area's economic base. The loss of prime farmland to other uses results in Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �4-5 fanning on marginal lands, which are more erodible and less productive. Soils in prime farmland categories that have frequent flooding or seasonal high water table, such as those in the southern half of Saugatuck Township, qualify as prime farmland because those limitations have been overcome by drainage. Unique farmlands are based on certain soil types as well as other factors. such as landscape position (proximity to water supply, orientation to sunlight, slope, etc.). moisture supply and present management practices. Prime farmland soils are shown on Map 4. 10. Unique farmland and lands enrolled in the Farmland and Open Space Preservation Program (PA 116 of 1974) are depicted on Map 5.3. GROUNDWATER Groundwater is an unseen resource and is therefore particularly vulnerable to mismanagement and contamination. Prior to the 1980's, little was known about groundwater contamination in Michigan, and some startling facts have recently been revealed. The leading causes of groundwater contamination in Michigan are from small businesses and agriculture. More than 50% of all contamination comes from small businesses that use organic solvents, such as benzene, toluene and xylene. and heavy metals, such as lead. chromium, and zinc. The origin of the problem stems from careless storage and handling of hazardous substances. On paved surfaces where hazardous materials are stored, substances can seep through or flow off the edge of the pavement. Materials can get into floor drains which discharge to soils, wetlands or watercourses. . At present. groundwater is the only tapped source of potable water for Saugatuck Township. The glacial drift aquifers in the area are especially vulnerable to contamination because of rapid permeability and high water table. In a local example, Douglas· water supply has been contaminated by volatile organic compounds (VOC's). supposedly by an industrial site within the Village. Some areas without municipal sewer and water service are in danger of groundwater contamination due to septic systems, intensive development and a high water table. In the Goshorn Lake area. household wells are susceptible to contamination from septic systems due to intensive development and a high water table. The Allegan County Health Department recommends provision of public water and sewer to households in that area. Protection of groundwater resources is problematic because of difficulties in locating aquifers. Well depth records indicate the relative location of groundwater at particular points. According to well logs from Michigan Groundwater Survey (MGS) data. well depths range from 29 ft. in the north central area to 360 ft. in the extreme southwest comer of the Township . Soils most vulnerable to groundwater contamination are found on Map 4.11. Well locations are indicated by small triangles on Map 4.12. SPECIAL FEATURES Lake Michigan Shoreline and Beaches The entire shoreline, from M-89 to the sand dunes, is flanked by single family homes overlooking sand and clay bluffs. The Lake Michigan shoreline in Saugatuck Township is very susceptible to wind and water erosion during storms and high lake levels due to resultant wave action. The current closing of Lakeshore Drive due to bluff erosion is a graphic example of the power of wave action. These natural processes pose hazards to public health and safety. The Shorelands Protection Act of 1970 was enacted to identify areas where hazards exist by designating them and by passage of measures to minimize losses resulting from natural forces of erosion. High risk erosion areas are defined as areas of the shore along which bluffline recession has proceeded at a long term average of 1 foot or more peryear. The entire Lake Michigan shoreline in the Township has been designated as a high risk erosion area. Within the designated area. shown on Map 4 .13, alteration of the soil, natural drainage, vegetation, fish or wildlife habitat, and any placement of permanent structures, requires a DNRreview and permit, unless the local unit of government has an approved high risk erosion area ordinance, as does Saugatuck Township. Sand Dunes The sand dunes along Lake Michigan in the northwest corner of the Township represent a unique and fragile physiographic formation and ecosystem that is very susceptible to wind and water erosion, and destruction due to careless use or development. The dune area which is in Saugatuck Township and the City of Saugatuck has been identifl.ed by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) as a critical dune area, subject to protection under the Michigan Sand Dune Protection and Management Act, PA Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �■ 4-6 222 of 1976. The designated critical dune area is shown in the shaded region of Map 4.14. Recent legislation (PA 147 & 148 of 1989) provides for additional protection of critical dune areas. Under these Acts, all proposed commercial or industrial uses , multifamily uses of more than 3 acres, and any use which the local planning commission or the DNR determines would damage or destroy features of archaeological or historical significance must ultimately be approved by the State. Single family residential development is to be regulated at the local level. The law prohibits surface drilling operations that explore for or produce hydrocarbons or natural brine as well as mining activities (except in the case of permit renewals). The legislation also imposes certain standards on construction and site design in critical dune areas. Site design and construction standards for sand dunes should be enhanced at the local level to prevent further deterioration of this fragile environment. Areas needing special attention in such standards are vegetation. drainage and erosion protection. WOODLANDS The wooded areas of Saugatuck Township are a mixture of hardwoods and conifers. Large areas of upland hardwoods are found in the sand dune areas, along Lake Michigan, and in the northeast quarter of the Township. A large area oflowland conifers exists in the southeastern portion of the Township east ofI-196. Other smaller patches of upland and lowland hardwoods and conifers are scattered throughout the area, as shown on Map 4.15 Mature trees represent a valuable resource in maintaining the aesthetic character of the area, not to mention their overall importance to wildlife and the natural environment. In particular, the wooded areas along the rivers and streams, the forested sand dunes between the Kalamazoo River and Lake Michigan, and the extensive wooded areas buffering adjacent uses from 1-196 are especially important. They should be managed to insure their long term existence. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �N A 0 4,000 Scale 1" 8,000 = 9060 ft MAP4.1 TOPOGRAPHY Saugatuck Township Contour interval is ten feet Darker lines are 50 foot contours August 1989 DATA SOURCE: USGS Quadrangle Maps Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �• + N 13eT H AVC. A 0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft r---+-- A'_;__ _ _ ____,·! ::; ,. ! ! ··•, 25 - • 28 ". :t i r - i • . i -~ 33 ;·.,..•-"", I ~ . '••••._ • 36 ..... • l, T .3N.R 16W •.. MAP 4.2 WATERCOURSES Saugatuck Township Lakes, rivers and streams Drains and intermittent streams August 1989 ·. DATA SOURCE: MDNR Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �+ N A 0 4,000 1.3ST M N . _L .. I .,,~;~-;~. I 8,000 Scale 1• = 9060 ft 12.T M s, AV£ . 0 28 25 • 27 33 T3N,R 1 6W .... W-89 MAP 4.3 FLOODPLAINS ■ 100 Year Flood Area ~ 500 Year Flood Area August 1989 DATA SOURCE:MDNR Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �• N A O 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft Saugatuck Township MAP 4.4 WETLANDS ■ ■ II Lowland Hardwood Lowland Conifer Wooded Swamp August 1989 II ■ ■ DATA SOURCE: MDNR Shrub Swamp II Marshland Meadow & Mud Flats Herbaceous Rangeland ~ Shrub Rangeland Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �N A ,.._.._. 0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft MAP 4.5 BASEMENT LIMITATIONS Ill Severe ■ Excavated ffiIII] Moderate ~ Wetland Soils LJ Slight ~ Sand Dunes August 1989 DATA SOURCE: USDA Soil Survey, Allegan County : Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �■ N A 0 4,000 Scale 1" 8,000 = 9060 ft MAP 4.6 SEPTIC LIMITATIONS lllffl mm Severe ■ Excavated Moderate ~ Wetland Soils LJ Slight ~ Sand Dunes August 1989 DATA SOURCE: USDA Soil Survey, Allegan County : Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 It Scale 1" ... 9060 ft MAP 4.7 SEPTIC LIMITATIONS ~ Sandy, moderate to rapid ~ permeability ~ Rapid permeability, wetness S of highwater table 1§111 Wet, ponding, heavier l!ll!I clay soils.slow permeability August 1989 fll Moderate Limitations HJ Slight Limitations ■ Excavated . ,· DATA SOURCE: USDA Soil Survey, Alleg. Cnty Hitt, Dept Saugatuck Township Sand Dunes Wetland Soils Very wet soils, organics, wetlands, floodplains Planning & Zoning Cen18r Inc, Lansing, Ml �■ ----------------------r-----1 II I I I I I I I I I r - l ! l ! I T I I : r,' : ,.~ "1---J' T _/ I ==~ ; ~ /, .· - V---- -------! 8 . IO . I (. !I Ii ( ! (~,\V':'&:.! ' l- r--------,--«-f ! a 21 I It . r, ..... .25 ... '•' MAP 4.7 A 38 Saugatuck Township ""11: ll'lfft ■ l'PWTIK....,IA.C.N.D.I ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT LIMITATIONS FKl NO. 2 -·~ .............. ...._ ----··- �N A 0 4,000 Scale 1" 8,000 = 9060 ft 1 ' , ~~ _,,,. \ / / I \ ~.j , I ~ ) \:::::, ( 4: \ i ,,.\ (~ ~ ~1\-t 0/ l ~(orE1~ j' ~r,~ > .J CJ )(_V~/l MAP 4.8 MOST SUITABLE SOILS 1111 Soils Most Suitable For Development ■ Excavated Areas August 1989 DATA SOURCE : USDA Soil Survey, Allegan County Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �N A - ,-...... 0 4,000 Scale 1" 8,000 = 9060 ft MAP 4.9 HYDRIC SOILS II Hydric Soils ~ Wetland Soils August 1989 DATA SOURCE : USDA Soil Survey, Allegan County Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A ,..____ 0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft MAP 4.10 PRIME FARMLANDS II Saugatuck Township Prime Farmlands August 1989 DATA SOURCE: USDA Soil Survey, Allegan County Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �N A 0 4,000 Scale 1" 8,000 = 9060 ft MAP 4.11 GROUNDWATER VULNERABILITY II Areas most susceptible to contamination ■ Excavated Areas ~ Wetland Soils August 1989 .. DATA SOURCE : USDA Soils Survey & Alleg. Hlth Dept. Saugatuck Township .,, Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A 0 8,000 4,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft A 0 • ', W-119A MAP4.12 WATERWELLS 0 Saugatuck Township Well Location August 1989 DATA SOURCE :MI Groundwater Survey Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �N A .. ,._.._M O 4,000 .. 8,000 12,000 ft Scale 1" = 9060 ft _o .._ MAP 4.13 HIGH RISK EROSION AREAS Accretion Area Saugatuck Township Numbers indicate accretion/recession rate in feet per year Recession Area August 1989 DATA SOURCE: MDNR Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A 0 4 ,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft ..• 12aT M f A.VL 0 ~ 0 z ~- ·"' ~ t2• T M A.VC . /' "• a.. .... 11-89 MAP 4.14 Critical Dune Areas l:23 Saugatuck Township Critical Dune Areas August 1989 DATA SOURCE : MONR Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �N A P----0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft ... Saugatuck Township MAP 4.15 WOODLANDS [II Lowland Hardwood 1111 Upland Hardwood Eill. Lowland Conifer August 1989 , ,.,,, ,,,, l'l'I'" Upland Con if er ~ Wooded Swamp IIJ Shrub Swamp DATA SOURCE: MONA ~ ./ Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml .CI• �3-1 Chapter5 EXISTING LAND COVER AND USE LAND USE/COVER DATA SOURCES Land cover and use refers to an inventory of existing vegetation, natural features, and land use over the entire Township (see Map 5.1). This data was obtained in computerized form from the Michigan Resource Inventory System (MIRIS) database, which is maintained by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The data came from photo interpretation of aerial infrared photos by trained interpreters at the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission. The DNR will update this data every 5 years. Land cover and use categories included in the data are explained on the legend to Map 5.1. The wetlands and woodlands maps in Chapter 4 were also derived from this data. MIRIS data was supplemented by a thorough land use inventory of Saugatuck Township conducted in the summer of 1988. The inventory was based on ownership parcels and conducted both on foot and through a "windshield survey". The existing use of every parcel was recorded and evaluated in combination with low-level aerial imagery available from the Allegan County Equalization Department and the MIRIS land cover/use map to prepare the existing (parcelbased) land use map (see Map 5.2). The following description is based on these maps and data sources and the USDA Soil Survey of Allegan County. Land use by category for Saugatuck Township is shown in Table 5. 1. This information was derived from the aforementioned data sources and areas were calculated using CMAP computer mapping software. The predominant land use in the Township is agricultural. This is followed by single family residential. Vacant land comprises forty six percent of the total land area (street ROWs excluded) of the Township. AGRICULTURAL The size of farms in Saugatuck Township ranges from over 300 acres to under 10 acres, with the average size being from 120-140 acres. Agricultural land in the Township is used pri- marily for crops and orchards, with some livestock. Prime Farmlands Prime farmland is generally concentrated in the south central part of the Township. Prime farmland is of major importance in meeting the nation's short and long term needs for food. Prime farmlands have been identified by the U.S.DA. Soil Conservation Service so that local governments can encourage and facilitate the wise use of valuable farmlands. Prime farmland is that which is best suited to food, feed , forage and oilseed crops. The soil qualities, growing season and moisture supply are those needed to economically produce a sustained high yield of crops. Prime farmlands are shown on Map 4.10. TABLE 15.1 EXISTING LAND USE LAND USE ACRES % TIAMSROW- Residential single-family 1317 multi-family 8 mobile home 25 Commercial 126 Industrial 58 Institutional 268 Agricultural 3914 Parks 40 Golf Courses 111 Boat Storage & 29 Service Kalamazoo 954 River Wetland Streets & Roads 1340 Vacant 6985 Commer.4..3. cial/Residentlal TOTAL 15180 8.68% 0.05 0.16 0.83 0.38 1.77 25.78 0.26 0.73 0.19 6 .28 8.83 46.01 0...00. 100% • % of total land area minus street ROW's Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �• 5-2 Unique Farmlands Unique farmland is land other than prime farmland for the production of specific highvalue food crops, such as vegetables, and tree, vine and beny fruits. Although these areas are not prime farmland, their unique quality and value to the local economy merit special consideration in land use decisions. They are shown on Map 5.3 with PA 116 lands described in the next section. Michigan Farmland Preservation Act The Michigan Farmland Preservation Act of 1974 (PA 116) allows landowners to enter into a voluntary agreement with the State whereby their land will remain in agricultural use for at least ten years. In return, the landowner is entitled to certain tax benefits. The program has been effective in helping to ensure that suitable lands are retained for farming. There are over 1100 acres of PA 116 lands in the Township, most of them in the southern half. Most of the prime farmlands in the Township are not suitable for intensive development because of soil limitations. Alternatives to conversion of agricultural land should be considered when land use decisions are made. RESIDENTIAL The majority of residential development in Saugatuck Township is scattered along county roads and along the Lake Michigan Shore. Very little is concentrated in subdivisions. Most resort-residential development is located along the Kalamazoo River and Lake Michigan. Single family structures are the predominant residential type. There is one area of multiple family structures in the Township (section 3), and two mobile home parks in the southern half of the Township. Mobile homes on individual lots are largely located in the southwest portion of the Township. The character of existing residential areas within Saugatuck Township is described below in relation to particular planning districts (see Map 5.4). Lakeshore Area The Lake Michigan shore in the Township is fronted by many large single family homes along Lakeshore Drive for 3.5 miles from M-89 to the Village of Douglas. This area is characterized by scenic vistas of the lake and the bluffs. Large trees line the road and many homes are on wooded lots. Lot sizes average from 5-8 acres and some lots are very long and narrow. Southern Agricultural Area This part of the Township consists of large and small farms, orchards, and a growing number of single family homes on large lots (20+ acres) . Typically, these homes are located along the county roads at the perimeter of each section. In addition to scattered development on large lots, there is the Pepper Brooke Subdivision in Section 22. This development has 38 lots on approximately 35 acres. However, homes have been constructed on only about 7 of the lots in the 17 years this since this subdivision was platted. This is not an appropriate area for further subdivision development. Kalamazoo River Area Much of this area is a wetland, unsuitable for residential use. The area is also wooded and is habitat to many birds and other wildlife . In some places, homes overlook the Kalamazoo River and Silver Lake (a shallow bayou connected to the Kalamazoo River). There are three subdivisions in this area: the Kalamazoo-Newport Subdivision in Section 15, Buwolda's Silver Acres in Section 14, and theJillmarSubdivision in Section 11. The character of the Kalamazoo River area is widely different from other residential areas of the township in that there are no farms or commercial/industrial developmentaside from a marina in Section 23. Lot sizes in this area vary widely. Lots on the north side of Silver Lake tend to be very long and narrow and could pose land development problems if permitted to be subdivided any further. Northeast Area The northeastern corner of the Township has a mix of woodlands and farms, with some steep slopes. Residential development is mostly on large lots (40+ acres), with some on small lots (less than 10 acres) within large lots. There are no subdivisions. Portions of this area west of 63rd. Street have an extremely junky appearance, with rubble strewn about yards in random fashion and a junkyard located at 63rd. Street and Old Allegan Road. Non-residential uses are also mixed with residential uses along Old Allegan Road-especially near the sewage treatment plant. This should be discontinued. North Blue Star Highway Area This area has a mixture of wooded, wetland, and open areas for recreation, including a large golf course. The only multiple family structures Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �r Saugatuck Township MAP 5.1 LAND USE/COVER WATER URBAN LJ ~ ■ ......... ~ 113 Single Family 115 Mobile Home 124 Neighborhood Business 126 Other Institutional 193 Outdoor Recreation FARMLAND □ ~ ~ ~ IIIlm 52 Lakes WETLAND 611 Wooded Swamps 612 Shrub Swamps 621 Marshland Meadow 622 Mud Flats 21 Cropland BEACH 22 Orchards 72 Beach At Riverbank 73 Dunes RANGELAND fll Ill 31 Herbaceous Rangeland 32 Shrub Rangeland WOODLAND 412} 414}Broadleaf 421} 429}Conifers ! I C August 1989 DATA SOURCE : MONA Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �Saugatuck Township LAND USE/COVER N A -. :i!~~i :::g1gjiiig1g~::, :H::H:::::::::::::: ~~H~~j~~iiiii~!i~~~~ ::::H::::;;;;;:::;;; ·igmmmi::m ,,::, :::::: ~~j~!~ :~m~ :Htt: g\11~ ~~~ill :::;::: ~~~~ ":::Hj :i::. �r Saugatuck Township MAP 5.2 EXISTING LAND USE ■ Single Family Residential Iii Mulltiple Family Residential ■ Residential/Commercial Agricultural - Orchard ,..,..,,. ■ Commercial ~m Recreational ■ Junkyard ~llllm Mobile Home Park mml Boat Storage/Marina Vacant !33!!!!!:i hH ~ Wetland Industrial 11illill 1nstitutional D Water ■ Agricultural August 1989 SOURCE: PZC Land Use Survey Planning & Zoning Center, Inc, Lansing, Ml �Saugatuck Township EXISTING LAND USE �N A 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 It Scale 1• = 9060 ft PA 116LANDS& 3 5 MAP · UNIQUE FARMLANDS ■ PA 116 Lands Saugatuck Township m Unique Farmlands August 1989 DATA SOURCE: MONA Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A ,...0 4,000 8,000 12,000 ft Scale 1" = 9060 ft MAP 5.4 PLANNING AREAS mLakeshore ~ North Blue Star ■ Southern Agricultural ~ Riverfront ■ Northeast ■ Dunes August 1989 DATA SOURCE: Saug. Town. Plan. Commisssion Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Cenl8r Inc, Lansing, Ml �w 5-3 in the Township are located where Blue Star Highway and Washington Road intersect. Most of the single family residences are located away from Blue Star Highway and lot sizes vary widely. The Herhann SubdMsion is the only one in the North Blue Star area. This area is characterized by a wide variety of land uses, some of them incompatible with existing residences. Riverfront - Dunes Area Along the Kalamazoo River, immediately north of the City of Saugatuck, are some residential uses. The rest of the area is unspoiled wetland. sand dunes, and beaches. The residential areas are mostly on small lots fronting the Kalamazoo River. This area has a distinct wooded. rural character, even though it is located close to the City of Saugatuck and Blue Star Highway. and a mixture of small retail establishments. Blue Star Highway south to M-89 has a rural character with a combination of wooded areas. open land, scattered residential development. and a "you pick" blueberry farm. Some highway oriented commercial uses are clustered around the highway interchanges. Other Commercial Other commercial activities scattered throughout the Township include a marina on the south side of Kalamawo River in Section 23. a junkyard in Section 11, and a motel on Lakeshore Drive in Section 20. None of these uses are compatible with the predominant land uses in the area and further commercial development should not be justified in this area based on their existence. INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL The major commercial area in Saugatuck Township is in the northern part of the Township along Blue Star Highway. Commercial development in the rest of the Township is very limited. Blue Star Highway The commercial areas along Blue Star Highway represent an early form of scattered commercial strip development. Commercial strips are a haphazard form of development and often have inconsistent setbacks. an excessive number of driveways, excessive signs, poorly controlled ingress and egress, and are poorly designed with respect to the natural environment. These characteristics make the strip una4ractive, environmentally incompatible, and potentially dangerous. The negative effects of strip commercial areas can be mitigated by consolidation of driveways and parking facilities, grouping of stores into "mini malls" and site design standards which require that natural features be positively incorporated into new developments, as well as minimizing "asphalt landscaping". Siting new development further back from the highway and retaining a natural buffer strip would be a major improvement. Sixty-five percent of people responding to the 1988 Public Opinion Survey indicated that they did not want to see further strip commercial development in the future. Commercial uses along Blue Star Highway include restaurants, gas stations, boat service, motels. a junkyard. a campground. small offices Industrial development is limited in Saugatuck Township. Less than 1% of the total land area is devoted to industrial uses. Industrial actMty includes several small machine shops and a luxury boat building establishment located near the mouth of the Kalamazoo River. A major deterrent to new industries locating in the Township is lack of adequately sited land served with good public facilities (sewer and water). Saugatuck Township is located 150 miles from Detroit, 180 miles from Chicago and 36 miles from Grand Rapids along a major interstate highway. There is also a railroad within five miles. This is an advantageous location for small scale, light industrial development. Of Township residents responding to the 1988 Public Opinion Survey, 49% favored more industrial development in the Township, 28% were opposed, and 23% were uncertain. HISTORIC & .ARCHAEOLOGICAL FEATIJRES Many archaeological sites and some historic sites can be found in Saugatuck Township. Historic and archaeological sites are designated by the Michigan Bureau of History. Historic Buildings and Sites The Michigan State Register of Historic Sites was established in 1955 to provide official recognition for historic resources in Michigan. Designated historic sites have unique historic. architectural, archaeological, engineering, or cultural significance. There are two State his- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �fS-4 torte sites in Saugatuck Township, which are listed on Table 5.2 . Old Allegan Road in Saugatuck Township is currently pending official designation as a State Historic Site. State historic site designation does not include any financial or tax benefits, nor does it impose any restrictions upon the owner of the property, unlike similar designations under fed- will be affected, archaeologists will negotiate a voluntary agreement to preserve those artifacts. The Bureau of History serves in an advisory capacity and has no legal authority to restrict development rights. TABLE 5.2 STATE HISTORIC SITES DESCRIPTION WCATION Saru1atuck Townshlo Shiver's Inn (historic name), Oxbow Inn (common name) Built in 1860's, originally used as a resort during lumbering era. In 1910Art Institute of Chicago used it for summer art school. Hacklander Site (National Section 23 Historic Site) Source: Michigan Bureau of History eral law. Archaeological Sites Archaeological sites are of particular scientific value to the fields of anthropology, ecology and biology, and may have historic or ethnic significance as well. There are 120 archaeological sites scattered throughout Saugatuck Township, mostly related to Ottawa and Potawatomi cultures. Their exact locations have not been disclosed by the Bureau of History in order to protect them from exploitation. One of these sites, the Hacklander Site, located in Section 23, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and has components representing Middle and Late Woodland periods. Recipients of Federal assistance must ensure that their projects avoid damage or destruction of significant historical and archaeological resources. The Michigan Bureau of History reviews these projects to assess their impact on archaeological sites. The Bureau of History also recommends that those proposing development projects in Saugatuck Township contact the State Archaeologist to determine if the project may affect a known archaeological site. This is particularly critical given the existence of Indian Burial sites in the area. If an important archaeological site Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �w 6-1 Chapter6 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES NON-PARK PUBUC FACIIJTIES A listing of all non-park public facilities in Saugatuck Township is found on Table 6.1 . This includes police and fire stations, municipal government offices, vacant lands and other public facilities. All are shown on Map 6. 1. UTILITIES Sewer and Water The area sewer and water systems are managed by the Kalamazoo Lake Sewer and Water Authority, which is responsible for operation and maintenance and provides water production and wastewater treatment. Each participating community is responsible for providing and financing their own infrastructure. The KLSWA performs the construction work or contracts it out. The service areas for the sewer and water systems, shown on maps 6.2 and 6.3, extend only for very short distances into Saugatuck Township. The Township did not participate in initial construction of the water or sewer systems because of the disproportionate financial impacts on the few property owners who would have been served. In effect, the Township is not served by public sewer and water. This severely limits the growth potential for the- Township, due to the fact that the soils are not suitable for multi-family or commercial septic systems, and in many areas even residential development is not appropriate except at very low density. If this continues. development in the Township may be brought to a standstill because of a lack of public utilities. Numerous engineering studies have been conducted which discuss various alternatives for improvement of utilities. These include using Lake Michigan for the municipal water supply and extending public utilities into the Township. Proposals must take into consideration the permanent population. seasonal population. number of daily visitors. and future industrial flow. Peak periods for public utilities in Saugatuck Township, if provided, are more pronounced than in typical communities due to the relatively high seasonal and daily visitor populations. The costs of developing an independent utility system for Saugatuck Township are not considered TABLE 6.1 (NON-PARK) PUBLIC PROPERTY & PUBLIC FACILITIES INVENTORY SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP NAME LOCATION USE Township Hall 36Center St.. Douglas 1\vp offices, Saugatuck Riverside Cemetery Douglas Cemetery Douglas North annex cemeterv • Land = acres 135th & Blue Star 130th south side 130th northside SIZE• CONDITION VALUE 56'xl20' interurban of- (45'x64') fices, Douglas police, 2 rental apartments 1350'x730' Burial Average Burial 690'x440' Average Burial 330'x530' Average Below average or square feet (Building = Square feet) Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan $175,000$200,000 �6-2 feasible. The absence of a capital improvements plans for financing the needed improvements further complicates the matter. The recent decision by the Township to join the KLSWA is a step towards the obvious regional solution of the Township connecting to the existing Douglas and Saugatuck system. Water System The existing water system, consisting of the City of Saugatuck and Village of Douglas pipelines, does not serve Saugatuck Township. Recent chemical contamination of the Douglas municipal water supply has led to an overburdening of the City of Saugatuck water system, which is presently serving the entire network and is working at full capacity: 24 hours per day during peak months. This has led to restrictions on non-essential uses such as lawn sprinkling, car and boat washing, and has reduced the minimum reserve needed for fire protection (600,000 gallons) down to 2/3 of the needed amount. A moratorium has been imposed on new development other than one or two family dwellings. Communications from the Michigan Department of Public Health have demanded that substantial progress be made towards a solution to the water supply problem in the near future. The Health Department has also questioned the usefulness and reliability of both Douglas wells because well # 1, which is out of use, is contaminated, and well #2 , which is used for emergency purposes only, may become contaminated through further use. As a result, alternatives for additional water sources are currently under review, with Lake Michigan and the City of Holland water system being considered the most viable options. Engineering studies have estimated a cost of nearly $4. 5 million for construction of a Lake Michigan water treatment facility which would provide a clean and abundant source of water. A service area including large portions of Saugatuck Township would reduce the per capita cost burden on users. This facility would be capable of pumping 3 million gallons per day, which could serve the needs of Saugatuck Township, the City of Saugatuck and the Village of Douglas well into the future. This, combined with a desire to retain local control over the water system, makes using Lake Michigan water the favored alternative. In 1984 and 1985, a one million gallon above ground storage tank was constructed, which allowed Saugatuck and Douglas to meet normal and fire protection demands . If Saugatuck Township is included in the system, the storage tank is adequate for fire protection for the near future, but additional capacity is needed if service were extended to the southern portions of the Township. If a water system is installed in the Township, the best arrangement for water mains is the gridiron system. Using this system, all primary and secondary feeders are looped and interconnected, and the small distribution mains tie to each loop to form a complete grid. If an adequate number of valves are inserted, only a small portion of the service area will be affected in the event of a break. Sewer System Wastewater treatment is provided at a treatment plant located in Section 10 of Saugatuck Township. The facility was constructed by the City of Saugatuck and the Village of Douglas in 1980. The treatment system provides biological and clarification processes for the reduction of BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) and suspended solids, including chemical precipitation for the reduction of phosphorus from fertilizers and detergents. The plant has two aerated lagoons and was designed for incremental addition of lagoons to accommodate increased wastewater flow. The facility was designed for heavier BOD loading than other facilities its size, in order to accommodate a pie factory and thus may not need more capacity of that type for many years. The discharge is to the Kalamazoo River on the north side of Saugatuck. The capacity of the sewer system is sufficient to meet the needs of Saugatuck and Douglas until approximately 2008. The capacity of the wastewater treatment facility would have to re-rated to 1.2 MGD (million gallons per day) for the Township to use the system until 2008. Thirty year projections for wastewater treatment for Saugatuck Township include extending serTABLE6.2 PROJECTED SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP WASTEWATER FLOWS AVERAGE DAY - MGD PERIOD Immediate 10-year 20-year 30-year NORI'H SOUTII 0 .07 0.28 0.43 0.65 0 .05 0 .19 0 .31 0 .53 TOTAL 0.13 0 .47 0 .74 1.18 Source: Saurtuck Township Area Utility Service Study, Marc 1988. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �w 6-3 vice to the south lakeshore residential area and the area of the Township northeast of 1-196. They are shown in Table 6 .2. The treatment facility was designed for a twenty year planning period through 1998. based on a population tributary of 7,695 and a wastewater flow of 0. 75 million gallons per day (MGD). The treatment facility is rated at 0.8 million gallons per day by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The facility was designed for a peak flow of 2 MGD. The present average flow is 0.4 MGD . A larger flow can be accommodated by increasing hours of operation. provided that the lagoons can treat the sewage well enough. An engineering study in 1987 determined that August (maximum day was Aug. 14) is the month of peak flow for wastewater. with 0.598 MGD . Based on the study. the treatment facility operated at 75% of flow capacity, 55% of BOD capacity, and 300/4 of suspended solids capacity. Existing effluent quality and treatment efficiency was found to be excellent. Increasing the rated capacity of the facility to 1.2 MGD with two aerated lagoons would accommodate all three jurisdictions through 2008 and possibly beyond. Pursuing this option would require detailed preparation of data accompanied by a formal request to the DNR from the KLSWA. Further capacity could be obtained by adding another aerated lagoon, estimated to cost $900,000 in 1987. The two basic alternatives for expanding the wastewater collection system to the Township are pressure sewers and gravity sewers. Pressure sewers are generally used where topography or spacing between services prohibit the use of gravity sewers or where high water table and difficult soil conditions prevail, such as in the tri-community area. These systems have lower construction costs and higher maintenance and operation costs than gravity sewers. Gravity sewers are the most common in use due to their minimal operation and maintenance expense. However, the cost of initial construction can be substantial for small communities, especially if construction costs are further aggravated by difficult topography and soil conditions. In addition, it is rare that an entire community can be served by gravity sewers. The existing system in Saugatuck and Douglas is a gravity system. with local areas of pressure. • Storm Sewers There are no mapped stormwater drains in Saugatuck Township except for county drains. Drainage has not been a significant problem in the northern part of the Township because of sandy, high permeability soils and lack of large paved areas. County Drains County Drains are found throughout Saugatuck Township, but mostly in the southern portion. A network of drains in Sections 27. 28, 34. 35 and 36 facilitates the removal of water from an area of poorly drained soils which is used as farmland. The Allegan County Drain Commission recently added four new drains along the Lake Michigan shore in Sections 20 and 29. These drains are needed to stabilize sand and clay bluffs along Lake Michigan. which are being eroded by groundwater. Other County drains in the area are located in the northeast comer of the Township, east of Saugatuck and south of Douglas. County drain names and locations are shown on Table 6.3. TABLE 6.3 COUNTY DRAINS DRAIN NAME Silver Creek Drain Ash Drain Mead Drain Golf Drain Falconer Drain Barr Drain Terrill Drain Rose Drain Rose Marsh Drain Wadsworth Drain Ruplow Drain Nuckelbine Drain Hudson Drain Kerr Drain Herring Drain Jager Crane Drain Warnock Drain Lakeshore # 1 Lakeshore #2 Lakeshore #3 Section 20 interceptor Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan - --- - -· - - - - - - -- - - LOCATION Sections 2, 11 Section 12 Section 12 Section 3, Saugatuck Section 10 Section 10 Section 35 Section 36 Section 36 Section 27 Section 27 Section 27 Section 33, 34 Section 29 Section 20, 21 Section 20, Douglas Section 20, Douglas Section 20, 29 Section 29 Section 20. Douglas Section 20 �6-4 Gas, Electric and Telephone There are no major gas or oil pipelines in Saugatuck Township. Gas service is provided by Michigan Gas Utilities Company and approximate locations of gas mains are shown on Map 6.4. There is one major 760 kilovolt electric transmission line which crosses the extreme southeast comer of the Township in Sections 25, 35 and 36. Electricity in the Township is provided by Consumers Power Company. Telephone service is provided by General Telephone and Electric Co. (GTE). TRANSPORTATION Transportation facilities within the area include streets and roads and a public transportation system (Interurban) . Saugatuck Township is served by a major Interstate highway (I-196) and by a State highway (M-89). Blue Star Highway, part of the Great Lakes Circle Tour, is the other major highway serving the area. The nearest railroad is the Chesapeake and Ohio RR, which runs north and south one mile east of the Township boundary. Kent County International Airport is within 50 miles and is served by 3 major airlines. with 126 flights per day. The area is also served by Greyhound Bus Lines. Transportation facilities are important in stimulating growth for Saugatuck Township and its location is an asset for attracting further economic and industrial development. Streets and Roads Streets and roads are classified according to the amount of traffic they carry and the nature of the traffic. Four common categories are local streets, collectors. local arterials, and regional arterials. Local streets typically provide access to residences, with speeds from 20 to 25 mph (Pepper Brooke Lane.). Collectors connect local streets to arterials and speeds average 25-35 mph. (66th St.). Local arterials facilitate larger volumes of traffic which originates and terminates within the tri-community area, with a trip length of ten miles or less and an average speed of 35-45 mph. (Blue Star Hwy.). Regional arterials are typically used for high speed through traffic, and access to the roadway is usually limited (I-196). Locations of collectors. local arterials and regional arterials are shown in Map 6 .5. Each class of street has an important function in maintaining the efficient flow of traffic and it is essential that adequate transpor- tation facilities exist or can be efficiently provided. Some up-to-date traffic counts for Blue Star Highway are available. A recent count for Blue Star Highway at two intersections in the Township only considers northbound traffic, missing traffic entering Saugatuck from exit 41 on 1-196. Other existing traffic counts for area roads are inadequate for planning purposes. Accurate and up-to-date traffic counts are needed in order to make some decisions pertaining to priorities for road improvements, monitoring of flows, evaluating impacts of proposed new development. and projecting future traffic conditions. Table 6.4 shows what very limited information is presently available from the County Road Commission. PA 51 of 1951 provides for the classification of all public roads, streets and highways for the purpose of managing the motor vehicle highway fund. The two classifications which pertain to Saugatuck Township are "Primary Road" and "Local Road". These roadways are shown in Map 6.6. Roads in Saugatuck Township are managed by the Allegan County Road Commission. which receives PA 51 funds for maintenance and construction based on the mileage of roads in each class under its jurisdiction. Lakeshore Drive Lakeshore Drive provides a scenic link between areas along the Lake Michigan coast. High TABLE6.4 EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE LOCATION 4L3L78 Blue Star & 64th 130th E &Wof Blue Star Blue Star & 129th 1959 & 1968 (same count) July 1987 (2 different days) 1969 VOLUME 5,319 368 10,575 8,256 336 Old Allegan. east of Blue Star 1982 130th & 70th, east 285 of Lakeshore Dr. July 1987 North 135th at 7,018 Blue Star (northbound) July 1987 129th at Blue 6 , 192 Star (northbound) October 1985 Center at Blue 10,861 Star Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �w 6-IS water levels on the Great Lakes. combined with storms. resulted in powerful wave action which undermined sand and clay bluffs along the shore. causing them to collapse. Because of its close proximity to these bluffs. the road has washed out in two places, one in Section 20 which is impassable, and one south of Douglas which has only one lane passable. School buses are not allowed to travel on some segments of the road because of poor and unsafe conditions. The Allegan County Road Commission allocated $260,000 to test the effects of concrete for accretion technology along the shoreline. The erosion barrier was installed in two locations and is having a minimal effect on the shoreline. Cost estimates for rebuilding Lakeshore Drive are at approximately $3.8 million (1988). This would involve relocation of portions of the road and implementation of erosion control measures. Blue Star Highway Blue Star Highway serves as a local arterial. Numerous problems inhibit it from performing that function effectively. Access to commercial and industrial establishments along arterial roads should be controlled by curbing. At present. there is virtually no controlled access in these areas on Blue Star Highway. and wide driveways and open shoulders lead to an elevated risk of accidents. There are no designated pedestrian traffic areas or bike paths, causing pedestrians to use the shoulder, unsafely. Widely varying speed limits between the Kalamazoo River bridge and the exit from 1-196 at the northern boundary of the Township make it difficult for motorists to travel the road without violating the speed limit. The roadway needs to have more than two lanes. especially if future development is to occur. The Township has paved the shoulders, and these are often mistaken for actual lanes, which poses a safety hazard. The possibility of creating a boulevard along Blue Star Highway was discussed at town meetings. Variations of this concept could improve appearance, safety and traffic control. There is no cooperative maintenance or planning arrangement among the Township, Saugatuck and Douglas for Blue Star Highway and the County Road Commission. yet the roadway needs repairs and resurfacing. Vecy little useable traffic count information is available, making it difficult to assess where needs are greatest so that improvements can be prioritized. Traffic may be higher in some segments than in others, indicating which speed limits and whether other traffic control measures are necessary. The entrance into Saugatuck Township from North Blue Star Highway is aesthetically poor and does not present visitors with a positive first impression. Over 60% of people responding to the 1988 Public Opinion Survey noted that the appearance of the highway needed improvement. Nearly 6()0!& of Township respondents indicated that the Highway needs improvemen ts in better lane striping, resurfacing. speed limits. traffic flow and safety. and bike paths. Interurban The Interurban is the area's public transportation system and is funded in part by a 1 mill assessment. The service was started in May 1980 as a two year experimental project and was initially funded at 100% by the State. Following the experimental period, some of the cost burden was borne by the tri-communities through the 1 mill assessment. The system has four buses and in 1988 there were approximately 37,000 riders. A new maintenance facility in Douglas. to be completed in the spring of 1990, is being constructed at a cost of $211,000 entirely with state and federal funds. The Interurban is governed by a board consisting of members from Saugatuck Township, Saugatuck and Douglas. POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Police Police protection for Saugatuck Township is provided by the Allegan County Sheriff Department and the Michigan State Police. The State Police maintains the Saugatuck Team post north of the Township on 138th. Avenue in Laketown Township. The facility has one lieutenant, one sergeant. seven troopers and eight patrol cars. The Allegan County Sheriff Department operates a satellite post in Fennville which serves the Township. The Township also has a constable who performs bar checks and serves zoning violations. Fire Saugatuck Township is included in the Saugatuck Fire District. This district is managed by a five member Fire Authority. Saugatuck, Douglas and Saugatuck Township each appoint one person to the board. These three then appoint two other people from the area at large, subject to approval by the three Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �6-6 communities involved. The Saugatuck Fire District has 35 volunteer personnel, including the fire chief. There are two fire stations, one located in downtown Douglas (4 7 W. Center) and another in Saugatuck Township near the intersection of Blue Star Highway and 134th Avenue. The latter is a new building designed to house six vehicles, offices and a meeting room with 9,600 square feet. It is located adjacent to the existing Maple Street facility. The Fire District maintains eight vehicles and one vessel: • 1975 Chevy Pumper • 1981 International Pumper • 1968 International Pumper • 1959 Ford Pumper • 1949 Seagrave Aerial • 1977 GMC Step Van • 1985 FWD Tanker • 1985 Karavan Trailer • Boston Whaler boat with pump Emergency Services Ambulance services are provided by the Fennville Fire District and by Mercy Hospital in Grand Rapids, dispatched from Holland. The Saugatuck Fire District maintains a first responder unit with 11 volunteers because of the distance from ambulance services. The first responder unit appears to average about 10 calls per month. SCHOOLS Three school districts seive Saugatuck Township; Saugatuck, Fennville, and Hamilton school districts. (See Map 6. 5) . Approximately half of the Township is seived by the Saugatuck district, with the southern portion of the Township being seived mostly by the Fennville district and the extreme northeast portion seived by the Hamilton district. The Saugatuck school system operates two facilities. Douglas Elementary School accommodates grades K through 6, and Saugatuck High School accommodates grades 7 through 12. Enrollment is approximately 550 students and has declined by 34% since 1973. The Fennville system has an elementary school (K-6) and a high school (7-12). with an enrollment of approximately 1600 students. Enrollments in the Fennville system are stable and range from 1550 to 1650 students per year, with less than 25% of the students coming from Saugatuck Township. The Hamilton district operates four elementary schools (K-6) and one high school (7-12) . Enrollment is near capacity, with 1900 students. The district has been experiencing a 4-5% annual increase in enrollments in recent years. The school districts serving the Township, especially the Saugatuck district, appear to have some capacity for accommodating increases in the school age population. Furthermore, the part of the Township seived by the Saugatuck school district is that which is most suitable for new growth. OTHER COMMUNITY FACJLITIES There is more than 200 acres of public land in Saugatuck Township (see Chapter 7). Other publicly owned facilities in the Township are the Saugatuck Riverside Cemetery and Saugatuck Township Hall (located in Douglas). SOLID WAS1E DISPOSAL PA 641 of 1978 requires that every county prepare both a short term (5 year) and long term (20 years) solid waste management plan. The plan must be approved by the County Planning Committee, the County Board of Commissioners and by at least 2/3 of the municipalities in the county. The Allegan County Solid Waste Plan dates from 1983 and covers a twenty year planntng period. It is presently being updated. The County generates about 220 tons per day of solid waste and has to rely on landfills outside of Allegan County. Solid waste removal in Saugatuck Township is handled entirely by private haulers. The waste stream from the County, and thus from the Township, is expected to increase due to population and tourist increases brought about by the area's shoreline, natural attractions, and proximity to Grand Rapids. The Saugatuck area is defined in the Solid Waste Plan and encompasses Saugatuck Township, Saugatuck and Douglas, as well as small portions of the adjoining communities. The Saugatuck area currently generates 11.3 tons of solid waste per day. In some outlying rural areas, 5-1 OOAi of the residential waste generated is disposed of or recycled on site. In urban areas, approximately 5% of residential waste is being recycled or scattered by indMdual efforts. The contributors to the solid waste stream by land use are shown in Table 6.5. Table 6.6 shows the results of a study conducted by the Northeast Michigan Council of Governments (NEMCOG) in the early 1980's. The study involved counties with both urban Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan (;°" (" �w I 6-7 and rural characteristics, much like the Saugatuck Township, Saugatuck and Douglas area. Solid waste generated has been broken down into specific categories. The numbers probably do not match the actual breakdown of solid waste components in the tri-community area, but give a rough estimate of the components. Per capita waste generated from various land uses is shown in Table 6. 7. The Allegan County Solid Waste Plan projects that solid waste output for the Saugatuck area will increase by 32% by 2000 to 14.95 tons per day due to projected population increase. The goals and objectives of the plan focus on reducing the waste stream through separation and recycling, using private haulers for waste collection, recovering energy from the solid waste stream and providing the public with opportunities to develop solutions for solid waste disposal problems. A recycling center is currently in operation on Blue Star Highway adjacent to 1-196 and exit 41. The center is partially funded by Saugatuck, Douglas and Saugatuck Township and is very well used. Allegan County Resource Recovery maintains the facility, which collects newspapers, plastics. glass, aluminum and brown paper bags. Pickup of metal appliances and tires is also possible by contacting the center. The recycling center was started in 1984. The County maintains the facility, which collects newspapers, plastic and glass. The Saugatuck Township Landfill (public), located in Sections 10 and 11, was closed in 1984. As far as new landfills within the Township are concerned, State regulations prohibit operation of a new landfill on: • Land considered by the DNR to be a State recognized unique wildlife habitat. • Land in the 100 year floodplain. • Prime agricultural lands. • A DNR designated and officially mapped wetland. • So close to an historic or archaeological site that it can be reasonably expected to produce unduly disturbing or blighting influence with permanent negative effect. • In a developed area where the density of adjacent houses or water wells could be reasonably expected to produce undue potential for groundwater contamination. • Due to the presence of many wetlands in the Township (Map 4.4), many prime agricultural lands (Map 4.10). numerous archaeologi- TABLE6.5 TONS GENERATED PER DAY BYLAND USE SOURCE QUANTI1Y (PER DAY) Residential Commercial Industrial Other Not Collected 6.5 2 .8 1.8 0.7 -0.5 11.3 NET TOTAL Source: Allegan County Solid Waste Plan TABLE6.6 SOLID WASTE COMPOSITION 1YPE P01SW* Percentage (%) 44.8 Combustible Wastes Paper Plastics Wood Yard Wastes Textiles Food Wastes Rubber Misc. Organics TOTALS 9.2 3.5 4.1 4.2 11.5 2.2 3.0 82.5 Noncombustible Wastes Glass Ferrous Aluminum Other nonFerrous Misc. Inorganics TOTALS 5.3 6.6 0.8 0.5 4.3 17.5 • Proportion of Total Solid Waste Source: Allegan County Solid Waste Plan TABLE 6.7 PER CAPITA WASTE GENERATED USE Residential Commercial Industrial Average Overall QPE • (LBS. PER DAY) 2.9 5.75 10.6 4.7 • Quantity Per Employee Source: Allegan County Solid Waste Plan Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �6-8 cal sites, land in the 100 year floodplain (Map 4 .3). and areas susceptible to groundwater contamination (Map 4 .11). not much is left for potential landfill sites. Furthermore, most of those sites which may be environmentally suitable for landfills have already been developed. Thus it is not likely that a landfill will be located in the Township. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �w N A __ 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 ft .,. . . . ,···· .,,,··· ..... ,~~ Scale 1" = 9060 ft AVI: , 25 29 28 ; . .! , f' 'i 0 . . '··: 33 r .. ..---..... ,. 3-4 l, ( .... , . ' \ TSN.IIIW ·, MAP 6. 1 PUBLIC FACILITIES .! . ••. /) " % .• I ,_.-J M-89 ', ' , ....i SAUGATUCK TWP. Saugatuck Township 1)2 Pumphouses 2)Vacant block 3)1/2 Vacant street 4 & S)Vacant lot 6)Library 7)Fire Dist. 1 & Fire Barn 8)DPW Barn 9)Saugatuck Township Hall 10)Saug. Riverside Cemetry 11 )Douglas Cemetry 12)Douglas North Cemetry 13)Saug. Town. Fire District No .2 14)Sagatuck City Hall August 1989 Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A ,..____ 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 ft Scale 1• • 9060 ft MAP6.2 WATER SYSTEM I,1> IWater Mains ■ j O@' ~ Saugatuck Township Reservoir Proposed Water Intake & Treatment area Ore·I Existing Well Locations August 1989 DATA SOURCE: WilNams & Works, Inc. Grand Rapids Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �w N A / I MAP 6.3 SEWER SYSTEM Saugatuck Township I~ISewer Lines 1,1 Discharge Line August 1ffl DATA SOURCE: Wdliams & Works, Inc. Gr.and Rapids Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 ft Scale 1" = 9060 ft MAP 6.4 GAS MAINS Saugatuck Township I/IGas Mains August 1989 SOURCE :Miehigan Gas Utilities Company Planning & Zoning Cenler Inc., Lansing.Ml �w I N A MAP6.5 STREET CLASSIFICATIONS Saugatuck Township [Lj Regional Arterials ~ Local Arterials ~ Collectors August 1989 DATA SOURCE : PZC I/ I Local Streets Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A 0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft MAP6.6 ACT 51 ROADS I/I County Local Road ~ County Primary Road ~ State Trunkline August 1989 DATA SOURCE: Michigan Department Of Transportation Saugatuck Township Planning & Zoning Cena Inc, Lansing, Ml �w 7-1 Chapter7 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE arks, recreation, and open space are essential to the quality of life of area residents, P and are an important component of the local tourist economy. They enhance property values, as well as physical and psychological well-being. Parks and open space define the character of each area community, create the scenic atmosphere which stimulates tourism, and provide the basis for popular local leisure activities. Recreation needs are regional in nature and plans must view local recreational offerings as part of a regional recreational system. Local governments, schools, private entrepreneurs, the County, and the State each have a central role in serving local and regional recreational needs. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE The Township formed a Township Park and Recreation Commission in November 1970, which is an independent governmental entity charged with provision of parks and recreational programs to area citizens. The Commission has six elected members, and is staffed by a parttime maintenance person. Representatives from both Douglas and the Township may be elected to sit on the Commission. The Commission completed the Saugatuck - Douglas Area Parks and Recreation Plan in February of 1985 and updates the plan periodically. Revision of the plan is currently underway. · Many of the area's recreational offerings are located in the Village of Douglas and the City of Saugatuck. The City of Saugatuck's parks are maintained by the City through its Department of Public Works. Park planning is done by a committee of three City Council members, who are overseen by the City Manager and the full Council. Douglas parks are maintained by the Village's Department of Public Works under the Village Council's Parks and Buildings Committee, which reports to the Village Council. Allegan County prepares and periodically updates a countywide parks and recreation plan. County parks are administered by a tenmember County Parks and Recreation Commission whose members include the Chairs of the County Road Commission, the County Planning Commission, the County Drain commissioner, two County Commissioners, and five members appointed by the County Board of Commissioners. The Commission meets on the first Monday of each month. It sometimes provides financial assistance for local recreational efforts which advance the County Recreation Plan. AREAWIDE RECREATIONAL OPPORroNITIES Recreation can be separated into four main categories: physical, social, cognitive, and environmentally related recreation. The former category focuses on sports and various physical activities. Social recreation looks at social interaction. Cognitive recreation deals with cultural, educational, creative, and aesthetic activities. Environmentally related recreation requires the natural environment as the setting or focus for actMty. Each of these categories in some way relates to the others. Physical Recreation Intramural athletics are popular for children and young adults in the area and are offered through the summer recreation program. Activities include softball, baseball, rocket football, volleyball, bowling and others (see Table 7.1). The elementary school has a newly expanded playground and Kid's Stuff TABLE7.l SUMMER RECREATION PROGRAMS ACTIVITY T-ball for kids Little League Pony League Slow-pitch softball Fast pitch softball (girls) Semi-competitive softball (boys) Rocket football Swirmning:begtnner,a~ beginner, intermediate, swimmer, basic rescue & a ~ lifesaving Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan 1989 PARTICIPANTS 40 46 19 10-18 27 15-20 57 66 �7-2 Park. Playgrounds are also found at River Bluff, Sundown, Schultz, and Beery Parks and the Douglas Village Square. Aerobic fitness classes are offered at the High school. Walking, hiking, biking, boating. golfing, swimming. and cross country skiing are also popular, and enjoyed by a wide range of age groups. Social Recreation A variety oflocal clubs and activities provide social recreation for people of all ages. Festivals, community education programs, and intramural sports provide an opportunity to socialize. Senior citizens actMties are organized through the New Day Senior Citizens Club of Douglas, the High School, the Masonic Hall, and various area clubs. Cognitive Recreation The tri-community area is rich in cognitive recreational pursuits. Festivals, art workshops, local theater, historic districts, an archaeological site, summer day camp, and community education programs provide cultural. educational, and aesthetic enjoyment. The Saugatuck Women's Club, Rubenstein Music Club, the Oxbow, Douglas Garden Club, and the Douglas Art Club are among the local clubs which organize cultural activities. Environmentally Related Recreation Area lakes, the Kalamazoo River, and state and local parks provide area citizens with unique outdoor recreation opportunities. They provide a location for a variety of outdoor activities including boating, fishing, swimming, nature study, camping, hiking, cross country skiing, and nature walks. These areas also serve the cognitive needs of area citizens and tourists by their scenic beauty and relaxing affect. In fact. the most valued attribute of area water bodies and open space to area citizens, as identified in the 1988 Public Opinion Survey, is not physical recreation, but the scenic view they provide. pact of tourism on local recreational facilities. A discussion of the size, condition, and planned improvements for selected area parks is shown in Table 7.3. Proposed recreation projects contained in the Saugatuck - Douglas Recreation Plan are listed in Table 7.4. Table 7.5 includes a schedule of planned park and open space acquisitions and improvements. RECREATIONAL NEEDS AND USAGE The 1988 Public Opinion Survey highlighted those recreational facilities which residents feel are inadequate in the tri-community area. Table 7.6 lists these by jurisdiction. Non-Motorized Trails and Bike Paths Residents placed highest priority on additional bike paths, cross country skiing routes, and hiking trails. These needs are currently served by non-motorized trails in the Oval Beach/Mt. Baldhead area. The 1985 Saugatuck - Douglas Parks and Recreation Plan, identified bicycle trails as a high priority and prepared a schedule of capital improvements to achieve this objective. These improvements have not been implemented to date. In 1984, the Saugatuck Township Park and Recreation Commission developed a list of recommended bike paths in the tri-community area. Those recommended for Saugatuck are shown below in order of priority: • Park Streets from Campbell to Perryman. • Oval Beach road. Those recommended for Douglas are shown below in order of priority: • Center Street from Tara to Lake Shore Drive. • Ferry Street from Center to Campbell Road. • Lake Shore Drive from Campbell Road to the Village limits. A path on Blue Star Highway from the bridge to Center Street. which was the Village's first priority, has already been completed. Those bike paths recommended in order of priority for Saugatuck Township are: • Lake Shore Drive from 130th Avenue to 0 M-89. RECREATION INVENTORY Map 7. 1 identifies parks and recreational facilities in the tri-community area. Table 7.2 contains an inventory of outdoor recreation facilities in the tri-community area. There are also two eighteen hole and one nine hole golf courses in the area. This is much higher than typical for such a small population (the standard is 1 golf course per 50,000 people). and reflects the im- • Holland Streets from Saugatuck to the Y. • Old Allegan Road from Blue Star Highway to 60th St. • Blue Star Highway from 129th Ave. to M89. The regional bike path system would connect with Saugatuck's chain link ferry to afford bicyclists east/west access. This connection Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan 0 �w 7-3 TABLE 7.2 INVENTORY OF OUTDOOR RECREATION .. . • • .... - ... i ..... l~: .- :::1 S11:e (acrea) oQ C l.oc:at ton !] u•w C a.-.u ,0 ;: ~ l: ;; ... I . River Bluff 27 X X 2,Sundovn .4 X X ).AJaalanchicr ◄ X 4 4-Douglas Beach 5.H. Beery Field 1.2 X X 20 X X 7,Union St. Launch a.center St. Launch IO . Villa2e Square 12.IJillow Parlt .,- 14.Spear St. Launch ~ ~ ~ X JI X X l( X X X X X X X X X X X X )6 X X X X X 60* X X X )( X X X .. X 20. HiRh School 21. St. Peter's X X X X .- ..: X X X X 12 X X 16 . Oval Beach 2). \Jest Wind KOA X • .<: -- x· X 22. 6)rd St. Launch X X X 8.6 X X X 19 . Elementary Sch. .. X JC - 154 0 UV X 51 18. Old "Airpor.t" .. < X IS.Ht. Baldhead 17. Tallma2e Woods 0 C X l( X .... ... ... .• ! .. ~ : ~1 . . ; ! ~ ~ a~ t o ., X X lC X 2. S .s C ~ - 11.Wiclts Parlt l) . Cuok Park .. X 1.4 6 . schultz Parlt : ... .!.... { l .. - .• : ... ' j ..... -- 3 • E "' ; 1;; :: !c X X X X X X X 24. Blue Star lliway Roadside Parlt X 25. R1 vera ide Park runs down Holland Street and across Francis Street to the waterfront and will be served by inner city streets, without the need for additional right of way. At this juncture, bicyclists may ride the chain link ferry to Saugatuck's eastern border. Once on Saugatuck's eastern side. bicyclists could follow Saugatuck's proposed bike path system down through Douglas and south out of the Township . Bike path right of way would also extend north to Goshorn Lake along Washington Road. thereby connecting with Laketown Township . Another future extension could extend the system east along Old Allegan Road into Manlius Township. This is a scenic route, although somewhat hilly. Bicyclists wishing to pass through Saugatuck and on south through Douglas would need additional right of way from Lake Street to the bridge, thereby connecting with the Douglas bike path network. Douglas in tum would extend its bike path south on Blue Star Highway to connect with the Township system. Map 7 .2 shows this proposed regional bike path network. Waterfront Open Space A survey of waterfront usage revealed that the most popular waterfront activity is viewing. The second most popular use varied by waterbody. Swimming was the primary use of Lake Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �7-4 TABLE 7.3 PARKLAND INVENTORY PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS 1YPE/YEAR LOCATION USES SIZE CONDITION Center & Main Sts. baseball playground, picnic pressbox & wash- None room poor, otherwise good Douglas Beach Lakeshore Dr. public beach & picnic Schultz softball, picnic, 130th & Kalamazoo River playground, launchram:e Union St. at Kal. launch ramp, River :etcnic area pressbox-220 sq.ft., dugouts350 sq.ft., land52,000 sq.ft, 1 acre beach-36,400 sq.ft. nearly 1 acre, bathhouse280 .ft. pavillion-1326 sq.ft., land- 20 acres 66'xl20' NAME OF PARK Dou las Beery F1eld Union St. Launch Ram:e Saug_. TwE. River Bluff Sundown Kai River above 1-196 bridge: access from Old AlIeganRd. hiking, picnic, 27 acres boaters stop, nature study. swinging & sandbox Lake MI Bluff at 126th Ave. 66'xl50' picnics, watching lakes & sun sets, scenic turnout 30'x200' picnics, resting for travelers Blue Star Blue Star Hwy. south of Skyline Restaurant Center St. Park Eastern end of canoe launching. Center at picnics, scenic Kalamazoo River viewing Fair None Good Acquisition/'89 Good None newly installed entry road & pienic area New dock & picnic shelter Very poor pad for dumpster/'89, more flowers/'89. toilet improvements/ 1990-92 new fence: needs landscaping/ 1989-1992 new flowers; needs new bollards & fence re- 8 fencework/1989, bollards/ 1989-90 airs Saug_atuck Village Square Butler & Main Streets Wicks Park Waterfront between Main & Mary Streets Willow Park Waterfront at Butler & Lucy Waterfront on Water Street Spear Street streetend Cook Park Boat Ramp 3 acres Poor tennis courts, drinking fountain, playground, benches, restrooms bandstand, boardwalk, benches. fishIng. restrooms viewing area. benches picnic tables 2.5 acres Good 1/2 acre approx. Good 132 ft Good 132 ft. Good boat launch 66 ft. Good additional docking, public restrooms, gazebo ? Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �w 7-5 TABLE 7.3 (continued) PARKLAND INVENTORY NAME OF PARK Mt. Baldhead Park LOCATION Park Street Oval Beach Park Lake Michigan Tallmadge Woods USES picnic shelter, ta- · bles, restrooms, hilting trails, parking, stairway to observation deck on top of dune, two observation decks on rtver beach house, concession stand, parking, picnic area, BBQ grills, viewing deck. stairs to beach, observation deck. nature trails current use restricted Michigan, powerboating for Lake Kalamazoo and Silver Lake (which also is popular for fishing), and nature study was the most popular for Kalamazoo River due to its large connecting wetlands and wide array of wildlife- including a large population of Great Blue Herons which have established a rookery in the area. In accordance with usage, the overwhelming majority of residents in Saugatuck Township cited preservation of existing waterfront open space and increased access to the waterfront as their highest waterfront need. Acquisition of land and provision of access to Lake Michigan was given highest priority for the waterfront by all three jurisdictions. Open space along Lake Kalamazoo and the Kalamazoo River were also given high priority by the majority of respondents, although the response was higher in the Village (64-6go/4) and Township (62%) than in the City of Saugatuck (48-50%). A large number of respondents also called for additional boat launching facilities. Parks Respondents to the 1988 Public Opinion Suxvey were asked how frequently they used various local parks and the overwhelming majority responded "never". Oval Beach is used most frequently of the area parks by Township SIZE 51 acres CONDITION Good 36 acres 100 acres new concession stand & restrooms/ 1990 Good residents. Douglas Beach is also frequently used. Wicks, Schultz, and Beery park are more frequently used by City and Village residents. than those in the Township. It is important to note that survey responses reflect the usage characteristics of older adults. The average age of survey respondents was 54 to 56 years old. As the age of respondents increases. park usage tends to decrease- especially for parks which specialize in active sports. This reveals the need to orient recreation plans to the recreational needs of older adults. Thus. bike paths. waterfront open space/access, hiking trails, and cross country ski trails should probably receive precedence in future recreation enhancement projects, over more active park facilities like ball diamonds. Senior Citizens Center Senior citizens in the area have been lobbying for a senior citizens center to sexve the social and recreational needs of the area's elderly population. The suxvey results reflect area support for a senior center. Fifty-three percent of Township respondents felt that a senior center desexved high priority. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan -- --------- PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS 1YPE/YEAR �7-6 TABLE7.4 PROPOSED RECREATION PROJECTS TRI-COMMUNITY AREA PROPOSED PROJECT VERY HIGH PRIORITY LOCATION Willow Park preseivation and improvement Acquire extensive land areas New dug outs - football field Renovation of playground equipment Convert weight room to storage & coach's offices Remodel Wicks Park restrooms Acquire land to access to Oxbow Lagoon Downtown Saugatuck on the river Lake Michigan Shoreline Saugatuck High School Douglas Elementary School Saugatuck High School On river in Saugatuck North of Oval Beach Park HIGH PRIORITY Acquire and improve land for marina and park Boat launching facility Develop bicycle trails Purchase park parcel on hill Acquire additional land for River Bluff Park Construct additional public restrooms Clear and develop Moore's Creek Rehabilitate tennis courts Update Village Square Park Expand and improve Howard Schultz Park Riverside Park equipment & improvements Douglas riverfront near bridge City of Saugatuck Entire area In Saugatuck Adjacent to River Bluff in Township Downtown Saugatuck Near Amalanchier Park in Saugatuck Township Village Square Park - Saugatuck Village Square Park - Saugatuck Village of Douglas Village of Douglas MEDIUM Expand underground sprinkling system Acquire land and develop tot lots Develop archery range Beach House rehabilitation Acquire land for neighborhood park Construct concession stand Village Square Park - Saugatuck All areas River Bluff Park - Township Saugatuck Oval Beach Campbell Road area - Saugatuck & Douglas Saugatuck High School Athletic Field LOW Teen Recreation Center Install lighting for tennis courts Develop non-motorized trail Lighting for tenniS courts Construct additional locker rooms Downtown Saugatuck Schultz Park Schultz Park Village Square Park - Saugatuck Saugatuck High School Source: Saugatuck - Douglas Area Parks and Recreation Plan, Feb. 1985. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �w 7-7 RECREATION AND LOCAL SPENDING In terms of priorities for spending current tax dollars. 42%-48% of respondents felt that parks and recreation are a high priority. Senior programs were given low local spending priority in the Township, despite the high average age of respondents. Although they would like to have them. most respondents would not support a community recreation center. a senior center. or a community pool if it meant an increase in general property taxes. TABLE 7.5 PLANNED ACQUISITIONS/IMPROVEMENTS TO PARKS AND OPEN SPACES ACQlTISillON NAME LOCATION Esther McSic East side Union St. property Kai I.a.ke, North of Blue Star (Douglas) Ruth McNaI.and locked mara property end of Schultz Park (Douglas) Blue Star & Vacant Lot Main St. (Douglas) SE 1/4 secOld tion 2 Saugatuck (Saugatuck) Airport rMPROVEMENr FINANCING DNRLand Trust USE Public open space SIZE CONDITION 124,000 sq.ft. Marshy (portion under water) vacant cosr ($) Park 132,000 Dry sq.ft. (vacant) NA NA Future park land 18,000 sq.ft.; nearly 1/2 acres 154 acres 65,000 NA Currently for- Dry 185,000 estry management. possible future recreation TABLE 7.6 RECREATION NEEDS IN THE TRI-COMMUNITY AREA 1988 PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY CI1Y VILLAGE TOWNSHIP Bike paths (68%) Hiking trails (62%) Cross-country ski trails (62%) Lake MI open space (61 %) Lake Kal. open space (50%) Kal. River open space (49%) Boat launching ramps (45%) Lake MI open space (70%) Lake Kal. open space (69%) Bike paths (67%) Kal. River open space (64%) Parks (50%) Boat launching ramps (46%) Senior Center (45%) Lake MI open space (67%) Bike paths (64%) Lake Kal. open space (62%) Kal. River open space (62%) Cross-country ski trails (60%) Boat launching ramps (59%) Senior Center (53%) Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �N + A 0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft ir.;;;;""--!P.!1!!!!11°'-+-',,. ( \ '·, \ 22 • ~ % 0 i 28 ~ - i 25 "27 1.......... ~ 0 ......:-• . . . . ' ; ' " ~ ~ > ll 33 •• ~ ,. .... . ........ .......... l, llN.•IIW •., , % ~ j , , .,6·-•·' ' ,' , C 35 36 ' ' f' . ... ,, : __j M-89 SAUGATUCK TWP, MAP7.1 OUTDOOR RECREATION SITES SaugatuckTownship 1) - 25) See Chapter 7, Table 7.2 26) West Shore Golf Course 27) Clearbook Golf Course 28) Mi-Ro Golfcourse 29) Center Street August 1989 DATA SOURCE :Saug. - Doug . Parks & Rec. Plan, 1985 Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �w ' N A ,..____ 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 ft Scale 1• = 9060 ft MAP7.2 PROPOSED BIKE PATHS Saugatuck Township 1. ·1 Bike Paths [!] Chain Link Ferry August 1989 DATA ~URCE: Saugatuck Township Park and Recreation Commission Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �8-1 Chapters WATERFRONT S augatuck was the first settlement in Allegan County. Its natural protected harbor along the Kalamazoo River and proximity to Lake Michigan gave it a ready means of water transport- essential to the commerce of the day. Throughout its history. land use activities along the Lake Michigan shoreline and the riverfront have continued to dominate the economic life of the trt-community area. Lumbering, boat building, basket making, fruit transport. and even large Great Lakes passenger boats have. at different times. relied upon the River connection. Tourists have always been attracted to the area, but tourism is now the number one economic activity. Today's waterfront activities are dominated by tourist and pleasure craft needs, especially sailboats. powerboats. charter fishing boats and other tourist boats. Consequently, how the waterfront is used will be of crucial importance to the future of the trt-community area. The primary issues concerning proper future use of the waterfront involve competition between economic development and environmental protection. Waterfront lands represent the highest value lands in the trt-community area, and local officials are therefore concerned about the potential tax base associated with use of waterfront lands. In order to finance the service needs of local residents. the trt-communities must balance taxable and nontaxable land uses. This presents a dilemma. Although waterfront lands have high revenue generating potential, a major attraction of both the Lake Michigan and Kalamazoo River waterfronts is their scenic, natural shorelines composed of forested sand dunes and large wetland areas. Should. these natural areas be greatly damaged or destroyed through inappropriate development, then the "goose that laid the golden egg" will be dead. It is essential that the natural beauty of the waterfront be maintained along the Lake Michigan shoreline, the Kalamazoo River from the channel to Saugatuck, and from the Blue Star Highway bridge inland. Limited additional development along the waterfront on Lake Kalamazoo and the Douglas side of the bayou east of Blue Star Highway may be both desirable and necessary. However, such development must be undertaken carefully to maintain the delicate balance between economic development and environmental protection. It is both necessary and possible to manage the waterfront for a variety of purposes. Yet it is always difficult to manage for multiple uses. Some individuals value land management to retain the necessary habitat for birds, fish and wildlife. Others feel it should be managed to maximize surface water use, or for intensive waterfront dependent activities like ship building or power generation. Based on some of the technical data presented below. existing use information, citizen opinions. and the goals and objectives presented at the beginning of this Plan, the waterfront in the tri-community area can, and should, be managed to accommodate a wide range of land uses and activities. This Plan seeks to define a balance between competing uses. It places protection of the natural environment as first and foremost in making future land use decisions along the Lake Michigan and Kalamazoo River waterfronts. The ultimate goal is to minimize disruption of the natural environment so that new development is in harmony with the environment, rather than in conflict with it. Some destruction of the limited remaining wetland areas along Lake Kalamazoo is only justified where the public benefits of particular projects are very great (e.g. a public marina or additional public access to the waterfront). Watersheds of the Kalamazoo River Basin The Kalamazoo River extends from south of Homer in Hillsdale and Jackson Counties to its outlet at Lake Michigan in Saugatuck Township (see Figure 4.1). With the exception of lands adjoining Lake Michigan (which drain directly into the Lake) and a small area in the southeast comer of Saugatuck Township, all land in the trt-community area is part of the Kalamazoo River Basin. Eight small watershed areas lie within the tri-community area and discharge into Lake Michigan via the Kalamazoo River (see Map 8.1). These include Goshorn, Peach Orchard. Tan- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-2 nery. Silver and "Cemetery" Creeks, as well as the Morrison Bayou at the eastern end of the Kalamazoo River as it enters the Township. Most of Douglas and Saugatuck also drain separately into the Kalamazoo River and Lake Kalamazoo. Slopes in the area are generally less than 10 percent though locally they may be in excess of 20 percent. Runoff erosion is taking place in the highlands, contributing sediment to backswamp areas and Lake Michigan. Monthly (exceedance) flows for the Kalamazoo River, based on a 1649 square mile drainage area near Fennville (#0410B500, T2n, Rl4W, NE 1/4 Sec 5), were averaged from measurements taken between 1929 to 1985 by the Hydrologic Engineering Section, Land and Water Management Division, MDNR. Estimates based on these measurements were then prepared for the larger drainage area of2060 square miles at the mouth of the Kalamazoo River (T3N, Rl6W, Sec 4, Saugatuck Township). Ninety-five percent and fifty percent exceedance flows are shown in Table 8. 1. These are flows exceeded 95% or 50% of the time. The lowest 95% exceedance flow in Fennville (nearly drought level) was measured during August at 410 cfs, and is estimated to be 520 cfs at the mouth of the Kalamazoo River. The 50% exceedance flow in Fennville ranged from a low of 860 cfs during the summer months to 2010 cfs TABLE 8.1 KALAMAZOO RIVER EXCEEDANCE FLOWS (1929-85) MONTHLY AVERAGE CUBIC FT /SECOND FENNVILLE January February March April May June July August September October November December RNERMOUTH 500/4 95% 500/4 95% 1350 1400 1950 2010 1600 1250 970 860 860 980 1210 1300 710 790 1010 1040 830 630 480 410 480 520 650 750 1690 1750 2430 2510 2000 1560 1210 1070 1070 1220 1510 1620 890 990 1260 1300 1040 790 600 520 600 650 810 940 Source: Hydrologtc En~eertnfuSection, Land and Water Resources Divis on, Mic gan Department of Natural Resources. during April. Corresponding estimates for the mouth of the Kalamazoo River ranged from 1070 cfs during the summer months to 2510 cfs during April. The 100 year discharge is estimated at 15.400 cfs at the mouth of the Kalamazoo River, and 12,500 cfs at the Fennville gage. PRIMARY ECOSYSTEMS The tri-community area has three basic ecosystems, two of which parallel the waterfront. The first ecosystem is comprised of hardwoods holding the sand dunes in place along the Lake Michigan shoreline. These woodlots are inhabited by small game such as fox squirrels, rabbits, raccoons, deer, wild turkey, and opossums. This ecosystem is comprised of fauna common to most of Michigan, but its balance is easily upset by the disruption of its shallow organic soils. Any ground cover that is damaged or removed should be quickly replaced with cover that will hold and prevent sand from blowing or rapid wind erosion may occur. Michigan's most famous ghost town, Singapore, once a thriving lumber town, Ues beneath these shifting sands near the mouth of the channel. The second ecosystem is the marsh-wetland ecosystem that covers the area along the Kalamazoo River, Silver Lake and Goshorn Lake, and the connecting tributaries. This area is covered with marsh grasses, low shrubs, poplar trees, spruces, some white pine, and other softwoods. The cover is inhabited by common Michigan marsh dwellers such as frogs, turtles, ducks, blackbirds. and snakes. The marsh ecosystem is also populated by muskrat. mink, mallard duck, black duck, teal, wood duck, blue heron, Canadian geese, and mute swans. Golden eagle and osprey used to frequent the area. The marsh ecosystem is very sensitive to changes in water quality and disruption of vegetation. Great care must be taken to limit siltation and disruption to vegetation when working in this ecosystem. The third ecosystem covers the rest of the Township and is predominantly agricultural/forest with birds and wildlife common to this dominant ecosystem in Michigan. The entire Saugatuck/Douglas area is designated as an area of particular concern by the DNR Areas of particular concern are those having scarce resources, unusual scenic beauty, unusual economic value, recreational attractions, or some combination of the above. They are only located in coastal areas. Altering the Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-3 environment in an area of "particular concern" could have a significant impact on the quality of coastal and Great Lakes waters. WATER QUALITY The Kalamazoo River watershed includes many types of land uses and the River flows through several large developed urban areas including Kalamazoo and Battle Creek. When it reaches the trt-community area. the quality of this water is not good. Despite the water quality problem, the River from about one-half mile downstream from the Hack.lander Public Access Site (in Section 23) . has been designated as a "wild-scenic river" under Michigan's Natural River Act, Public Act 231 of 1970. Land use restrictions have been imposed to retain its natural character within 300 feet of the River's edge. The basic water management goal is the elimination of the pollution threat to surface and groundwater resources. The Kalamazoo River is designated by the DNR to be protected for recreation (partial body contact). intolerant fish (warm water species). industrial water supply, agricultural and commercial uses. Downstream from the Kalamazoo Lake, the river is protected for cold water anadromus fish species (trout and salmon) . Kalamazoo Lake and Goshorn Lake are designated to be protected for recreation (total body contact). and intolerant fish (warm water species). These water management objectives are nearly ten years old, but there have been no concerted efforts to update them and carry them out. A push to revise the objectives is underway statewide, but it could be years before any action plans are carried out for the Kalamazoo River. 1988 Public Opinion Survey results reveal that citizens in the tri-community area feel that the water quality of the Kalamazoo River and Lake is poor to very poor (58%-70%). Lake Michigan is rated fair to good (31-50%) . and most respondents familiar with the water quality of Silver Lake felt that it was fair. The majority of respondents who are familiar with these water bodies, feel that the water quality of Lake Michigan and Silver Lake has deteriorated slightly in recent years, and Kalamazoo River and Kalamazoo Lake has deteriorated slightly to greatly. Most respondents who reside in Saugatuck. however. felt that the water quality has stayed about the same. Basic water quality data on the River appears in Table 8 .2 for selected months in 1978, TABLE8.2 KALAMAZOO RIVER WATER QUALITY FECAL COLIFORM PER 100 ML PHOSPHOROUS TOTAL ORIHO MG/L MG/L NITROGEN N02 N03 MG/L SEDIMENfS MG/L TONS/DAY HEAVY METALS LEAD MERCURY MG/L MG/L Fennville 1/27/88 5/18/88 7/28/88 9/21/88 28 96 .05 .04 .08 .07 .01 <.01 <.01 .02 1.4 0 .5 0 .67 0.64 5 26 17 39 29 102 30 202 200 200 .08 . 11 .14 .02 .02 .01 1.6 0 .88 0 .39 21 13 21 161 102 103 .07 .12 .12 .15 NR NR 1.7 0.34 0 .54 0 .00 9 20 15 28 27 123 26 72 <5 <. l <5 <. l <5 <.l <5 <.l 20 10 <.5 <.5 .5 Saugatuck 3/19/86 6/25/86 9/11/86 Saugatuck 1/10/78 5/1/78 7/20/78 9/11/78 120 69 NR NR NR = Not Reported Source: USGS Water Resource Data For Michigan, Water Re sources Division, U.S . Geologic Survey. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-4 1986, and 1988. The sampling point was moved from Saugatuck to Fennville in 1987. This data reveals an increase in sedimentation and a decline in heavy metals. It also shows an increase in fecal coliform (intestinal bacteria) levels to 200/ 100 ml at the former testing site in Saugatuck- the maximum level permitted under rule 62 of the MDNR Water Resources Commission General Rules of 1986. Phosphorous and certain nitrogen levels have not changed appreciably in the past ten years. The Kalamazoo River between Calkins Dam and Lake Michigan has been designated an Area of Concern in the 1988 Michigan Nonpoint Source Management Plan (MNSMP). due to contamination of fish from PCB's. The primary source of contamination was identified as PCB contaminated sediments upstream in the Kalamazoo River and Portage Creek. These sediments continue to erode, resuspend, and dissolve PCB's into the water column where they are transported downstream. Due to the presence of PCB's. advisories are in effect for consumption of fish caught in the Kalamazoo River or Lake Michigan. The advisory warns against any consumption of carp, suckers, catfish. and largemouth bass taken from the Kalamazoo River downstream from the Morrow Pond Dam to Lake Michigan and Portage Creek downstream from Monarch Millpond. Limited consumption of other species (no more than one meal per week) is considered safe for all except nursing mothers. pregnant women. women who intend to have children. and children age 15 and under. In Lake Michigan limited consumption of Lake Trout 20-23", Coho Salmon over 26", Chinook Salmon 21-32". and Brown Trout up to 23" is considered safe for all except nursing mothers. pregnant women. women who intend to have children, and children age 15 and under. Individuals should not consume carp, catfish, or Lake Trout. Brown Trout, or Chinook which fall outside of the acceptable size for limited consumption. To address the PCB problem, the MNSMP has devised a Remedial Action Plan with the goal ofreducing human exposure to acceptable levels (1: 100,000) and thus reducing fish tissue concentration to a maximum .05 mg/kg and reducing water column levels to .02 ng/1. Actions taken to address the problem include: strict controls on direct discharges of PCB's: a feasibility study of remedial alternatives; funding through State Act 307 to take remedial action at three sites: and legal action and negotiations with private parties at two other sites (see MNSMP, November 7. 1988, p. 328). Efforts initiated in the '70's to identify and require extensive treatment of pollutants prior to their dumping into the River will continue to slowly improve the quality of the water. As the nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen are removed from wastewater entering the River, less new plant life will be stimulated and more oxygen will be available for fish. One of these efforts is the Michigan Water Resources Commission Act. which requires all discharges into the water to have discharge permits. In addition, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. Under these laws, any public or private facility which will emit any point-source discharge into the water must first receive a NPDES discharge permit. The permit program sets forth limitations and monitoring requirements to protect water quality and meet treatment standards, and establishes strong enforcement actions for violations. The Surface Water Quality Division. MDNR administers NPDES permits. NPDES permits issued in the tri-comrnunity area are shown on Table 8.3. However, sedimentation and nonpoint sources of pollution will remain a problem. In contrast to pipes that discharge directly into a waterbody, nonpoint sources of pollution include those pollutants that do not originate from a single point- such as fertilizer and pesticide runoff from farmers fields and petroleum based pollutants that wash off parking lots and roadways. The most obvious pollutants are the physical litter and debris that are carelessly dumped into the River or Lake and which typically wash up along the shore. Michigan's 1988 Nonpoint Pollution Assessment Report concluded that 99% of Michigan's watersheds have at least one waterbody with a non-point source pollution problem. In-place contamination and atmospheric deposition were listed as the primary non-point sources of pollution for the Kalamazoo River. Stronger efforts to improve water quality will have a positive affect on tourism. recreation. and future growth and development of the trtcomrnunity area. All sources of pollution a:ffect water quality, and hence the utility of the water resource. While the tri-comrnunity area must rely on outside agencies to enforce pollution control laws upstream. some efforts can be undertaken by Saugatuck. Douglas and Saugatuck Township to improve water quality Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-5 TABLES.3 NPDES PERMITS ISSUED IN THE TRI-COMMUNITY AREA PERMIT RECIPIENT ADDRESS DISCHARGE Culligan processed wastewater treated municipal waste 900,000 gal/day purged groundwater, purgable halocarbons 12,000 gal/day non-contact cooling water & cooling tower blowdown Groundwater 201 Culver St. , Saugatuck 340 Culver St.. Saugatuck 6449 Old Allegan Rd .. Saugatuck Purge Twp. Rich Products 350 Culver St.. Saugatuck Kal. Lake Water & Sewer Authortty Kalamazoo Lake LOCATION Kalamazoo Lake via storm sewers Kalamazoo River EXPIRATION DAIB 1991 1990 outfall 001 Kalamazoo River 1993 outfall 001 Kalamazoo River 1990 via storm sewer Source: MDNR Surface Water Quality Division TABLE 8 .4 LAKE MICHIGAN LAKE LEVELS YEAR LOWEST EL FEET AS.L. MONTI-I HIGHEST EL MONTI-I FEET A.S.L. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 578.00 578.12 578.31 578.92 578.51 578.17 578.85 579.02 579.57 580.36 578.96 578.10 February March February December February March February February February February December December 578.57 579.01 580.02 579.77 579.43 579.02 580.08 580.23 580.84 581.62 580.65 579.04 July October Aprtl July July Aprtl July July June October January May DIFFERENCE DIFFERENCE IN FEET IN INCHES .57 .89 1.75 .85 .92 .85 1.25 1.21 1.27 1.26 1.69 .94 6.84 10.68 20.52 10.20 11.04 10.20 15.00 14.52 15.24 15.12 20.28 11.28 Source: The Michigan Riparian, May 1989 and prevent further pollution within the tricommunity area. These will be discussed further later in this Chapter. LAKE LEVELS The natural level of the Great Lakes goes through periodic changes that are based predominantly on rainfall and evaporation within the entire Great Lakes Basin. Since a century peak in 1986. Lake Michigan has steadily fallen to its current level of around 5 78 feet (see Table 8.4). The Kalamazoo River. Kalamazoo Lake and Lake Michigan are interconnected. Thus. water levels on the River and Lake Kalamazoo are largely dependent on Lake Michigan water levels. Consequently. land uses adjoining the waterfront should be based on the vagartes of fluctuating Lake Michigan water levels. This has not always been done as was evident by extensive shol'.'e erosion and flooding during the last high water pertod. When water levels are high "no-wake" zones. which are always in effect from the channel to Mason Street in Saugatuck. are extended Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-6 to cover all of the Kalamazoo Lake shoreline and parts of the River east of Blue Star Highway (see Map 8.2) . When a "no-wake" speed is in effect. then all motor boats and vessels must limit speed to a slow no-wake speed when within 100 feet of: • rafts, except for ski jumps and ski landing floats; • docks; • launching ramps; • swimmers; • anchored, moored or drifting boats; and • designated no-wake zones. This means a speed slow enough that the wake or wash of the boat creates a minimum disturbance. Owners and operators are responsible for damage caused by wakes. HARBOR Map 8.3 is the existing harbor map (June 1987) distributed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. It depicts water depth for the shoreline along Lake Michigan, and the River through Kalamazoo Lake. Channel depth is maintained by periodic dredging to a depth of 13 feet to Main Street in Saugatuck. (Dredging at the mouth of the channel is to begin in July 1990 and be completed in the Fall of 1990.) The depth then drops to 20-27 feet for the next 500 feet. Between that point and Tower Marine, the water depth is about 7 feet. Most of the rest of Lake Kalamazoo varies between 1 and 4 feet in depth with not more than 2 feet being the most common. The Douglas shoreline, east of Blue Star Highway is only 1-2 feet in depth except for a small area running NW-SE from the center of the bridge and connecting to the Point Plt:;asant Yacht Club. This natural harbor is the principal attraction for nautical tourists which flock to the area during summer months when the marinas are used to capacity. Hundreds rent dockage by the season. Many live on their boats for weeks on end. The demand for dockage appears to be greater than the supply, despite the huge number of slips available (see Map 8.4) . In 1976 there were 8 marinas with approximately 800 slips. In 1989, there are 26 legally operating marinas with 966 slips. There are about half dozen marinas without current permits and these contain over 30 more slips. There are also a number of slips maintained by private residences for their own personal use. Marina permits are required for any commercial activity. so as few as two slips could require a marina permit if they are rented. Permits are issued for a three year period by the DNR On peak summer weekends the number of boats on the lake could be twice to thrice the normal level. This presents one of the most serious problems jointly facing the tri-community area- how to deal with surface water use conflicts. The Lake has a total surface water area of 184 acres. Acreage available for recreational boating is dramatically reduced by the dockage which extends into the Lake hundreds of feet and by the shallow water at the edge to about 133 acres. Yet, on summer weekends the River is a constant highway of boats moving in and out of the Lake. Recreational sailing, fishing, swimming, sailboarding and water skiing are limited by all of the motorboat traffic. However, during the week. other water surface activities can go on without much interference. MARINE SAFETY The Allegan County Sheriffs Department, Marine Safety Division, maintains strict control of the waterways. The Department has 8 marine officers. Normally, two officers patrol by boat, but three to four officers patrol during holidays and special events. Officers patrol in a 27 foot Boston Whaler with two 150 horsepower outboard motors. This boat is equipped for Lake Michigan rescue , and has a noise meter which monitors the 86 decibel noise limit. From Memorial Day to Labor Day officers put in 635 hours of patrol duty on Kalamazoo River and Kalamazoo Lake. One hundred and ten hours were spent patrolling Lake Michigan. Most patrols occur between Friday and Sunday, and about half of the Department's budget goes to patrolling the Saugatuck area. In the summer of 1989, 189 tickets were issued on Kalamazoo River and Kalamazoo Lake, 11 were issued on Lake Michigan, 276 warnings were issued, 10 complaints were received, and 6 boating accidents occurred. The Department also conducted 378 safety inspections. The most common violations are inadequate life preservers on board and lack of current registration. The Department notes that slow/no wake, and hazardous violations were down in the summer of 1989. The most common surface water use conflicts identified by the Sheriffs Department include sailboat and motorboat conflicts and complaints over the noise and attitude ofjet Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �- I 8-7 skiers. Conflicts between sailboats and motorboats are most common on Saturday. waterfront. but there are few public acces.s sites and, except for Shultz Park, these provide little space for transient parking. EXISTING !AND USE Existing land use ls described in detail in Chapter 5. All land uses along the waterfront are oriented to the water. The bulk of the waterfront in the Township from the channel to the City ls developed as single family residential. The City and Village waterfronts are predominantly residential and marina. The balance of the waterfront, which lies in the Township, is in a natural state with some areas of residential development (such as along Silver Lake) . Many commercial establishments (mostly motels and restaurants) are also located here. Except for the Broward Boat Company near the channel, there are no industrial activities along the waterfront. A number of small parks are located along the CONFLICTS/PROBLEMS At an interj urisdictional meeting on water front issues on November 1986, ftve key issues were identified: • high water and its impacts • development and acquisition of public lands along the waterfront: • limiting the intensity of shoreline development; • preserving the scenic character of the shoreline environment retaining visual access to, of the • surface water use conflicts. Each of these remain important issues as shown in the 1988 Public Opinion Survey. FIGURE 8.1 LINKAGE PLAN Jrt R-2 R-2 R-1 \(commercial) ~wetland · AG. '" Source: Conaerve Oakland County'• Natural Resources: A Manual for Planning 6: Implementation, Department of Public Works, Oakland County, MI. September 1980. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-8 High Water When Great Lakes water levels are high , erosion along the Lake Michigan shoreline increases. The impacts of erosion are clear along Lakeshore Drive, where part of the road has been washed away. Many high value homes will be threatened by additional erosion in this area. Erosion along the River and Lake Kalamazoo also increases with higher Lake Michigan water levels. Many bulkheads and similar shore protection devices were installed to minim1ze the effects of the most recent high water level. Raising some of the land and structures would be necessary iflake levels remained high for lengthy periods. On the positive side, the south shore of Lake Kalamazoo becomes more attractive to marina development when water levels are high since it is very shallow in this area. Likewise, when water levels are below average, some existing dockage is unusable. Fluctuating lake levels are part of a natural system. The costs and implications of trying to artificially manage the entire Great Lakes Basin to maintain even Lake levels is not known, but waterfront land use decisions in the trt-community area should be made based on the assumption that Lake Michigan water levels cannot be artificially maintained. Acquisition and Development of Public Lands Along the Waterfront Two types of public lands are needed along the waterfront. One is parkland/ open space and the other is a public marina. Existing open space along the waterfront should be preserved (see Map 8.5) . Several street ends provide needed relief from structures along the shoreline. These public open spaces are generally well managed, and efforts should be initiated to ensure that they are not lost. Existing parks along the shoreline should also be linked together, and with other inland parks, by pedestrian and bicycle paths whenever the opportunity arises (see Figure 8 .1) . The lack of parkland along the Lake Michigan shoreline is most acute for Township residents, and somewhat less severe for Village residents. Outside of purchasing and developing new land for parks, the tri-communities should consider establishing a separate park and recreation authority responsible for maintaining all parks presently owned by the three communities. The benefit would be providing access to Oval Beach by Village and Township residents and spreading the fiscal responsibility for main- tenance across more taxpayers. This would also make it more feasible to acquire additional park space as needed. Because residents of three jurisdictions would benefit. grant requests would probably be more favorably reviewed. Public marina space is also needed as there are only three public access sites along Lake Kalamazoo and the River presently, and two are too far inland for most daily boaters. The third is a street end in Saugatuck and has no adjacent parking. Private marinas provide transient berthing opportunities, but there is considerable demand for more. By having a facility to attract more transient boaters. the three communities would be gaining additional tourist income. The three most logical places for such a facility are: 1) immediately adjacent to the Blue Star Highway bridge in Douglas and extending to the existing launch facility adjacent to the Kewatin; 2) converting the Center Street maintenance facility in Douglas to a public marina; 3) at some distant time (or if the opportunity arose) by replacing the Rich Products office building in Saugatuck with a public marina and accompanying parking. Alternatively. if adjacent parking could be secured, the street end next to Gleason's in Saugatuck could be a good public access point. While the public opinion survey did not reflect overwhelming support for a public marina, there appears to be demand for such a facility from persons outside the trt-community area. Its long term economic benefits may well justify its cost. especially if state or federal funds could be secured to help pay for it. Limiting the Intensity of Development The primary future development of waterfront lands in the City will be redevelopment of existing parcels. In the Village it will focus on further development along the South Shore of Lake Kalamazoo. In both areas it will be critical that new development is neither so dense, nor so high as to block existing public views of the waterfront or further --Wall" the Lake with structures. Recommendations to prevent this are included in Chapter 10. It will be critical that all three communities agree to a common approach to waterfront development. embody that in land use plans, and then implement those plans. To some extent, uniform densities, setbacks, and height regulations will be valuable, especially around Lake Kalamazoo. Additional development around Silver Lake needs to remain at a very low density in keeping Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-9 with the septic limitations of the land and the limited recreational value of this shallow waterbody. The eastern end of the Kalamazoo River should likewise receive little new development in keeping with its Natural River designation. Retaining Visual Access, Aesthetics and the Character of the Area As has been emphasized throughout this Plan, the natural beauty of the waterfront has much to do with the attraction of the tri-community area. Local development regulations should be reviewed and revised if necessary, to insure that new development complements, rather than detracts from this natural beauty. Old vessels should not be permitted to lie beached along the shoreline, because this also detracts from the beauty and character of the waterfront. The Kewatin should only be retained if its exterior remains in a good state of repair or if it is restored as an historic landmark. Several vistas have public values that deserve protection. These include the entry into and exit from Lake Michigan on the Kalamazoo River, the view from Mount Baldhead, the view of Kalamazoo Lake from both ends, and approaches to the Kalamazoo River Bridge. The public opinion survey strongly supports the provision of additional open space along Lake Kalamazoo and the Kalamazoo River and demonstrates that the primary use of the area's water bodies is viewing. Yet, recent development pressures have led to overbuilding of condominiums along the waterfront, shutting off all public viewing of the lake from existing rights-of-way. Any future development along the channel should be set back sufficiently to maintain the broad open views that are presented to boat travelers entering or leaving the Kalamazoo River. The view from the top of Mount Baldhead should be improved by careful selective pruning of dead or dying trees blocking good views of Saugatuck and Lake Kalamazoo. The curve going northbound on Blue Star Highway in Douglas just before crossing the bridge is the only good panorama of Kalamazoo Lake. A public turnoff, the acquisition of a scenic easement, or the concentration of new development on the western portion of those undeveloped lands should be initiated to protect that important view. In addition, the land adjacent to the west side of the bridge in Douglas should be selectively pruned to improve the view to travelers crossing the bridge (northbound) until a public marina could be established there. Surface Water Use Corifllcts Resolution of surface water use conflicts will require more planning and a uniform approach to regulation. Most important is establishing the carrying capacity of Lake Kalamazoo and the River to the channel mouth. Carrying capacity refers to the physical capacity and intrinsic suitability of lands (and water) to absorb and support various types of development (or use). Such an analysis is typically performed by an inventory of existing surface water use during weekdays and peak weekends. Data is then examined in terms of the size of the waterbody and its capacity to assimilate various mixes of use. Such an analysis would probably reveal some, but not much excess capacity for new boat slips, because any number of boaters can access Kalamazoo Lake from Lake Michigan. Without an analysis of carrying capacity, the amount of new boat slip development and related surface water use conflicts are difficult to evaluate. Some time or surface zoning could be established in conjunction with the DNR if desired. For example, water skiing, jet skiing, fishing, sailing, etc, could be limited to particular parts of Lake Kalamazoo or Silver Lake or to particular times of the day. Another option could be a harbor patrol paid for by all three governmental units. More information is necessary to establish the need for regulation. If surface water use is regulated, each unit of government would need to agree to a common regulatory approach. Surface water use conflicts will grow more acute on Lake Kalamazoo if existing dockage is extended much further into the Lake. Such extensions should not be permitted as the surface area available for various recreational uses will be too drastically reduced. Existing no-wake zones should also be more rigorously enforced. RECOMMENDATIONS TO GUIDE FUI'URE USE In seeking to balance economic development with environmental protection, the concept of carrying capacity should be a major consideration. If the carrying capacity ofland or water is exceeded, then activities cannot be undertaken without unacceptable impacts on users, the environment, or both. Impacts can include increased trip times. decreased safety, pollution, loss of open space, and many other considerations. The key is prevention of overuse by limiting intensity of use on adjoining lands and regulating surface water use. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �8-10 Environmental protection must be a leading principle in making future land use decisions along the waterfront. Environmentally sensitive areas such as sand dunes, wetlands, high risk erosion areas, floodplains, and key woodlands should be protected from unnecessary destruction. Development should complement rather than destroy these areas and their . values. By doing so the environmental quality of the air and water will be improved, wildlife habitat will be preserved, scenic values will be protected, and the character of the area will be maintained. Some new intensive shoreline development will be desirable and necessary, but the balance should not be disproportionately on the side of new tax base as it has been for the past decade. Opportunities to enhance the waterfront should be seized. Parks and open spaces should eventually be linked with other public places. Additional access to the waterfront should be acquired when available , and existing access via street ends and parks should not be lost through neglect or inaction. A new public marina should be constructed if resources are available and the cost could be spread among local citizens and other users (such as through grants or user fees) . Visual access from public thoroughfares and walkways should be maintained in all new waterfront development. Protection mechanisms. like the Natural River designation, should be recognized for the ancillary benefits they bring to the community. A local "Friends of the River" organization could be instituted to annually adopt and clean up the shoreline to remove floating debris, other waste, and downed timber that become lodged there. A special effort to maintain the character of Lakeshore Drive along the Lake Michigan shoreline should also be initiated. A comprehensive storrnwater management plan and wetlands protection plan should be instituted as part of a broad water quality protection program that is based on the small watersheds that feed the Kalamazoo River Basin. The Soil Conservation Service should be asked to assist in preparing nonpoint pollution guidelines to help guide farmers in land management practices that help keep the River clean. spectjurisdiction boundaries. Their future quality and desirability depends on all governmental units through which they flow playing an active and supportive role in protecting and improving water quality. To advance this goal, the Jointly appointed waterfront committee should be reinstituted or its responsibilities shifted to the Joint Planning Committee which helped fashion this Plan. NEED FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION Each of these recommendations requires a strong degree of intergovernmental cooperation. Watercourses, like the environment, do not re- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �- I N A Tri-Community MAPS.1 WATERSHEDS Kalamazoo River Basin Boundary [2] Creeks & Drains Small Watershed Areas: 1) Douglas 2) Tannery Creek 3) Peach Orchard Creek 4) Kalamazoo/Morrison Bayou 5) Ash Drain 6) Silver Lake Creek 7) Goshorn Creek 8) "Cemetery" Creek 9) River Bluff-Indian Creek 10)Saugatuck August 1989 DATA SOURCE :Allegan County Drain Commission Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing , Ml �N A / MAP8.2 NO-WAKE ■ No-Wake Area If]] Additional No-wake Area During Periods Of High Water August 1989 DATA SOURCE: Tri-Community Wa1Bf'front Committee Saugatuck Township ~ ~ Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lanaing, Ml __......_...,.T P SCP GMue;;;::.; m "' -- - - · ....,.,,.. �56 rz· JI 30 32 J7 JI JJ 29 J• 37 JO " J7 30 JJ ,. 29 ,. 29 c::, \) 24 27 ;: 21 JI 26 0 MICHIGAN k•I• l, IS.000 IOUNOINOS IN ,,i n:rr ,.:. ... I/ D MAP 8.3 SAUGATUCK HARBOR �MAP 8.4 MARINAS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21 . 22. 23. 24. Saugatuck Township Ship & Shore MoteVBoatel (0) East Shore Harbor Club (64) Pointe Pleasant Yacht Club (14) Sergeant Marina (63) Tower Marina (322) Skippers Cove (12) Water Side Condo (12) Naughtins Marina (37) Saugatuck Yacht Club (16) Deep Harbor Deve, Inc. (46) South Side Marina (24) Casa Loma (11) Gleasons Marina (9) Saugatuck Yacht Co. (81) Walkers Landing (22) Windjammer Condo Association ( 12) Schippas Marina (10) Singapore Yacht Club (50) West Shore Marine Inc. (57) Bridges Of Saugatuck (8) Coral Gables (50)) V & L Properties (10) Back Bay Marina (12) Southside Marina (24) Total Number Of Permitted Marina Boat Slips lnArea ........ .966 August 1989 DATA SOURCE :DNR Planning & Zoning Center, Inc, Lansing, Ml �I I I �N A MAPS.5 STREETENDS/ PARKS G Street/Road Ends [!] PubHc Access 0 Saugatuck Township Parks . 1) Oval Beach 2) Mount Balc:lhead 3) Chain Link Ferry 4) Douglas Beach Auguat1989 Planning & Zoning Center lne, Lansing, Ml �N A See Preceding Map For Information Regarding This Area MAP 8.5 A STREET ENDS/ PARKS ~ Street/Road Ends @] Public Access August 1989 0 Saugatuck Township Parks 1) Shultz Park 2) River Bluff Park 3) Sundown Park Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �9-1 Chapter9 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS G rowth and development trends reflect past settlement patterns in a community and provide a basis for estimating future development patterns. Growth rates are one aspect of change. These show which areas are growing at a faster rate. Residential construction permits show where most of this residential development is talcing place and provide insight into residential preferences. Land subdivision trends show the rate at which small lots are created. Rapid land subdivision caives up agricultural land and other open spaces for residential use and thus permanently transforms the rural character of an area. Inefficient land subdivision takes large amounts of potentially developable land out of use as long "bowling alley" lots or "flag" lots are created. Population trends may be used to project future population, which is used to estimate future land use needs and settlement patterns in a community. And finally, a "build out" scenario may be created based upon the vacant or buildable sites in an area to get an idea what the area might look like if it were developed according to current zoning and use requirements. A more complete discussion of these issues is included below. GROWl'H RATES During the past decade, the Township's population growth rate hit 4QOA>, up from only 11 % between 1960 and 1970. The growth rate in the Village declined from 35% to 17% over the same period, and the City went from a 19% growth rate in the 60's to only 6% in the 70's (see Table 9.1). TABLE 9.1 RATE OF POPULATION CHANGE COMMUNI1Y Saugatuck Saugatuck 1\vp. Douglas AREAWIDE 1950-60 1960-70 1970-80 20% 34% 35% 29% 10% 11% 35% 16% 6% 40% 17% 22% The Township's large supply of land has translated into high growth rates. The Township is expected to continue to capture most of the region's residential growth. The Village also continues to have a high rate of growt • and while this has declined from the higher growth rates experienced during the past two decades, it is increasing again in this decade. The City's slower growth rate is due in part to a shrinking supply of vacant or developable land and in part to a higher proportion of seasonal residents and elderly in small households. In terms of actual numbers, the areawide population nearly doubled between 1950 and 1980, when it reached a total of 3,780 people. The Township gained over half of these new residents. RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION Building permit data reveal development trends in each community since 1980. Since 1970 about 280 single family homes have been constructed in the Township and only 8 multiple family units. This residential development has been focused in three areas: along Lakeshore Drive; in the area west of 1-96, north of 134th Street. and east of 64th Street; and around Silver Lake. Aside from new construction, the number of additions, extensions, and other improvements was also high. See Map 9. 1. LAND SUBDIVISION TRENDS Land subdMsion trends in the area are startling. Between 1954 and 1984, the number of lots in Saugatuck Township increased by nearly 60%, as large rural or agricultural parcels were caived into smaller lots. In 1954 the majority oflots were 20 acres or more, while in 1984 most lots fell into the 1-4 acre category (see Figure 9.1). Rapid subdivision of the Township's large rural parcels was stimulated by increasing demand for scenic rural lMng, along with the decreasing supply of land in the City which created an "overflow" effect. If the rapid subdivision of rural land continues unchecked, it will threaten the viability of the Township's agricultural base and increases demand for public Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �est rate of in-migration in the state. Many of these tmrnigrants are retirees. Figure 9.2 reveals migration patterns of senior citizens in the region over the past three decades. It reveals an explosion of retiree migration into Allegan County since 1970. Between 1980 and 1985, the rate of retiree migration into the County continued to climb, reaching 2.17 compared to -0.26 for the state as a whole. FIGURE9.l SUBDIVISION TRENDS CHANGES FROM 1954 TO 1964 p E R ~ C o E u N s A T N A D G s POPULATION PROJECTIONS E 70+ ~ 18-311 10- 15 5-g Future population for the Township was projected based on the 1970 to 1980 population trend, rather than long term trends, due to the recent changes in the rate of population growth described above. A composite straight-line trend can be projected by applying logarithms to determine the ratio of change based on the 1970 to 1980 trend. Table 9.2 illustrates these results for each jurisdiction in the trt-community area. Thus if current trends continue, the area can expect about 1800 more people in 2010 than in 1980. Sixty-four percent of this growth is expected to occur in the Township, with 21 % in the Village, and 15% in the City. Due to its greater availability ofland, the Village will even- 2--4 1 OR LESS LOT SIZE (ACRES) services, especially sewer and water. Unfortunately, the areas involved and the lots created are so large that it will not be cost effective to provide any new public services in these areas for many years. MIGRATION Migration is a strong component of population growth throughout the County. Allegan County experienced net in-migration of 3.03% between 1983 and 1987-the eighteenth high- FIGURE 9.2 KENT -767 54 . -1148 . so1 II -713 • 1412 I TTAWAI RETIREE MIGRATION TRENDS I SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN 0 -247 -457 150 AUEGAN. l'-'.RRY -173 · I 12 -5 121 l EATON · -158 I - _142 1040 · 132 · 804 ·-·--r-..l..._._i_. ___ Net Migration of The Population 65+ 1950-60 1960-70 1970-80 VAN IUREN I KALAMAZOO 1' · +· J' ~ -r I -13 284 1039 I- j I -447 -1651 • -1729 1 ,sr:I • CALHOU_N -1196 -1131 -592 • I Wl · ,LWPH..,· IRANCH . , 130 . s6 - r49 44 - 5 1 85 ,· -33 -125 .-• 390 578 I 109 580 Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan -181 �9-3 tually overtake the City in terms of overall population growth, as seen in Figure 9.3. FIGURE 9.3 POPULATION TREND SAUGATUCK TWP . PROJECTED LAND USE NEEDS: 2010 3.0 To determine the impact of this population growth on residential land use, future population is translated into new households. This is done by applying the average household size for each community to the projected population in 2010 and then subtracting 1980 households. The result is an estimated 44 7 new households in the Township by 2010. These results are shown in Table 9.3 Future demand for land by these new households may be estimated by looking at land subdivision trends and current settlement patterns or zoned densities. Based on this information, we can expect most of the Township's residential development to fall into the low density category (2 units per acre). Thus, over half of these 44 7 new households will settle in low density residential areas, translating into the conversion of 205 acres of land. Thirteen acres would be transformed into medium density residential use, and about 10 acres would be developed at higher densities as apartments of clustered units. Tables 9.4 to 9.6 show this projection of current trends. p 0 p T H LJ 0 L u A! TN I o 0 N - lWP.ONLY = DOUGLAS =- SAUGATUCK 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 s 0.5 0.0 1950 1960 1980 1970 1990 2000 2010 YEAR BUILD our SCENARIO The projections shown above are only estimates based on current trends. Yet any number of events could alter these trends. For example, provision of sewer and water service in to the Township could intensify the type, density, and rate of growth that occurs there. The location of a new industry could attract new families into the area. And the region's attraction as a center for tourism could continue to grow, fostering greater in-migration of retirees and others searching for an alternative lifestyle. TABLE9.2 PROJECTED POPULATION 1970-1980 TREND COMMUNTIY Saugatuck Saugatuck Township Douglas AREAWIDE 1970 1980 1,022 1,254 813 3,089 1,079 1,753 948 3,780 1990 1,163 2,074 1,061 4,298 2000 2010 1,254 2,454 1,187 4,895 1,352 2,904 1,328 5,584 TABLE9.3 PROJECTED NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS COMMUNTIY Saugatuck Saugatuck Township Douglas AREAWIDE POP. 2010 1,352 2,904 1,328 5,584 HH SIZE # HHs 1980 HHs NEWHHs 2 .00 2.69 2.44 676 1,080 544 2,300 537 633 391 1,561 139 447 153 739 Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �9-4 TABLE 9.5 NEW HOUSEHOLDS BY DENSITY TYPE TABLE9.4 PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION BY DENSITY TYPE COMMUNITY LOW Saugatuck Twp. 800/o Saugatuck 400/o Douglas 5% MEDIUM HIGH 100/o 40% 100/o 200/o 700/o 25% HOUSEHOLDS MED. HIGH TOTAL LOW COMMUNITY Saugatuck Douglas Sa~atuck 1\vp. AREAWIDE 56 8 358 421 28 38 45 111 56 107 45 207 139 153 447 739 Totals are based on unrounded figures. TABLE 9.6 FUTURE RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS COMMUNITY LOW TABLE9.7 AVAILABLE ACREAGE BY LAND USE TYPE ACREAGE• MED. HIGH TOTAL Saugatuck Douglas Saugatuck 24 4 205 14 26 13 3 4 10 41 34 228 AREAWIDE 234 53 17 303 ACREAGE COMM. IND. COMMUNITY Saugatuck Douglas Sal.JS2:atuck1\vp. Tar.AL ACRES 3 33 155 191 0 49 22 71 RES. 135 197 5,950 6,282 •times 1.25 (20¾ allowance for rights-of-way) Totals are based on unrounded figures. TABLE 9.8 POPULATION 2010: BUTI.,D OUT SCENARIO UNDER ZONING IN EFFECT COMMUNITY Saugatuck Douglas Saugatuck1\vp. AREAWIDE ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLDS 330 1,139 16,413 17,882 AVERAGE HH SIZE 2.00 2 .44 2.69 If the area were developed to its full capacity. what would it look like? This exercise, called a "build out" scenario, provides a rough estimate of the buildable capacity of the Township. Acres were estimated based on vacant or developable land (not including existing agricultural areas) in the Township by zoned use and density /minimum lot size. These results are shown in Table 9.7. This information can be translated into a population estimate by first dividing the developable acres by the minimum lot size in that zoning district to determine the number of households which could occupy the parcel(s). This reveals the Township's capacity for about 16,413 new households. The new households are then multiplied by the average household ADDITIONAL POPUIATION PRESENT POPUIATION 660 2,779 44,151 47,590 1,079 948 1,753 3,780 TOTAL POPUIATION 1,739 3,727 45,904 51,370 size for that community to derive a population estimate. Thus, under a build out scenario, the Township could accommodate about 4 7. 590 new residents. bringing the total tri-community area population to over 50,000 people (see Table 9.8). If land currently being farmed were added to these estimates, the total would be considerably higher. POLICY IMPLICATIONS If development were to proceed under existing zoning, as reflected in the build out scenario, then the Township would be transformed into a suburban enclave, complete with a long commercial strip from one end of Blue Star Highway to another. The agricultural area in the southern part of the Township, which greatly contributes Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan ~ r �9-5 to the economy and scenic rural character of the area, would be gradually carved up for residential use. This is problematic in light of the 1988 Public Opinion Survey which revealed the vast majority of respondents have the following preferences: • maintain the scenic, small town/rural character of the area; • no strip commercial development; • small commercial shopping centers off of major roads; • preserve open space along the waterfront; • protect the environment by prohibiting development of dunes and wetlands; and • additional waterfront condominiums are not needed. Respondents named Blue Star Highway and the freeway interchanges as the preferred locations for future commercial development and 500/2 named fast food restaurants as a high priority for Blue Star Highway. In terms of residential development, the highest proportion of respondents (49.2%) felt that detached single-family homes in the $50$70,000 range are needed now. Fifty-eight percent objected to more mobile homes and 89.5% objected to more waterfront condominiums. Fifty-two percent felt that prime agricultural land in the Township should not be limited exclusively to agricultural production, but 460/2 felt that if residences are allowed to develop on agricultural lands, then the lot size should be limited to reduce negative impacts. These results suggest the need to reevaluate current zoning and regulatory policy. Policies to achieve the public's development objectives are included in Chapter 1, and the Future Land Use Plan in Chapter 10. Regulatory tools, such as zoning, subdivision regulations, and site plan review be amended to insure consistency with this plan and the comprehensive plan of each jurisdiction. I I Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan i �N A 4,000 8,000 12,000 ft • • • • •• • • Scale 1" = 9060 ft • • •• •• .. ,..____ 0 • • •• • • • • •• •• • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • MAP 9.1 Residential Construction Permits Saugatuck Township 0 Residential Construction Permits 1980-1988 August 1989 DATA SOURCE: Saugatuck Township Building Permits Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �10-1 Chapter 10 FUTURE LAND USE G ood land use planning is essential to the future quality of life of the tri-community area. Future land use arrangements are difficult to predict and guide to achieve desired results. A future land use map and plan embodies local land use goals, objectives, and policies and provides one land use scenario which a community may use as a physical guide. Goals and policies, in tum, provide the policy guide for land use and development decisions. The future land use map accompanying this chapter seeks to anticipate community land use needs for 20-30 years (see Map 10.1). These future land use arrangements are based on information in the preceding chapters which includes analyses of existing land use, impacts of area trends, projected future land uses needs if current trends continue, and the relationship of land use activities to the natural resource base. All proposals are intended to be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies presented in Chapter 1 (which were created with substantial public input). Many factors could intervene that would require reevaluation of certain arrangements or the entire plan. For example, if a large mixed use development (e.g. 1000 single family units plus some commercial) were built or if a large single employer would enter the scene (e.g. an auto manufacturing facility) then land use arrangements in this plan must be reexamined. A few key planning and design principles were used to evaluate alternative land use arrangements. With slightly different trends and projections, application of the same principles could lead to different conclusions and different land use arrangements. However, these differences would be related to the amount of particular land uses more than their location or relative relationships to adjoining uses. Likewise, there are many areas in which alternative land use arrangements would be satisfactory providing they remained in keeping with these basic planning principles. Consequently, it is crucial that this plan be regularly reviewed and updated at least once each five years to insure its continued relevance in planning for future land use needs. PLANNING AND DESIGN PRINCIPLES Future land use arrangements were determined based on compatibility with surrounding land uses, natural capacity of the land for particular uses. and necessary infrastructure improvements. These land use arrangements can and should be refined into timed and sequenced development areas, once some key decisions concerning the provision of sewer and water services are made. The following planning and design principles are the technical foundation (or rationale) in support of the proposed land use arrangements graphically depicted on Map 10.1. Map 10.1 depicts generalized land use, which is partially reflected through mapping of zoning districts. The planning principles listed above are implemented primarily through zoning regulations and applied during the site plan review process. These principles are consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies in Chapter 1 and should remain the basis for reviewing any subsequent changes to the proposed Future Land Use Map. These planning principles are: • Protection of Public Health and Safety • Conservation of Natural Resources • Environmental Protection • Minimizing Public Service Costs • Efficiency and Convenience in Meeting Land Use Needs • Insuring Compatibility Between Land Uses (Nuisance Prevention) Often a land use decision based on one principle also advances another. For example, prevention of filling or construction on floodplains protects public health and safety, conserves natural resources, protects the environment, and minimizes public service costs (especially for relief efforts). It may also create a valuable buffer or open space between uses and hence help insure compatibility. Protection of Public Health and Sqfety Key situations in which this principle is applied include: • avoiding construction in areas which present natural hazards. In the Township these Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �10-2 include areas too close to the Lake Michigan shoreline at high risk from erosion from coastal wave action; floodplains; saturated soils and wetlands; soils not well suited for support of foundations or safe disposal of septic wastes: and steep slopes. • avoiding construction where an intensive land use activity is not adequately serviced by all weather public access: • avoiding construction in areas with soils contaminated by hazardous and/ or toxic waste. Conservation of Natural Resources Failure to consciously protect nonrenewable natural resources exposes a community to unbridled destruction of those resources which are the foundation for an area's character and quality of life. Conservation of natural resources usually focuses on: land, water, minerals, certain soils (such as prime farmland). wetlands, sand dunes, areas supporting an abundance and diversity of wildlife, and unique forested lands. Areas where the land and the water meet are the most important. Indiscriminate land subdivision frequently reduces the size or alters the shape of land, thereby compromising the resource value and production potential of those lands. This occurs frequently in prime agricultural areas and once lost, these lands may never be reclaimed for food production purposes. If widespread, such losses can dramatically destroy valuable resources and alter the character of an area. These changes also reflect lost opportunities- usually higher public service costs and gradual degradation of an area's tourism potential. Environmental Protection This principle aims at preventing pollution, impairment, or destruction of the environment. While there is considerable overlap with natural resource conservation issues, environmental protection measures focus primarily on air and water quality, and the impact of activities where the water meet s the land. Environmental quality is best preserved by planning for appropriate land use actMties in and near sensitive environmental areas, and managing development accordingly. This usually means insuring conformance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental regulations. Minimizing Public Service Costs Public service costs may be minimized by encouraging new land uses where existing infrastructure is not used to capacity and where expansion can be most economically supplied. This also results in compact settlement patterns. prevents sprawl, and is usually favored by taxpayers because it results in the lowest public service costs both for construction and maintenance. Efficiency and Convenience in Meeting Land Use Needs To be efficient in meeting future land use needs, communities must make better use of existing infrastructure and plan for infrastructure expansion in a manner which keeps the costs low and does not create huge areas where infrastructure will not be fully used for many years. It also means locating future land uses so that travel between activity centers is minimized. For example: building schools. neighborhood commercial activities, day care facilities, fire and police protection, etc. near the residential areas they serve. This saves municipal costs on initial road construction and future maintenance, reduces everyone's gasoline expenditures, and conserves fossil fuel supplies for future use . Insuring Compatibility Between Land Uses A central objective of land use planning is to locate future land uses so that they are compatible with one another. This prevents future nuisance situations between adjacent land uses, such as loud sounds, ground vibrations, dust, bright lights, restricted air flow, shadows, odors, traffic, and similarimpacts.Afewobvious examples of incompatible land uses include factories, drive-in establishments. or auto repair facilities adjacent to single family homes. With proper planning, land uses can be tiered to buffer impacts and orderly development can occur. Examples include: commercial service establishments on highway frontage with backlot wholesale, storage, or office uses abutting a residential area: or single family residential uses adjacent to park and recreation areas. DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION AREAS The future land use map for the Township was prepared by first identifying conservation areas and then examining the suitability of remaining lands for various development pur- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �10-3 poses. Conservation areas fall into two basic types: agricultural resources and other natural resources. Nonrenewable agricultural resources are limited to prime agricultural soils which are uniquely suited for crop production and require the least expenditure of energy and chemicals per acre of crop produced. Prime farmland can not be artificially created and is a rapidly diminishing natural resource. While Michigan has an abundance of farmland, prime farmland is in much shorter supply. Therefore, this plan recommends presexvation of prime agricultural lands for agricultural production purposes. Other natural resource areas were used as the basis for identifying conseivation areas. These include sand dunes, wetlands, floodplains, streams, creeks and drains. the Kalamazoo River. Lake Kalamazoo. and areas at high risk of erosion along Lake Michigan. These areas are proposed for very limited future development in keeping with their fragility and importance in buffering Lake Michigan storms, filtering and storing water during periods of flooding, draining storrnwater from land, providing habitat for a wide range of plants and animals. and for their wide ranging open space values. Destroying these resources would destroy the essential qualities which continue to attract residents and tourists to the area. If conseived and wisely used, waterways and farms will become a natural greenbelt system that continues to enhance the area for years to come. Local zoning ordinances should be amended to include consexvation of these areas. ENTRY POINTS There are four major entry points into Saugatuck Township (See Map 10.2). They are: · • from Lake Michigan on the Kalamazoo River • from 1-196 at Blue Star Highway (north) near 136th Ave. • from 1-196 at M-89 (south end) • from Fennville on M-89 Three entry points oflessor significance are along Lake Shore Drive which is very scenic, and along Old Allegan Road and Riverside Drives (both twisting, hilly and scenic routes). At the present time. only the entry from Lake Michigan provides an aesthetic and inviting entry into the Township. The entry along North Blue Star Highway is especially bad. Incompatible land uses, poorly maintained properties. buildings too close to the road. poorly marked ingress and egress to commercial estab- lishments. poor road conditions. a proliferation of off-premises advertising signs, and an unattractive Saugatuck entry sign and intersection greet the newcomer or tourist. Less severe characteristics surround the southern entry to the Township from 1-196. The remaining entry points don't leave a bad impression, they simply leave no impression at all. The public opinion suxveys also reflected citizen concern about the appearance of properties along Blue Star Highway. If left unresolved, the poor design of these entry ways could have severe consequences for the area's competitiveness with other resort communities. First impressions are very important in the tourism industry. Attractive entryways help entice tourists into the community and leave a positive impression to encourage future visits. The entry points represent the community and should reflect those qualities which make the area special. Fortunately, these design problems are easily overcome, and with only minimum public investment. A special joint effort to develop alternatives for improving the entry points should be initiated. In addition, new land developments in these areas (or changes to existing ones) need to be carefully reviewed to insure that changes enhance (and do not further detract from) the positive image and character that should exist in these areas. RESIDENTIAL Residential use will continue to be the predominant developed land use in the Township. If the Saugatuck School District is to survive with the same breadth of programming and quality it has today, then affordable housing oriented to families must be available. In terms of new construction, affordable housing typically means homes of about 1,000-1,200 square feet, on smaller than average lots, and priced at not more than $70,000. Some public incentives or "write-downs" are typically necessary to alter one of these basic elements. Some housing meeting this definition is being built on large lots in the rural parts of the Township, but not in any significant quantities. A unique opportunity exists for the area communities to take the initiative in providing affordable housing. If plans proceed to acquire the property commonly known as the Jager property for a new water intake plant, part of the parcel could also be used for affordable housing. A design competition or specially hired site plan could be arranged to provide for affordable Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �10-4 housing in this area. The site plan would be required to tier houses by size and type to blend with existing homes along Lake Shore Drive. The treatment plant could be buffered from the residential area and the land costs paid back through development. New residential construction in the Township should be encouraged on soils suitable for basements and with soils capable of safe septic disposal. The best locations for concentrations of such housing are north of Saugatuck and southwest of Douglas. No new residential subdivisions should be developed in the agricultural areas of the Township during the planning period. COMMERCIAL The present commercial zoning of Blue Star south of the Douglas interchange should be eliminated except for small areas representing existing commercial establishments at the freeway and M-89 interchanges. Land use analysis reveals that this commercial land is far in excess of projected need within the planning period. It cannot be cost-effectively serviced with sewer and water, nor can it be adequately controlled with the existing zoning in place. It will, over time, only detract from more appropriate commercial areas in Saugatuck, Douglas and along north Blue Star Highway, and create an extended commercial strip. The commercial zoning of this strip should be eliminated, except as noted above. The area between Saugatuck. the North Blue Star Highway, and I-196 freeway interchange, which is presently developed for a variety of land uses, should be encouraged to develop for highway service uses through more refined zoning regulations than are presently in place. No further warehousing, boat storage or repair. mini-storage, or similar land uses should be permitted along the frontage . Instead, motels, auto service centers, restaurants, and similar highway service establishments should be allowed. General business uses like shoe stores, banks, hardware stores, etc., should be encouraged in the general business area in Douglas and not in interchange areas. Allowing general business establishments to spread results increase the number and length of trips for local residents. causes a corresponding waste of fossil fuels, and increases the potential for individual businesses to fail, since the "critical mass" of general business opportunities in a single location is not present. INDUSTRIAL In the absence of public sewer, water and all weather highway access, there is presently no location in the Township ideally suited for industrial development, except for the area contiguous to existing industrial development on the south side of Douglas. If a large light industrial concern, or industrial office facility were to be interested in a location in the area. the land between I-196 and 63rd St. at the northern freeway interchange should be considered. While there are some limitations to development of that land. it could probably be seived with sewer and water efficiently. However, road improvements would be necessary to bring roads up to all weather standards. If a waterfront location were desired for use by a new industrial concern, it should be considered only if it can be efficiently provided with public services, there is no public loss of access to the waterfront. and the activity is waterfront dependent. Other scattered site locations should not be considered for new industrial activity. Industrial parks are an excellent way to manage future industrial growth. Although they have broad, long-term public benefits (including lower service costs. fewer nuisance impacts, better design. and less environmental impact), industrial parks require a large short-term investment in land and public services. Therefore, it is crucial that studies be conducted to insure that the park could be competitive with others in the area. The Michigan Department of Commerce maintains an inventory of industrial parks through the Statewide Site Network. Only certified industrial parks will be included on this list. and thereby be able to effectively compete for new industries. To be certified, industrial parks must be at least 40 acres. a site plan for the park must be approved, soil borings must be conducted, infrastructure must be completed, utilities must be installed 300 feet into the park. and protective covenants must be established. AGRICULTURE Agriculture is a major contributor to the economy and rural character of the Township . It provides a contrast with developed areas of Saugatuck and Douglas. The south central portion of the Township contains thousands of acres of prime agricultural soils, is characterized by extensive fanning of those soils, and much of this land is enrolled in PA 116, the state Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �10-IS Farmland and Open Space Protection program (see Map 4 . 10). The size of existing farms, the location of these lands away from the hnmediate path of development. the lack of existing or planned sewer and water services. the lack of need to convert prime farmland to nonagricultural use, and the broader public purpose of preserving prime farmland for present and future food production strongly argues in favor of retaining these lands in agricultural production for the entire planning period and beyond. Nonagricultural development should not be permitted in this planning area except for purposes related to agriculture. Land divisions should be controlled to preserve the economic viability of farming, which depends on large parcels. When left unchecked, land division and subdivision encourages residential spot development of agrtcultural lands- a process which carves up agricultural land. eventually transforming the area from agricultural to rural or suburban residential. The adjoining lands on the east and to the north of the prime farmland soils (and south of the river) are also characterized by a large number of farms, although the average lot and farm sizes are smaller. Scattered residential development on large lots is also taking place. Soils are suitable for limited residential development, but agricultural uses should be the primary land use in these areas. No plans are underway to provide sewer and water to this area within the planning period and it would not be cost effective to do so. Consequently, development density should remain low. Another future agricultural use issue goes beyond where agricultural areas should be located and focuses on the character of the agricultural area and its relationship with the regional economy. Agriculture in the Township has prospered primarily through cultivation of fruit, grain crops, hay and alfalfa. and in the case of nurseries. plants. These activities take advantage of the area's prime soils. Efforts are also underway to attract tourists to the larger fruit farms to watch cider-making. eat freshly baked fruit products. and pick fruit- thus capitalizing on economic opportunities presented by the area's tourism industry. These issues raise concern over the compatibility of high density livestock and poultry operations with the character of agricultural areas and the impact of the strong odors on tourismwhich is a central component of the region's economy. High density livestock operations also pose substantial health and safety questions. This is a strong consideration due to the nature of the soils in the agricultural areas and their proximity to extensive wetlands and water bodies. It is also relevant that groundwater is the Township's sole source of potable water in this area, and elsewhere. Based on these economic and environmental considerations, this planning area is not an appropriate location for high density livestock operations. Other. more appropriate sites for these operations exist in the surrounding region and elsewhere in Allegan County- where such operations have been welcomed and continue to prosper. Defining High Density Livestock Operations The policy of discouraging high density livestock operations in the Township does not apply to all livestock operations. On the contrary, raising livestock is an integral part of many agricultural businesses. is compatible with the Township's agricultural character, and does not detract from tourism opportunities. Thus, the scale at which a livestock operation may be considered "high density" must be defined. High density livestock operations may be defined based on existing state and federal regulatory policy. Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines establish when a livestock operation reaches a certain density and intensity that it should be regulated for environmental protection. The Department of Natural Resources adopted EPA's size guidelines to determine when a livestock operation must obtain a discharge permit. Under this definition, the permitting process begins for livestock producers with 1,000 animal units or more. One thousand animal units equals: 1,000 slaughter or feed cattle; 700 mature dairy cattle (whether milked or dry) : 2,500 swine each weighing 55 pounds or more; 500 horses; 10,000 sheep or lambs; 55,000 turkeys; 100,000 laying hens or broilers (if the facility has a continuous overflow watering) ; 30,000 laying hens or broilers (if the facility has a liquid manure system); or 5,000 ducks. [These guidelines were adopted by the DNR from the Federal Register, Title 40, "Protection of the Environment", Chapter 1, Environmental Protection Agency.) A supplementary definition which was set by the Department of Agriculture and also based Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �10-6 on EPA guidelines, describes high density livestock operations as: Those operations that house or confine livestock or poultry in such a manner that any or all of the following apply: a. Animals are confined or retained in a lot or building or combination of lots and buildings for a total of 45 days or more in any 12 month period. The confinement or retention area accumulates manure that has to be removed. b. A sustained ground cover (crops, vegetation, forage growth or post haroest residues) is unable to be maintained during the normal growing season over that portion of the lot or facility where the animals are housed, confined, or retained. c. Notwithstanding any provisions of this definition, any livestock or poultry operation may be designated as a High Density livestock or Poultry Operation where it is determined by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to be a contributor of pollution to the waters of the state. Exception: if an operation discharges only in the event of a 25 year, 24 hour storm event. Although not included in the Department of Agriculture's (DOA) formal administrative guidelines, this supplementary definition embodies EPA guidelines and was drafted and recommended by DOA's Environmental Division. These definitions and guidelines will be used by the Township to define high density livestock operations for the purposes of regulation and review. FUTURE LAND USE BY AREA Following are brief geographic descriptions of future land use. These descriptions use the same planning areas depicted on Map 5.4. Lake Shore Area This area should continue to be used for low density single family homes along the lakeshore in keeping with the size and quality of homes presently there. Additional single family homes in subdivisions can be compatibly developed behind existing homes provided public sewer and water are available. An effort should be made to maintain existing densities or tier the density of new homes so that no sudden density change occurs. Density should increase in the area closest to Blue Star Highway to take advantage of economical expansion of public utilities and improved access. The wooded areas along 1-196 should be maintained to retain the aesthetic and noise buffering benefits. Southern Agricultural Area The area west of Blue Star highway, north of M-89 and generally south of 128th Avenue is the area which contains the best agricultural soils and the largest farms. This area has the potential to remain economically viable for agricultural purposes for decades and should be encouraged to do so. The existing trend to divide these lands into smaller parcels for use by nonfarm residents should be abated, as that will slowly but surely erode agricultural uses in the area. The existing wning provisions encouraging single wide mobile homes to locate in this area should be reexamined, not because the homes are manufactured (as opposed to site constructed) but because they represent nonfarm residences in a viable agricultural area. The Township should consider adopting one of several restrictive agricultural wning options such as "exclusive agricultural wning" or "quarter-quarter" zoning to protect the existing investment in agriculture in this area. Intensive livestock operations should be discouraged. Additional tourist-agricultural activities similar to those at Crane's orchards and u-pick bluebeny operations should be encouraged. Farmers should be informed of the benefits of participation in PA 116, the Michigan Farmland & Open Space Preseivation Program. The balance of the land in this southern third of the Township is currently a mix of agricultural and residential uses. Where the land is not suited for agricultural and residential uses. Where the land is not suited for agriculture, additional residential development at low density is appropriate. In the distant future, the areas closest to Douglas may be suited for subdivision development provided that sewer and water are available. No additional subdivisions (like Pepper Brooke) should be permitted in this area. The commercial strip zoning along Blue Star Highway south of the Douglas interchange should be eliminated except for the two existing commercial areas already in existence at each interchange. Kalamazoo River Area The area north of Riverside Road and south of the Kalamazoo River, and the area south of Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �10-7 roughly the north border of Sections 14 and 15 (north of the Kalamazoo River) should receive limited development that is carefully sited on large lots to avoid wetland destruction. No lots should be allowed to be established that are unbuildable under existing DNR or Army Corps of Engineers wetland regulations and local zoning. Much of the development on the north side of Silver Lake is proceeding on long narrow lots that under existing zoning and the state Subdivision Control Act can be redivided every 10 years into 4 additional lots. This can result in unplanned subdivisions over time with a menagerie of private access roads and serious problems for emergency vehicles. Zoning regulations in this area should be reexamined to insure they are not unwittingly creating a serious future problem. This entire area should be managed with conservation of the natural environment the preeminent goal and private construction permitted only to the extent that it does not significantly encroach thereon. Low intensity recreation activities are appropriate. Northeast Area Steep slopes, thick forests, significant wetlands and the lack of any public services make this area unsuited for any intensive development except possibly as follows. If sewer and water were to become available along Old Allegan Road, then some residential subdivision on the south side would be appropriate. The north side should probably also develop this way. but existing nonresidential uses and the sanitary sewer treatment plant, could rationally be used to justify limited nonresidential development. provided the road were either improved to all season standards or the development did not have any significant transportation needs. The area south of 136th Ave. , west of 63rd St. and east of I-196 may be appropriate for limited light industrial or a large office complex if necessary sewer and water. and roadway improvements were made. Existing wetlands in this area would have to be respected. North Blue Star Highway This area, bounded by I-196 on the east. Saugatuck and (generally) one lot deep east of the River on the west. is the area most appropriate for intensive future development in the Township. Many of the soils in the area are more suited for basements than in most other parts of the Township. Sanitary sewer and water could be more economically run into this area than elsewhere , and access is good. Septic limitations are also less than in other parts of the Township permitting some development prior to sanitary sewer and water. With the exception of some significant wetland areas that must be respected, this area is well suited for residential development at various densities. Development along Blue Star Highway is currently of a mixed character. The existing zoning regulations should be reviewed to refine permitted uses to those with a highway service orientation (rather than simply allowing any general business use). New wholesale, storage and boat repair facilities should remain off the road frontage. Minimum lot widths should be wide and serious consideration should be given to adoption of parallel access drive or service drive requirements. Parking in the front should be studied and possibly prohibited. This entire area deserves more refined study than this plan is able to undertake at this time. A lot-by-lot corridor analysis and sewer /water expansion plan should be prepared. Special attention should focus on timing and sequencing controls to prevent opening up too much land for intensive development prematurely or other public service needs will not be met. Identification and acquisition of lands for new public facilities, parks and roadway improvements in this area should be undertaken as a part of that analysis. Riverfront-Dunes Area This area is already nearly as intensively developed as it should be. The steep forested east river bank and sand dunes (which are ranked as of "critical" importance by the DNR), dictate low intensity development in this area. The construction of luxury boats is the only intensive land use activity in this area. The sand dune areas on both sides of the channel ought to be acquired and managed by a public body or conservancy agency. The area north of the channel should logically be connected to the existing Saugatuck Dunes State Park and the area south of the channel should be added to the parkland owned by the City of Saugatuck. A Joint management entity could be created. In the alternative, residential development at a density no greater than one unit per 5- 10 acres. should be established. Existing duneland regulations must be modified to conform with new state requirements. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �Saugatuck Township MAP 10.1 FUTURE LAND USE ~ Agricultural I&; Ill Rural Residential ■ Highway Commercial ffilill . Institutional ,,.,,,.,,, .,,,,,,,, Low Density Residential ,,,, ,.,,. ,,,,,,,,, Conservation/Recreation !!!!!!!: ■ Medium Density Residential ~ Floodplain/Wetland ■ Mixed Residential HH Industrial ■ City Center Commercial D Water August 1989 Planning & Zoning Center, Inc, Lansing, Ml �N A 0 4,000 8,000 Scale 1" = 9060 ft Saugatuck Township FUTURE LAND USE �"I + N A .. ·· ..... ,. ~···· , . .. ,. , ..... . 0 4,000 ,..0 8,000 AVC, Scale 1" = 9060 ft . ._ _ _I A - - - - ~ • !l% ~ ,a 2.8 l G 1.......... • r' ..... ,♦ 1 ! ~ taeTH 25 27 •h-0••1 AVE , ,, ,,.• J 0 '· Q, ' ··: 34\ 53 ,. ......-.......... , . •., l, TlM.RlfW •,, .•· ,r MAP 10.2 MAJOR ENTRY POINTS I♦ I j 35 38 4 /·' ,' i ,. . -~• -' lof-89 SAUGATUCK TWP. Saugatuck Township Entry Points August 1989 DATA SOURCE: Planning & Zoning Center Inc, Lansing, Ml �I. 11-1 Chapter 11 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION B ~ y itself this plan has no legal regulatory force but rather, serves as a foundation upon which regulatory measures are based. The two primary land use regulatory documents which are also the principal means of implementation of this plan, are the wrung ordinance and subdivision control regulations. These regulatory instruments are described in the next chapter. However, effective integration of this Plan will also require an ongoing commitment to intergovernmental cooperation with Douglas and Saugatuck. In particular, the Joint Plan prepared concurrently with this one should be implemented as steadfastly and also kept current with comprehensive reviews at least once each five years. It will also be very important to make every effort to keep Saugatuck, Douglas, Laketown Township, Manlius Township, and Ganges Township officials informed of proposed changes to this Plan or any of its regulatory instruments (such as zoning) and to encourage their input prior to such a change being made. Likewise, those jurisdictions should be encouraged to reciprocate with proposals and an opportunity for review by Saugatuck Township prior to action on any change which may impact on the Township. A copy of this Plan and any amendments to it will be filed with the clerk of each of these jurisdictions, as well as with the County Clerk, the County Planning Commission, the County Economic Growth Alliance, the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, and Department of Natural Resources. Ongoing efforts to consolidate additional public services such as police and possibly public works should be continued where mutually beneficial. Likewise, efforts to fully include the Township as a partner in the Kalamazoo Lake Sewer and Water Authority should be aggressively pursued as should the conversion of the authority into a more independent authority. This would help take it outside of political influence in day-to-day administration. Likewise, at some point, additional consideration should be given to consolidation of all governmental services into a single unit of government. A formal analysis of costs and benefits of consolidation may reveal the benefit of this alternative. See the additional thoughts in this regard in Chapter 12. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan ��12-1 Chapter 12 STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION PRIMARY IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS Relationship to Zoning The Township has a zoning ordinance adopted pursuant to the Township Rural Zoning Act, PA 184 of 1943. The intent of this ordinance is to regulate the use of land to provide for orderly growth and development and allow the integration of land uses without creating nuisances. The zoning ordinance defines land use districts and regulates height, bulk, use, area of lot to be covered, and open space to be preserved within each district. Because the Zoning Enabling Act requires the zoning ordinance be based upon the analysis contained in the Plan prepared by the Planning Commission to guide future land use decisions, the zoning ordinance should be revised to reflect this Plan's new goals, policies, and future land use proposals. However, the zoning district map and the future land use map (10.1) will not be identical. The zoning map typically reflects existing land use (where it is desirable to continue it) and small areas zoned for more intensive use then at present. The future land use map reflects land use arrangements at some future time. (See Section 10.10, p. 245-250, Michigan Zoning&: Planning, 3rd Ed., by Clan Crawford, ICLE, Ann Arbor. 1988). The Township should continue to maintain a formal site plan review process. Through this process applicants. in order to obtain zoning approval, must submit plans which clearly indicate how their development proposals will change and affect both the parcel of land being developed as well as surrounding properties. It is recommended that all commercial and industrial development. as well as all subdivisions. multiple family housing, planned unit developments. and other development requiring more than five (5) parking spaces, undergo site plan review. Numerous suggestions for changing the Township zoning ordinance have been offered throughout this Plan. Key ones include: • elimination of strip commercial zoning between Douglas and M-89 along Blue Star Highway . • adoption of protective agricultural zoning • amendment of the sand dune development requirements • refining the commercial uses permitted along Blue Star Highway. In addition, the zoning ordinance and fee structures should be amended to permit the Township to require developers of new commercial and industrial uses and all proposed multifamily developments to pay into an escrow fund to be used for payment of professional review fees by engineers, planners and attorneys (if necessary) . Unused escrowed dollars would be returned. Relationship To Plans/Zoning In Acijacent Jurisdictions The land use proposals in this plan were carefully prepared with an eye to ensuring compatibility with those of Saugatuck and Douglas and with adjoining townships. Equal care should be taken in the future to seek and receive comment on proposals that are on or near a border from an adjoiningjurisdiction. Failure to do so will only insure future conflict over adjacent land uses, or the provision of new public services. Relationship to Subdivision Regulations Saugatuck Township should consider the adoption of subdivision regulations. The enabling legislation that permits the enactment of such regulations is Public Act 288 of 1967, also known as the Subdivision Control Act of 1967. This Act allows a community to set requirements and design standards for streets. blocks, lots. curbs. sidewalks, open spaces. easements. public utilities, and other associated subdivision improvements. With the implementation of a subdivision ordinance there would be added assurance that development would occur in an orderly manner. In particular. lots which would be unbuildable under ·existing state or local regulations (such as lots which are wholly within a protected wetland) should be prohibited. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �"I 12-2 Relationship to Capital Improvements In its basic form, a CIP is a complete list of all proposed public improvements planned for a 6 year period (the time span may vary). including costs, sources offunding, location, and priority. The CIP outlines the projects that will replace or improve existing facilities, or that will be necessary to serve current and projected land use development within a community. Advanced planning for public works through the use of a CIP assures more effective and economical capital expenditures, as well as the provision of public works in a timely manner. The use of capital improvements programming can be an effective tool for implementing the comprehensive plan by giving priority to those projects which have been identified in the Plan as being most important to the future development and well being of the community. The Township Planning Commission should develop a formal capital improvement program. Land Use & I,ifrastructure Policies A strong effort will be necessary to coordinate future capital improvement decisions and land use policies with adjoining units of government. As a result, proposed policy changes should be circulated for comment early. Likewise. proposed capital improvement programs should be prepared with adequate time for review and comment by the adjoining jurisdictions. Community Participation And Education In order to gain the support, acceptance. and input of area residents for future planning, ongoing efforts should be continued to provide information to them. and involve them in the planning process. The importance of their role in that process should be emphasized. Public acceptance will make the implementation of plans much easier and public input makes plans better and more responsive to local needs. SPECIAL AREA & FINANCING TECHNIQUES Building and Property Maintenance Codes BOCA (Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc.) is the basic building code adopted by the Township to regulate construction methods and materials. The adoption and enforcement of a building code is important in maintaining safe, high quality housing and in minimizing deteriorating housing conditions which contribute to blight within neighborhoods. This should be continued. The Township should consider adopting a basic property maintenance code to regulate blighting influences which result from failure to properly maintain property and structures. A standard code such as the BOCA Basic Housing - Property Maintenance Code or a locally developed code could be adopted. Community Development Block Grant Program The Community Development Block Grant program was authorized under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. The Act had the effect of combining several federal categorical grants such as Urban Renewal and Model Cities into one. Grants under the program must principally benefit low and moderate income families . In Michigan there are two categories of eligible applicants: entitlement and non-entitlement. Entitlement communities. by meeting specific eligibility criteria, are given grant funds outright without having to compete for them . Non-entitlement applicants must compete for grant funds by applying through the Michigan Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program. Saugatuck Township is not an entitlement community. Therefore, it must apply through the Small Cities Program. Operation of the Michigan CDBG Program is the responsibility of the Michigan Department of Commerce with central program administration by the Department's Office of Federal Grant Management (OFGM). The Department of Commerce has entered into an agreement with the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) assigning administrative responsibilities for the housing component of the program. In the housing area, samples of grant eligible activities include: • Home Improvement Programs • Rental Rehabilitation Programs • Weatherization and Energy Conservation • Home Repair for the Elderly • Public Improvement in conjunction with targeted housing activity (limited to 25 percent of grant request) • Housing Related Services • Housing for the Homeless. The maximum grant amount is $250,000. By applying and obtaining a Small Cities Block Grant. the Township alone, or in concert with Douglas and Saugatuck could establish a hous- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �12-3 ing rehabilitation program which would help preseIVe housing throughout the area. The CDBG program also has the following categories of assistance: • Base Industrial Loan program helps financially viable businesses needing financial assistance for growth. modernization, or expansion. Limit $750,000). • Commercial Retail Loan program is for commercial, services. tourism, and other non-residential projects: and minority owned and retail projects in distressed communities. Limit $400,000. • Public Infrastructure Assistance program funds public improvements for the location and expansion of public infrastructures. Limit $750,000. • Downtown Development program provides financing to assist businesses in the redevelopment of the downtown area. Limit $500,000 or $300,000 for infrastructure improvement. • Communities in Transition program funds community development activities. such as public sewer and water systems, parks, bridges, roads, and comprehensive redevelopment planning. Limit $400,000. • Emergency Community Assistance program funds communities experiencing an imminent and urgent threat to public health. safety, or welfare which occurred within 90 days of application. Limit: $500,000. Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) Programs To help preseIVe Michigan's older existing housing, Public Act 130 was passed in 1977 to allow MSHDA to begin a home improvement loan program that offers reduced interest rates to eligible low and moderate income families. MSHDA has created the Home Improvement, Neighborhood Improvement and Community Home Improvement Programs (HIP/NIP/CHIP). To get a loan, residents should apply to one of the banks, savings and loans, or credit unions that take part in HIP /NIP /CHIP. Land and Water Conservation Fund The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant program was authorized by Public Law 88-578, effective January 1, 1965. The purpose of the program is to provide federal funds for acquisition and development of facilities for outdoor recreation. The LWCF Program is administered jointly by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. All political subdivisions of the state. including school districts, are eligible to participate in the program. Eligible projects include: 1. Acquisition of land for outdoor recreation, including additions to existing parks, forest lands, or wildlife areas. 2. Development including, but not limited to such facilities as: picnic areas, beaches, boating access. fishing and hunting facilities, winter sports areas, playgrounds, ballfields, tennis courts. and trails. For development grants, the applicant must have title to the site in question. The minimum grant allowable is $10,000 and the maxi.mum grant allowable is $250,000. For all grant proposals. the amount of the grant cannot exceed more than 50 percent of the total project cost. Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund The Kammer Recreational Land Trust Fund Act of 1976 (Public Act 204) was passed by the Michigan Legislature and signed by the Governor on July 23 1976. This Act created the Michigan Land Trust Fund. The program provided funds for public acquisition ofrecreational lands through the sale of oil, gas. and mineral leases and royalties from oil, gas. and mineral extractions on state lands. On November 6, 1984, Michigan residents cast their vote in favor of Proposal B. This constitutional amendment created the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund (MNRrF). Public Act 101 of 1985, which officially replaced the Michigan Land Trust Fund on October 1, 1985. MNRrF assists state and local governments (including school districts) in acquiring land or rights to land for recreational uses. protecting land because of its environmental importance or scenic beauty, and developing public recreational facilities. Any individual. group. organization. or unit of government may submit a land acquisition proposal, but only units of government may take title to and manage the land. Only units of government may submit development proposals. All proposals for local grants must include a local match of at least 25 percent of the total project cost. There is no minimum or maxi.mum for acquisition projects: for development pro- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �12-4 jects, the minimum funding request is $15,000, the maximum is $375,000. Costal Zone Management Fund The Land & Water Management Division of the Department of Natural Resources offers grants for the purpose of planning, designing, and carrying out low-cost projects to improve Great Lakes shorelines and connecting waterways. The Recreation Bond Fund The Recreation Bond Fund draws from bonds approved by voters in 1988. It calls for money to be spent on DNR and local recreation facilities in four categories: Recreation infrastructure: such as ballfields. tennis courts, beaches and other shoreline areas, boat launches, trails, picnic areas, historic structures, playgrounds, roads, parking, restrooms, etc .. which are not less than 15 years old: Waterfront recreation: such as fishing piers, boardwalks, boat launches. marinas, amphitheaters, landscaping. and shoreline stabilization: Community recreation: playgrounds, sportsfields, community centers, senior centers, fishing sites, and trails for the handicapped: Tourism-enhancing recreation: including campgrounds, boating facilities, historical sites, recreational conversion of abandoned rights-ofway, and fishing access. In its statewide inventory of recreational facilities. the DNRhas identified Allegan County as deficient in a number of recreational facilities. Those relevant for the tri-community area include deficiencies in bicycle trails, fishing access, fishing piers, boat launches, campgrounds, nature areas. hiking trails, nature trails. cross country ski trails, picnic areas, and playgrounds. Allegan County communities with proposals for such projects will get funding priority over similar projects proposed in nondeficient counties. Table 12.1 includes the minimum number or size of selected recreation facilities to be considered toward bond funding. Grant requests may not exceed $750,000 and may not be less than $15,000. Applicants must match bond funds with 25% of the total project cost, not including other state grants or legislative appropriations. Bond money will only be allocated to projects on sites controlled by public agencies. In the tourism category, priorities are given to projects which: create new and innovative recreation-related tourism attractions: involve partnerships between the public and private sector: and projects for which feasibility studies have been conducted which demonstrate local, regional, and statewide economic benefits. (Applications and further information maybe obtained from: DNR. Recreation Services Division, P.O. Box 30028, Lansing, MI 48909 (517) 335-3043.] Recreation Improvement Fund The Recreation Improvement Fund was created from State fuel tax revenue . About $750,000 per year is being targeted for development of non-motorized trails (hiking, bicycle, cross-country, and nature trails) . No application forms or criteria have yet been prepared, but the Recreation Division is encouraging local governments to submit proposals based on local determination of need, location, and financing. Local Facility Development Grants These grants come from a number of funding sources and are available for planning, design, or development of local recreational facilities. The Village of Douglas received $11 ,000 through this program in FY 1987 -88 for TABLE 12.1 RECREATION FACILITIES&: THEIR MINlMUM NUMBER OR SIZE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM POINTS RECREATION FACILI'IY MINIMUM SIZE Bicycle Trail Playground 1 mile 3 pcs. of play equipment 50 feet 5 parking spaces 10 campsites 1/2 mile Swimming Beach Boat Launch Campground Non-motorized Trail Cross-country Ski Hiking Nature Horse Fishing Access 50 feet Fishing Piers 1 Nature Area 10 acres NOTE: Points are not to be awarded separately for cross-country ski trails, nature trails, and hik1ng trails. These trails are to be considered as one facility. Source: DNR, Michigan•• 1987-88 Recreation Ju:tlon Program Guidel>ook, Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �1 12-5 improvement of its boat launch site on Kalamazoo Lake. Land Acquisition Grants Land acquisition grants are available for projects aimed at open space preservation; park creation or expansion; acquisition of environmental resources such as sand dunes, woodlots, or wetland areas; waterfront access sites; and many other land acquisition projects intended for (passive or active) recreational purposes. Watenvays Fund The Waterways Division of the Department of Natural Resources offers grants for the purpose of developing public boating facilities. The emphasis is on creating boat access sites and supporting facilities. Road Funds In 1987, three acts were passed to provide a new source of revenue for cities, villages.and county road commissions. The Transportation Economic Development Fund (Act 231 of 1987, as amended). the Road Construction and Improvement Act (Act 233 of 1987). and the Local Road Improvements and Operation Revenue Act (Act 237 of 1987, as amended). The acts will be in effect for five years, when they will be reviewed for continuation by the legislature. The Local Road Improvements and Operation Revenue Act authorizes county road commissions to impose a vehicle registration fee and use these funds for road improvements. This Act has had little utility, however, because the fee must be approved by a public vote. Michigan voters in 3 counties rejected proposed fees in the November 1988 election. Many counties chose not to even put it on the ballot, fearing the same result. The Road Construction and Improvement Act (Act 233) provides funding through the transportation economic development fund only to rural counties (less than 400,000 population) with a national lakeshore, national park. or in which 34% or more of the land is commercial forest land. Then a portion of the remaining funds are available for use for county, city, and village street improvements. The Transportation Economic Development Fund allocates money for the purposes of bringing county roads to all season highway standards. This is important because heavy trucks can only travel regularly on all season roads. The Transportation Economic Development Act also offers counties, cities, and villages the opportunity to compete for additional funding on special projects with economic development objectives. This competitive grant is awarded by the State Highway Commission. Qualified project categories are listed below: (a) Economic development road projects in any of the following targeted industries: agriculture or food processing; tourism: forestry; high technology research; manufacturing; office centers solely occupied by the owner or not less than 50,000 square feet occupying more than 3 acres of land. (b) Projects that result in the addition of county roads or city or village streets to the state trunk line system. (c) Projects for reducing congestion on county primary and city major streets within urban counties. (d) Projects for development within rural counties on county rural primary roads or major streets within incorporated villages and cities with a population of less than 5,000. PUBLIC WORKS FINANCING In addition to using general fund monies, it is often necessary for a community to bond to raise sufficient funds for implementing substantial public improvements. Bonding offers a method of financing for improvements such as water and sewer lines, street construction. sidewalks, and public parking facilities. Common municipal bond types include: 1. General Obligation Bonds - full faith and credit pledges, the principal amount borrowed plus interest must be repaid from general tax revenues. 2. Revenue Bonds - require that the principal amount borrowed plus interest be repaid through revenues produced from the public works project the bonds were used to finance (often a water or sewer system). 3. SpecialAssessi:nent Bonds - require that the principal amount borrowed plus interest be repaid through special assessments on the property owners in a special assessment district for whatever public purpose the property owners have agreed (by petition or voting) to be assessed. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �"I 12-6 TAX INCENTIVES The state law permitting communities to provide property tax incentives for industrial development is Act 198. This Act allows a community to provide tax abatements as an incentive for industrial firms which want to renovate existing or build new facilities. ADDfflONAL RECOMMENDATIONS Other Planning & Economic Development Assistance The Township Planning Commission should maintain regular communication with the County Planning Commission, with the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, and with the Allegan County Community Growth Alliance. These organizations should be encouraged to continue their County and region-wide planning and economic development efforts and to share relevant matertals with the Township. Likewise a copy of this Plan should be forwarded to each of these agencies when adopted. Pro-Business Alliance One way to strengthen the Township's economic development potential is to establish a pro-business exchange in Township government (or jointly with Douglas and Saugatuck) modelled after the Michigan Bell Business Retention and Expansion Program. (Saugatuck Township is not eligible for participation in the Michigan Bell Business Retention and Expansion program because it is not in a Michigan Bell service area.) A pro-business exchange creates an atmosphere of cooperation which benefits both the business and the community. The role of a pro-business exchange is to assist existing businesses in finding solutions for their problems (Le. inadequate parking, expansion or relocation needs, etc.) and help make new businesses feel welcome. The exchange would work with area businesses to determine their needs and appoint an ombudsman to inform new businesses of local services and contacts. Businesses are often not aware of the services available to them or who to contact for more information. A brochure could be prepared which identifies who to contact for information on zoning, construction. planning, utilities, and taxation. The brochure could also identify permit fees. tax and utility rates, and transportation, delivery, freight, health, and financial services available in the area. Poverty The changing economy. higher health care costs, higher literacy and skills requirements for employees, and inflation have seriously hurt the nation's poor, including the elderly on fixed incomes. Social security benefits are the only retirement income for about two-thirds of all American retirees, and an estimated one million Michigan residents have no prtvate or public health insurance. The poor are often overlooked in community development efforts, yet they are the group most in need of public assistance. Seven percent of Township residents were living below the poverty level in 1980. That's an annual income of less than $3, 778 for those under 65, and $3 .479 for those 65 and over. The Township should continue to monitor the number of people in poverty through the census counts and work with local churches and non-profit groups to assist them through food drives, temporary shelters, or other needed services. Establishing Specific Incremental Growth Areas Once a final decision on whether the Township will or will not become a full partner in the Kalamazoo Lake Water & Sewer Authority has been made, then it will be possible to determine if specific incremental sewer and water extensions can be made, and at what cost. That process could result in specific targeting of new growth areas and the modification of local zoning and capital improvements programs to reflect the phasing of growth in those areas. Collection of Trqffic Count Data A more detailed analysis of street and road needs should be undertaken. However, doing so is limited by the lack of any systematic and recent traffic count information. The tri-community jurisdictions would greatly benefit from jointly purchasing the necessary equipment and undertaking specific traffic counts on a regular basis. The cost and training associated with this is minimal compared to the benefit. Blue Star Highway Corridor Study Blue Star Highway from the Kalamazoo River bridge north to the freeway exit has the potential to grow dramatically and haphazardly under existing zoning regulations. As a result it deserves a more thorough and careful analysis than has been possible to date. A lot by lot Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan /!'""- �12-7 analysis with an emphasis on traffic flow, ingress, egress, bicycle use, pedestrian access, parking, shared access, signs, land use, and the potential impact and appropriate timing for the extension of sewer and water should be initiated. The first and most important step will be the collection of data on traffic flow and traffic generation by road segment. Public Open Space Acquisition Programs to acquire public open space should be initiated. One option is to create a local nonprofit land conseIVancy. There are several very effective ones operating in Michigan. Priority should be given to building a trust fund for acquisition and maintenance or tying into existing ones by the Nature Conservancy and similar organizations . Initial acquisitions should be the dune lands adjoining the channel. These lands should either be managed as a part of the City's holdings to the south and the State's to the north of the channel, or in common by all three Jurisdictions. or by a conservancy trust. Considerable additional research and effort is needed. Kalamazoo Lake Sewer & Water Authority The Township should Join as a full member of the authority and then the authority should be modified so that it is a more independent operating authority and not under the control of the legislative bodies of the three Jurisdictions. This would distance it from political influences in day to day administration. Efforts are presently underway to evaluate the potential for doing so. /10· ,._ Periodic Updating and Revisions As these additional studies are undertaken the plan should be updated to reflect the new information. At a minimum the plan should be comprehensively reviewed and updated at least once every five years. Managing Growth and Change The key to successfully managing future growth and community change is integrating planning into day-to-day decision making and establishing a continuing planning process. The only way to get out of a reactionary mode (or crisis decision making) is by planning and insuring the tools available to meet a broad range of issues are current and at hand. For that reason it will be especially important that the recommendations of this plan be implemented as the opportunity presents itself (or revised as circumstances dictate). The current rate of growth in the Township does not warrant a more sophisticated mechanism for growth management than that described in the previous pages. However, should the rate or predominant type of development change, Township officials should be prepared to move forward quickly with more targeted regulatory tools. Many new tools may be made available to local governments over the next few years to manage the growth and change process. It will be a challenge to Township officials to pick from among the new tools, those that will provide greater choice over local destiny and quality of life. One Jurisdiction The benefits of merging the three communities into one Jurisdiction far outweigh the detriments if the long term future of the area is considered. However, past efforts to do so have been met with failure and the citizen opinion survey still reflects an evenly divided electorate. Yet, no systematic analysis of the issue considering all aspects (planning, development control, cost. revenues. taxes . economic development. short versus long term, impact on community character. etc.) have ever been performed. Such an analysis should be done to more clearly lay out and analyze the issues. It should be undertaken by the three communities together, but could also be done by an outside group, such as the business community or a taxpayers organization. Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �APPENDIX A References �REFERENCES Listed below are some of the key reports. studies, plans, and data sources which were used as references in the preparation of this plan. Other data sources are referenced throughout the plan. DEMOGRAPIIlCS U.S. Census, Current Population Reports, East North Central 1986 Population and 1985 Per Capita Income Estimates for Counties and Incorporated Places, Series P-26, No. 86-ENC-SC (also referenced for economic data). U.S . Census of Population and Housing, 1980- Summary Tape File 3A (microfiche) for Saugatuck, Saugatuck Township, the Village of Douglas, and Allegan County. HISTORY Joe Armstrong and John Pahl, River & Lake: A Sesquicentennial History OF Allegan County, Michigan, published by the 1835 Committee, 1985. MASTER PLANS Saugatuck Township General Development Plan, prepared for Saugatuck Township by Williams & Works. Inc., 1975. Village of Douglas Land Use Plan, prepared by the Village of Douglas Planning Commission with the assistance of the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, adopted November 19, 1986. Land Use-Village of Saugatuck, prepared by the Saugatuck Planning Commission with the assistance of the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, 1979. NATURAL RESOURCES Michigan Resource Inventory System Database, Department of Natural Resources. Soll Survey of Allegan County, Michigan, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, March 1987. OWNERSHIP Land Atlas and Plat Book, Allegan County, Michigan, Rockford Map Publishers, Inc., 19871989. Saugatuck Township Plat Book, Township Treasurer's Office, Saugatuck, Township. RECREATION A Parks and Recreation Plan for Allegan County, Michigan, prepared for Allegan County by Williams & Works, Inc .. 1986. Saugatuck-Douglas Area Parks and Recreation Plan. prepared by the tri-community area Parks and Recreation Commission. with the assistance of the Saugatuck Public School District. February 1985. �,~ SOLID WAS1E Allegan County Solid Waste Plan, prepared for the Allegan County Board of Commissioners and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources by the Allegan County Planning Commission, PA. 641 solid Waste Planning Committee, and the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, September 1983. ECONOMY Real and Personal Property SEV, 1980-88, Michigan Department of Treasury, State Tax Commission. The Economic Impact of Travel on Michigan Counties , prepared for the Michigan Travel Bureau by the U.S. Travel Data Center, July 1988. Travel and Tourism in Michigan: A Statistical Profile, First Edition, Research Monograph# 1, Michigan State University, Travel, Tourism and Recreation Resource Center, 1986. Michigan Employment Security Commission, Bureau of Research & Statistics, Detroit, Michigan. UTILITIES A Feasiblllty Study on the Utlllzation of a Single Ground Storage Reservoir, SaugatuckDouglas Water System, prepared for Kalamazoo Lake Sewer & Water Authority by Holland Engineering, Inc. , January 18, 1983. Facilities Plan for Wastewater, prepared by Williams & Works, April 1976. Saugatuck Township Area Utility Service Study, prepared by Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr & Huber, Inc., March 1988. Village of Douglas Water Supply Contamination Problem Evaluation and Recommendations, Wolverine Engineers & Smveyors, Inc., July 1, 1987. Village of Saugatuck Streets and Public Utilities Condition Report, May 1984. Waterworks Reliability Study for Kalamazoo Lake Sewer and Water Authority, prepared by Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr, & Huber, Inc., March 1987. ZONING City of Saugatuck Zoning Ordinance, as amended through October 1989. Saugatuck Township Zoning Ordinance, as amended through October 1989. Village of Douglas Zoning Ordinance, as amended through October 1989. ,._ �APPENDIX B Demographic, Economic, and Housing Data �"I A. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS 1. Age Cohorts (Raw Data) Saugatuck Douglas Area Saug. Twp. County --------------- ----------- -------------------------------------------------- --61 52 94 46 46 86 212 67 55 73 67 37 80 80 53 188 297 330 349 483 215 46 132 333 210 47 25 26 56 24 29 20 106 47 23 32 34 4 51 34 21 78 107 166 142 265 108 8 75 110 104 17 23 11 17 19 6 36 59 14 15 23 18 14 16 22 18 60 84 72 106 82 48 17 30 85 49 4 13 15 21 3 11 30 47 6 17 18 15 19 13 24 14 50 106 92 101 136 59 21 27 138 57 26 under 1 1-2 3-4 5 6 7-9 10-13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22-24 25-29 30-34 35-44 45-54 55-59 60-61 62-64 65-74 75-84 85+ 1496 2560 2544 1289 1332 4274 5989 1522 1642 1758 1666 1392 1403 1402 1230 4267 6706 6503 9306 7820 3927 1172 1882 5151 2555 767 ------------------------------------------------- ------ ------------------------ Source : U. S . Census of Population and Housing , 1980--Sumrnary Tape File 3A, item 15 . Detroit, MI, tel. 313-354-4654. 2. Age Cohorts (Aggregated and Percent Comparisons) Age Saugatuck Douglas Saug. Twp. Area County --------------------------------------------------------------- -- -------------0-4 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ 49 97 170 198 101 136 107 221 (4.5) (9.0) (15.8) (18.4) (9 . 4) (12 . 6) (9 . 9) (20.5) 51 134 186 156 106 82 95 138 (5.4) (14.1) (19 . 6) (16.5) (11.2) (8 . 6) (10.0) (14.6) 107 226 277 273 142 265 191 231 (6 . 3) (13.2) (16 . 2) (15.9) (8.3) (15.5) (11.2) (13.5) 207 457 633 627 349 483 393 590 (5.5) (12 . 2) (16.9) (16 . 8) (9.3) (12 . 9) (10.5) (15 . 8) 6,600 (8.1) 14,406 (17.7) 14,760 (18.1) 13,209 (16.2) 9,306 (11 . 4) 7,820 (9.6 ) 6,981 (8.6) 8,473 (10.4) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: (same as above, 1960 and 1980). �3. Change in Age Cohorts from 1960-1980 Age 1960 M/F Tri-Community Area - 1960 1980 M/F 1980 Change 1960-80 --------------------------------------- - --------------------------------------- 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ 121/140 274/249 133/146 129/139 170/166 142/147 115/163 196/232 261 523 279 268 336 289 278 428 (9.8) (19.6) (10.5) (10.1) (12.6) (10.9) (10.4) (16.1) 113/94 233/224 325/308 337/290 170/179 239/244 192/201 231/359 207 457 633 627 349 483 393 590 (5.5) (12.2) (16.9) (16.8) (9.3) (12.9) (10.5) (15.8) -20.7% -12.6% 126.9% 134.0% 3.9% 67.1% 41.4% 37.9% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: (same as above, 1960 and 1980). 4. Place of Birth Michigan Another State Born Abroad Foreign Born Saugatuck Douglas Saug. Twp.* Area 615 (56.9) 422 (39.1) 5 (0.4) 37 (3.4) 577 (60.9) 320 (33.8) 2 (0.2) 49 (4.4) 990 (57.8) 598 (34. 9) 2182 (58.3) 1340 (35.8) (0.2) 7 210 (5.6) 124 (7.2) County 63,771 (78.2) 15,934 (19.5) 227 (0.3) 1,623 (2.0) * Some individuals not accounted for. Source: (same as above), item 33. 5. Place of Residence - 1975 (Persons 5 years old and over) Saugatuck Same House Same County Another County Another State Abroad 503 187 228 117 (48.6) (18.0) (22.0) (11.3) 423 156 198 103 8 Douglas Saug. Twp. (47.9) (17.6) (22.4) (11.6) (0.9) 984 (59.5) 144 ( 8. 7) 244 (14. 7) 280 (16 . 9) Area 1910 487 670 500 8 (53.4) (13. 6) (18. 7) (14.0) (0.2) County 44,575 (59.3) 15,428 (20.5) 10,923 (14.5) 3,962 (5.2) 241 (0.3) Source: (same as above), item 34. 6. Household Characteristics Total HHs Ave. HH size 2 parent fam. Female HH head Saugatuck Douglas Saug. Twp. 537 2.00 219 41 391 2.44 222 31 633 2.69 411 28 Source: (same as above), items 10 and 20 Area County 1561 2.39 852 100 27,282 2.95 19,520 1,911 �7. Marital Status Saugatuck Saug Twp Douglas ----------------------------------------------- - -------Single Married Separated Widowed Divorced 262 ( 28.1%) 325 (23.9%) 467 ( 50.1%) 849 (62.5%) 25 (2.7%) 28 (2 . 1%) 107 (11.5%) 75 (5.5%) 72 (7.7%) 82 (6 . 0%) 177 (23.2%) 449 (58.8%) 16 (2.1%) 66 (8.7%) 55 (7. 2%) Source : (same as above) , item 26 . B. HOUSING STOCK 1. Structure Type Saugatuck Douglas Saug Twp. Area County ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total units Year Round Units 1 in Structure 2 in Structure 3 and 4 in Struct 5 or more Mobile Homes Vacant , Seasonal , & Migratory 1 in Structure 2 in Structure 3-4 in Structure 5 or more Mobile Home/Trailer 772 569 385 49 68 60 7 529 406 290 20 16 40 40 850 734 636 32 203 150 6 18 29 123 108 11 4 116 106 5 66 5 2 , 151 1 , 709 1 , 311 101 84 100 113 31 , 864 28,985 23 , 190 1 , 001 583 1 , 199 3 , 012 442 364 22 22 29 5 2 , 879 2,250 51 57 153 368 ~ Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1980--Summary Tape File 3A, item 102/ 103. Detroit, MI, tel . 313-354-4654 2 . Year Structure Built - Year Round Units Saugatuck Douglas Saug Twp. Area County ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- ----- -- 1975-80 1970-74 1960-69 1950-59 1940-49 Pre 1940 36 (6 . 3) 19 (3.3) 51 (9.0) 73 (12.8) 56 (9.8) 334 ( 58. 7) 22 (5.5) 46 (11.3) 81 (19.9) 32 (7 . 9) 36 (8.9) 189 (46 . 5) Source: (same as above), item 109. 72 116 133 99 68 246 (9.8) (15.8) (18.1) (13.5) (9 . 3) (33.5) 130 181 265 204 160 769 (7. 6) (10 . 6) (15.5) (11.9) (9.4) (45.0) 3568 (12.3) 4326 (14 . 9) 4458 (15.4) 3647 (12.6) 2507 (8.6) 10479 (36.2 ) �3. Occupancy Saugatuck Total Units Owner occupied Renter occupied 772 334 (43.2) 205 (26.5) Douglas 529 271 (51.2) 117 (22.1) Area County 850 2,151 531 (62.4) 1,136 (52.8) 117 (13.7) 439 (20.4) 31,864 22,271 (69.8) 4,961 (15.5) Saug Twp. Source: (same as above), item 97. C. ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 1. Type of Employment Saugatuck Private Wage/Salary 402 (73. 5) Federal Gov. 7 ( 1. 3) State Gov. 21 (3.8) Local Gov. 49 (9.0) Self Employed 68 (12.4) Unpaid Family Worke Douglas Saug Twp. Area County 333 (76. 9) 1 (0.2) 25 (5.8) 33 (7. 6) 40 (9.2) 1 (0.2) 492 (71.4) 11 ( 1. 6) 2 (0.3) 56 (8.1) 92 (13.4) 17 (2 . 5) 1227 (73. 5) 19 ( 1.1) 67 (4.0) 138 (12.0) 200 (12.0) 18 (1.0) 26697 (78.5) 308 (0 . 9) 775 (2.3) 3022 (8.9) 2977 ( 8. 7) 246 (0. 7) Twp/Douglas Area County County(%) 43,730,725 9,402,800 1,126,200 2,661,790 430,733 64,898,211 20,080,005 1,905,350 2,661,790 430,733 604,509,215 101,799,772 50,272,956 153,232,546 3,251,687 Source: (same as above), item 67. 2. Real Property SEV - 1988 Saugatuck Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural Developmental 21,167,486 10,677,205 779,150 N/C N/C 66.2 11.1 5.5 16.8 0.4 Source: Michigan Department of Treasury, State Tax Commission, 1988. Lansing, MI, tel. 517-373-1091. 3. Total Annual Real Property SEV - 1980-88 Year Saugatuck Douglas 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 13,709,600 15,682,000 18,314,033 20,855,000 25,831,436 27,382,650 29,737,980 32,727,560 10,560,200 11,723,580 13,341,647 15,101,800 16,848,894 18,756,700 20,321,283 21,957,626 * Area Saug Twp . * Saug. Twp.** 18,482,350 21,042,164 23,287,428 25,691,300 27,155,345 28,922,650 30,023,509 32,464,745 42,752,150 48,447,744 54,943,108 61,648,100 69,835,675 47,679,350 50,344,792 54,422,371 42,752,150 48,447,744 54,943,108 61,648,100 69,835,675 75,062,000 80,082,772 87,149,931 not including Villages. ** including Saugatuck and Douglas through 1984 and Douglas only after 1984. Source: Michigan Department of Treasury, State Tax Commission, 1988. Lansing, MI, tel. 517-373-1091 �4 . Annual Average Employment -Tri-Community Area Year Ave . Emp . 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1,491 1,527 1 , 555 1,613 1 , 695 1,656 1,175 2 , 461 2,550 2 , 700 Source : Michigan Employment Security Commission, Field Analysis Unit. Detroit , Michigan, tel . 313-876-5427. 5. Persons in Poverty by Age Saugatuck Less than 55 55-59 60-64 65+ 67 3 Douglas Saug Twp. Area County 77 6 83 227 24 39 5181 281 206 1127 9 8 8 15 78 Source : U.S . Census of Population and Housing , 1980--Summary Tape File 3A, item 93. Detroit, MI, tel. 313-354-4654 . �APPENDIX C Public Opinion Survey Responses �"I SAUGATUCK TOWNSHIP PUBLIC OPINION SURVEV RESULTS PAUL HARRIS: ASSISTANT RESEARCH DIRECTOR ... RESPONSE RATE WE SENT 966 SURVEYS FROM OAKLAND UNIVERSITY USING THE MAIL LABELS FROM THE TOWNSHIP. WE RECEIVED (es of 11 /29/68) 372 SURVEVS FROM THIS MAILING. PRODUCING A RESPONSE RATE OF 37.7 PERCENT. IN ADD IT I ON, WE RECEIVED 22 RENTER SURVEYS WHICH WERE DISTRIBUTED BY THE TOWNSHIP. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SURVEYS USED IN THE FORTHCOMING ANALYSES IS: 394. �COt1t1UNITY VALUES Q.J.: r,?\ Importance of things people look for in a community. NOTE: OR IGI NAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2: NOT IMPORTANT, 4& 5: IMPORTANT, 3:HAS BEEN OMITTED Q.2: How has the community changed. (~ \ , IMPORTANT 87.71 ~QI IMPOR]:ANT 6.51 5.31 15.31 4.61 15.11 21.01 31.01 9.31 37.51 6.31 19.41 13.91 29.11 23.61 24.81 49.91 49.11 16.91 21.31 rural/country atmosphere quiet friendly people attract 1ve/beut t f ul surround1 ngs ~ood place to raise children raditional values religious opportunities freeoom to be myself chance to get involved tn locel org·s low crime rate ~ood school system ow tax rates close to larger cities convent ent shop pin~ opportuni tes availabilit~ of goo housing family in t e area job in area water based rec re at ion nearby not i ndustri a1i zed better place to live stayed about the same worse place to live 90.71 70.01 82.61 69.81 58.81 42.21 73.21 31.21 82.81 59.41 73.91 47.91 43.71 50.81 28.71 37.51 58.91 57.91 CHECKED 21.51 58.11 20.41 ai As the area grows and chanes, which best describes Saug. Twp .. 1= small village, 2= bedroom community, 3= Holland suburb, 4: Small city community as is community as would like it to be community as think it will be mt 63.21 19.91 19~21 17.31 26.01 3 4.21 11.91 48.41 !1.4: How would you rate the commun1tes on the following. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2: POOR, 4 & 5: GOOD, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED bust ness c1i mate churches community events entertat nment general appearance flous1ng jobs location med1 ca 1 care recreation restaurants roads POOR 35.81 10.91 30.11 51.41 21.71 33.31 59.81 2.71 55.71 13.11 29.71 36.31 .GQQO_ w.71 59.71 41.41 28.91 50.41 29.01 10.41 84.91 20.81 70.31 51.91 33.81 4 4.21 7.61 5.71 �POOR 26.21 ll.4: cont. schools sen1 or c1 ti zen services shopping social services texes 34.31 41 .71 41 .81 63.21 B 29.41 35.01 10.61 16.41 COt1tlUN ITV PROBLEMS Q.6: Problems feced by the communities, how importent ere they to you. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2= NOT A PROBLEM, 4 & 5: PROBLEM, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED NOT violent crime vandalism teens w/ nothing to do drugs alcohol unemp 1oyment new job opportunities housrng shortages pub 1i c recreet ion too much development not enough development leek of e hospitel ... trefic sef ety perking downtown Saug. skateboerds/bikes downtown Seug. run down property 1it ter downtown aree litter along blue star Hwy appearance of bus. along Blue congestion at oval beech quafity oval beach facilities Inad. eccess to waterbodi es local schools Township QOV't services county govt services leadership elected officiels Inadequate Twp. taxes inadequete local planning i nedequate 1oca 1 deve 1opment erosion & fl oddi ng contami net ion drfki ng water water quality wetlands send dunes other env. destruction lned. senior programs erosion e1ong 1eikeshore Dr. inad. water supply inad. sewer service snowmobiling on public roads A PROBLEM 75.91 47.21 30.31 18.51 17.91 32.71 23.21 32.21 67.61 43.21 69.61 34.01 63.21 23.11 47.71 48.81 60.31 57.61 49.31 53.01 53.91 50.01 44.41 45.61 47.51 44.41 74.91 28.71 28.21 47.91 35.51 21.91 27.91 31.41 27.61 52.91 26.71 35.41 36.21 64.11 PROBLEM 9.51 42.91 56.81 57.91 65.61 33.51 48.71 31.01 14.41 46.11 14.51 56.81 25.61 69.51 20.41 29.31 12.61 20.41 40.61 9.81 14.81 33.91 25.71 25.71 28.51 26.01 5.01 36.21 36.81 36.51 45.11 61.01 46.41 42.51 26.71 16.41 61.71 34.71 33.61 18.61 �SHOPP ING & SERVICES Where do you go most often for the fo11ow1ng things. ( 1= Saugatuck, 2= Holland, 3= close to work, 4= belter service) (5= more choice, 6= 1ower cost) 1 2 3 4 5 6 T4.41:~TSI o.9112.blnrnl appliances 0.01 79. 1I 1.71 4.31 6.31 6.61 auto/truck sales 13.01 72.71 2.51 4.21 5.11 2.51 auto /truck services 75.11 19.71 1.61 0.01 3.61 0.01 bakery goods 79.51 14.01 4. 11 0.91 0.01 1.51 banking 60.11 26.61 5.61 4.91 1.71 0.91 beautician/barber 25.41 55.01 1.61 1.01 10.41 6.51 books 41.61 51.21 0.91 3.71 0.91 1.61 car wash 6.41 66.51 0.01 0.01 16.21 7.01 clothing 65.31 26.61 3. 11 3. 11 0.01 0.01 day care 0.01 75.41 0.01 0.01 21.21 3.41 dept. store 46.01 50.91 2.11 0.01 1.01 0.01 dry c1eaners 50.11 46.31 0.01 0.91 2.61 0.01 f ami 1y restaurants 40.51 39.91 0.01 0.91 16.61 0.01 fancy restaurants 5.01 65.01 3.71 0.91 5.31 0.01 fast food 62.21 28.31 2.01 3.91 3.61 0.01 flower shop 25.51 46.31 1.91 1.91 16.31 6.21 furniture 48.51 47.31 0.81 0.01 0.61 2.51 groceries 56.61 31.41 4.01 1.71 1.41 2.91 fiardware 69.81 24.51 1.41 2.81 1.41 0.01 laundromat lawn&. garden supplies 34. 11 53.51 1.01 0.01 5. 11 6.41 50.61 37.91 1.01 1.01 2.51 7.01 lumber medical services 30. 11 53.31 8.01 4.31 4.31 0.01 3.01 88.51 2.01 0.01 6.61 0.01 movies 66.81 27.51 2.61 1.41 0.91 0.91 pharmacy 18.21 62.51 2.11 0.01 7.41 7.41 sport 1ng goods _g, 1O: COttt1ERC IAL DEVELOPMENT Approve or disapprove of future commercial development. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 &. 2= DISAPPROVE, 4 &. 5= APPROVE, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED in small shopping centers in one large shopping center in downtown Saug. in downtown Dougles in scattered commercial areas in strip commercial areas nowhere _g~ Where should new commercial PI $APPROVE 31.21 48.21 62.71 38.51 45.71 64.71 46.81 APPROVE 54.6i 33.01 23.51 47.71 28.91 20.51 22.81 development occur. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 &. 2= DISAPPROVE, 4 &. 5= APPROVE, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED along North Blue Star Hwy. along South Blue Star Hwy. along Butler St. in Sougotuck along Water St. in Saugatuck elong Lake St. 1n Saugatuck along M-89 outside oT Fennville et freeway interchanges DISAPPROVE APPROVE 17.01 23.41 77.01 75.11 74.11 32.11 27.21 74.11 65.21 14.11 13.11 14. 11 40.01 52.11 �INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT 11.•.12.; Does the area need more industrial development. ( 1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree) 1= 17.61, 2= 9.61, 3: 23.41, 4= 16.01, 5= 31.11 Ir' BLUE STAR HIGHWAY 9~ What are your priorities for Blue Star Highway. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 &. 2= LOW PRIORITY, 4 &. 5: HIGH PRIORITY, 3= HAS BEEN OMITTED better lighting untf orm sign controls improve traffic flow add a center turn 1ane install public sewer install public water imp rove drainage improve appearance create commercial strip more tourist orientated bus. more shopping more industry more personal services more auto services more offices fast food rest.s drive thru businesses no changes better lane striping re surfacing uniform speed limit bike bath more tree a R 35.01 24.41 35.21 40.21 40.21 52.41 22.31 46.81 65.31 40.61 44.51 39.21 36.61 47.51 59.71 45.31 30.11 30. 11 29.41 61.31 32.11 22.61 45.11 39.91 35.41 43.71 43.21 26.61 44.21 61.31 50.51 27.51 49.31 26.91 29.01 13.01 32.51 36.21 35.51 59.61 73.51 57.11 54.31 49.61 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .Q.14: What type of residential development is needed in Saugatuck. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED ( 1= needed now, 2= needed 1eter, 3= not needed, 4= hos been omitted) 1 apartments attached single-femily homes detached single-family homes(50-70) detached single-family homes(70+) waterfront condos low income housing mobi 1e homes seniors housing country estates 37.41 21.71 14.tr 27h 13.61 42.51 49.21 17.81 16.01 32.41 20.21 25.11 1.61 37.71 19.31 36.41 32.11 1.51 7.81 4.61 21.81 18.21 69.51 37.11 58.31 17.81 27.91 �RECREATION Q.15: Type of eddttionel recre8tion81 f8ciltties 8re needed in the S8UQ8tuck 8re8 . NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 &. 2: LOW PRIORITY, 4&. 5: HIGH PRIORITY, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED, 6= HAS BEEN OMITTED BECAUSE OF LOW RESPONSE basketball courts bike paths boat l_aunching ramps camp1ng community center cross country ski trai 1s fitness center ~olf course ikin~ trails horse 8Ck trails ice rink Lk. front open space(Lk. Ml) LI<. front open space(Lk.Kal) pub 1i c Mari nos pri vote marinas movie theater nei ~hborhood p1aygrounds pars picnic areas raquetb811 courts Riverfront open spece(K81 river) senior citizen center shuffle board softb811 fields swimming pool(s) tennis courts HIGH LOW so.5'°1 19.31 17.11 40.61 34.91 24.71 29.91 60.81 27.01 36.1 I 29.91 20.11 27.01 31.81 SO.Bl 32.61 43.31 32.51 34.51 44.21 21.BI 26.BI 40.61 47.71 37.01 55.31 ~ 64.41 58.91 34.51 34.91 59.81 46.91 17.41 55.61 38.71 41.61 67.01 61.91 44.51 19.41 44.81 35.71 50.91 44.11 16.81 61.81 53.11 27.61 21 .91 42.11 23.21 WATERFRONT DEVELOPHENT & SURFACE WATER QUALITY Q.16: Which of the followin~ best desribe ~our use (s) of nearby water bodies. ~Qtion . ng sw1mm1ng sunbathing ft shi ng~boot) f 1sh1 ng shore) noture study S8i11ng windsurfing waterskiing powerboot i ng scuba di vi W8terfow1 unt. ice fishing ice skatin~ cross coun ry ski . snowmobi 1i ng tcebooting other I dont use it "ft I" (VALUES EPRESENT PER ENT CHECKED) ~I 3.01 4.61 , 28.91 28.41 21.61 2.31 0.01 7.11 15.01 3.81 9.61 3.81 0.81 6.11 2.31 0.81 12.41 '-3.81 &1 3.01 8.11 6.91 B.61 6.11 3.01 6.91 •13.51 3.01 1.51 3.01 0.81 0.81 0.01 0.01 6ijl "'55.1 I 44.91 38.81 16.51 23.11 19.01 9.41 15.71 22.81 6.31 0.81 1.51 0.01 B.61 1.51 0.01 1~1 6.11 3.81 13.71 12.91 12.41 0.81 0.81 6.91 9.61 1.51 3.81 . - 14.21 2.31 3.01 3.01 0.01 17.31 6.31 23.91 �D.17: Which term best describes your opinion of the present woter -quelity of the following water bodies. H1 8.71 very good go~cl fa1r poor ve,:-y poor don t know 0~ 7.91 19.61 14.01 37.11 21.31 19.81 17.31 39.71 14.51 SL t.?1 0.01 7.11 11.81 17.61 14.91 48.61 25.21 33.81 13.01 11.61 9.71 g_ 18: Besed on your experience in recent yeers the water quality of the following water bodies has. 1ff1 19.71 improved greetly improved slightfy steyed the same deteriorated slightly deteri oreted great 1y don't know 11 .81 23.71 20.21 13.01 1~ 13.81 12.61 22.81 21.01 17.71 & 1H'1 B.91 16.41 18.11 6.11 47.41 21.BI 20.91 2B.31 5.51 11.11 11.J.9.;. Indication of feeling about the adequacy of the following facilities on each weter body. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2= INADEQUATE, 4 &. 5= ADEQUATE, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED KR Boot launch boat s1i ps(r) boot slips(c) marinas swim. beaches Boat serv1 ce pumpout focil. Fish cleening Comp grouds perks public rest. other public. Des. boat mor. Des. no wake INAD-A9,0 45.6 2~1 20.6 5.3 14.4 35.6 23.0 26.4 25.8 54.7 43.4 51.7 39.0 49.7 41.0 48.9 55.5 68.2 46.5 59.0 23.0 33.5 21.5 32.4 34.1 31.3 30.3 33.4 1o/\°~8~ 20.5 49.7 6.1 23.0 38.5 27.2 25.7 27.0 48.5 40.3 49.5 27.3 35.7 35.7 55.5 57.2 31.7 57.6 25.0 31.3 21.0 18.2 26.2 31.9 39.0 46.5 & IJ1 I~~-~ 20.5 16.8 17.8 25.5 34.6 24.3 35.5 46.3 44.0 37.5 21.8 25.2 25.4 11~• ~8,~ 20.6 20.7 40.1 45.0 59.4 37.0 19.6 19.5 18.0 32.8 32.4 37.3 35.7 52.0 17.B 19.4 36.8 33.7 16.3 34.9 47.3 45.9 37.2 28.5 23.0 27.9 ADO 21.1 25.2 31.0 39.8 26.4 28.9 20.9 11.1 18.6 19.3 18.6 25.3 27.0 38.6 g~ Should the TownshiP. actively coopenste in the construction of an areawide marina. 1= 40.31, ( 1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree) 2= 7.11, 3= 12.61, 4= 7.91, 5: 32.11 g=2.1.;, Should the Township actively seek to find alternatives for low cost access by Township resldents to Lake Michigan beech facilities. ( 1=strongly disegree to 5= strongly agree) 1= 11.61, 2= 7.21, 3: 13.41, 4= 20.91, 5: 46.61 OTHER LAND USE QUESTIONS g~ Should ·pole barns" be allowed to be constructed in residential districts 1= 28.61, ( 1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree) 2= 6.51, 3= 30.51, 4: 18.31, 5: 16.11 ,.. �.Q.23: Should prime ogriculturol lend in Seugetuck Township be limited exclusiYely to egriculturel production or should residentiel homes be permitted to be deYeloped. CHECKiD leeYe for exclusive eg. use 38.4 ellow residences 52.01 uncertei n 9.61 9.24: If residences ere premitted, should the size of the lots be limited to reduce impects on egriculturel lends. C\CKjD yes, reduce size 4 .9 no, lots eny size 39.91 uncertein 14.21 9~ Should other non-egriculturel uses be permitted in egriculturel zones. yes= 43.41, no: 32.51, uncertain= 24.11 .U,26: Which, if eny, of the following types of "home occupations" do you f eYor being permitted in residentielly zoned erees. ( f = strongly oppose to 5: stronly favor) NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2= OPPOSE, 4 & 5: FAVOR, 3= HAS BEEN OMITTED r'~ WW 39.81 bed & breekf est heirdressers/berbers music 1es sons dance lessons accounting/tax prep. low offices medical offices edul t foster cere dey care "evon", "emwef typing serYi ces dressmekt i ng/ a1t. cerem1cs clothing boutiques b~kery_ p1zzene smell engine repair antique seles 14.81 19.11 19.61 45.51 46.81 39.41 35.41 44.21 18.61 13.21 37.21 57.61 51.01 63.91 48.91 40.31 EW 42.81 74.61 68.71 67.01 41.01 37.21 38.21 44.81 36.11 60.41 67.61 38.11 26.11 34.51 25.21 33.31 49.01 ENY I RONt1ENT AL PROTECT I ON .0....2L Whet limitations, if eny, should be imposed on deYelopment in each of the following erees. ( 1= no new deYelopment, 2= Yery low density, 3: moderate density) (4= No special regulation) ,,-----.... ~ forested send dunes open send dunes wetlends & swamps ed~oining wet 1ends & swemps tn end elong the Kel. r1Yer elong Kel. leke elong Lk. HI elong Silver Lk. ~ 87.41 82.81 72.61 34.71 39.71 32.91 30.51 ~ 8.51 10.21 19.01 33.11 24.01 27.11 23.31 ~ ~ 1.81 3.51 4.41 31.31 34.41 35.91 35.71 2.41 3.51 4.11 0.91 1.91 4.11 10.51 �PUBLIC SERVICES 9.28: How would you rate the fallowing local public services. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2= POOR, 4 &. 5: GOOD, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED ambulance animal control building inspections cemetaries drain maintenance ftre protection first responder unit i nturban bus land use planning library dust control on roads park maintainace playground equip. shenff services property assessment public boat launching schools K-6 schools 7-12 schools- community ed. snow removal state police storm drat nage street 1i ght i ng road maintainance road re surfacing water service zoning enforcement keeping intersections clear rm- 35.21 26.91 5.71 34.81 12.51 10.41 16.41 56.31 12.51 39.21 17.01 15.21 34.71 55.71 34.91 22.81 23.91 15.91 20.91 4.61 22.01 25.01 42.41 41.91 30.91 43.01 42.61 f\ R 29.31 25.61 62.41 21.31 67.41 66.41 71.41 9.21 51.31 20.81 41.91 44.91 37.91 11.81 27.11 45.01 46.01 45.31 53.91 81.81 32.81 23.91 26.41 22.11 19.21 15.01 15.91 ~ r---. ..... g~ What are your prtor1ties for how the Township s~ends your tax dollars. ( 1:low priority to 5= high priority NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2= LOW PRIORITY, 4 & 5: HIGH PRIORITY, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED cemetary maintenemce enforcing ordinances road re surf act ng fire protection ambulance service Twp. admin. services Twp. hall maint. park& rec. services plan future waterfront imp. interurban bus LOW 35.41 14.81 11.31 0.01 2.71 45.01 51.91 24.71 17.91 39.81 41.01 HIGH 29.01 44.91 72.21 88.11 81.01 25.01 15.61 42.21 61.01 41.11 42.61 I", �9.30: How frequently do you use the followf ng servf ces,. ( 1= never, 2= less than ltfme/montti, 3= one t1me/month) (4= one time/week, 5= more often) recyc 1i ng center interurban bus service river bluff park Saup. -Doug. di strf ct 1i brary ova beacti Douglas beach sun aown park shultz park Saug. Dunes St. Park beery field wicks park other parks out of area Twp. office services 1 seB 52.41 64.91 39.01 41.41 55.21 73.41 47.31 67.01 62.11 73.01 52.61 44.51 ~ 34.01 31.61 30.91 24.41 20.11 21.11 40.51 20.71 14.21 24.31 32.31 43.51 rob 7.51 2.71 15.31 13.11 11.81 1.71 6.01 5.41 1.61 1.81 11.91 9.11 4 -s:51 1.71 0.91 8.41 8.91 10.01 3.81 4.51 3.91 1.61 0.91 2.11 0.91 ~ 4.31 0.01 6.41 12.21 2.91 0.01 1.81 3.01 0.01 0.01 1.11 1.91 .Q.31: Which of the following options do you prefer for solving the problem of shore eros10n undermimng Lake Shore Road. CHECK;o 34.3 provf ding shore protection ... closing lake Shore Drive ... rebuilding the road ... closing sections of road ... 30.51 34.81 6.11 Q.32: If it meant an increase in genera 1 property taxes, wh1 ch of the follwing services do you tflink Saugatuck Twp. should increase or add. CHECKED police protection fire protection addi ti one 1 road paving ambulance service municipal water service muni ci pa1 sewer service renovate Twp. hall est ab 1i sh archi Ye ... more parks comm. rec. center seniors center 1ndustri a1 park drainage control trash collection combined ma1nt. garage economic development 24hr. medical service community poo1 26.41 35.51 25.41 36.01 23.11 22.31 2.31 0.01 3.81 7.91 18.81 16.21 11.71 6.91 8.41 8.91 46.41 13.51 Q.33: Which of the following methods do you support for paying for public water and sewer service. 1= gerneral prop. tax, 2= special assessment, 3= seperate fee, 4: uncertain wells & treatment facilities individual street/road lines connections to each property access to sewer and water euth. 1 41.21 26.71 11.11 26.11 r,h 22.31 15.91 11.01 3 16.0ll 26.01 48.41 33.11 4 23.21 24.91 24.61 29.81 �J;l.34: Which of .the following stetements is closet to your position on government services end property texes. Nice to have better services, but. .. I would like better government services, ... Local government tries to do to much, ... Other C~CKED .71 17.51 · ,30.21 8.61 Q.35: Place a check before each of the follwing Township boards/commissions et wh1ch you have attended a meeting in the 1ast 2 years. CHECKED Township Boe rd 27.41 planning/zoning commision 18.31 zoning ooerd of eppea 1s 15.71 board of review(taxes) 25.41 9.11 schoo 1 board Saug Township fire district 5.61 interurban trans. system 6.31 Kal. Lk. weter & Sewer Authority 0.81 Saug. twp. Park & Rec. Commiss1on 1.51 .Q.36: How responsive do you feel these parts of local government are to Saugatuck Township citizens. NOTE: ORIGINAL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN COLLAPSED 1 & 2: NOT RESPONSIVE, 4 & 5: RESPONSIVE, 3: HAS BEEN OMITTED Twp. Board planning/zoning commision zoning lloard of appea 1s board of review(taxes) schoo 1 board Saug. twp. fire district interurban tnms. system Ka 1. Lk. water & Sewer Auth. Saug. twp. Park & Rec. Comm. NOT R~SP°IS IVE 2.7 29.21 28.91 36.81 16.61 4.41 23.91 18.61 18.21 RESK,ONII VE 7.6 27.21 24.81 24.91 32.31 42.71 33.01 19.71 24.31 !J.37: Should the Township adopt a policy of consolidating services with other governmental unit. yes= 62.51, g~ no= 10.31, uncertain:27.21 If yes, whet services should be consolideted. NOTE: THESE VALUES CORRESPOND TO THE PERCENT WHO ANSWERED "VES" ABOVE Sewer water strorm water police street &. roads parks &. summer Rec. planning zoning bu11 d1 ng permits Townshl p manager Comb. 1nterurban veh1 ca 1 mai nt. CHECKED 45.71 44.21 26.91 43.11 35.31 35.51 35.31 29.41 21.61 27.91 27.41 �9_39: Should the City of Sougotuck, the Villoge of Douglos{ ond the Township of Saugatucl< consolidate into a single uni of government. yes= 49.4:C, no= 50.6:C BACKGROUND INf.ORNATION ,tl-40: Are you a regi sterd voter. yes: 95.2:C, no: 4.81 9-41: How many years have you resided in Saugatuck Township. less than 1 1 - 5 5 - 10 10 - 20 more thon 20 CH§CKED .61 12.21 30.1:C 20.81 33.21 .Q.42: How many more years do you think you will stay fn the Saugatuck area. less than one 1 - 3 4 - 10 more than 10 yrs. CHE~KED o. I 7.8:C 17.61 72.01 ~ How many months of each year do you typically reside in Saugatucl< Township. ~ 81.01 OF RESPONDENTS SAID " 12 MONTHS" _g~ Please check each of the following that apply to you. NOTE: PERCENT AGES INDICATE MULTIPLE RESPONSES residential property owner renter own or manage o business in area CHECKED 92.0:C 27.51 16.7:C !I~ Which of the following best represents where you live. NOTE: 11. 11 OF RESPONDENTS DID NOT ANSWER TH IS QUEST ION I on the dunes/bluff along Lk. Ml on the dunes along Kalamazoo Lake elsewhere along Kalamazoo Lake along Kalamazoo River a1ong Si 1ver Lake elswnere along the Kal. river on hi 11 in Saug. else. in Saug. near downtown Doug. else. in Doug in Arg. area of Saug. twp. e1se. tn Saug. twp. CHECKED 8.91 0.81 1.71 7.51 7.51 0.01 0.01 2.51 0.01 7.81 20.81 32.11 �"I J;l.46: Whet is the highest level of educetion you hove f i nished. cH;cKED less then high school high school greduete some co 11 ege essoctete's or techntcel degree college greduete greduete or professionel degree .61 11.01 25.81 9.91 34.1 I 12.1I g~ Pleese provide the following tnformetion ebout eech person thet normelly lives in your housenold. AVERAGE AGE OF RESPONDENTS 56.77 SEX OF RESPONDENTS mele femele 68.01 32.01 EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF RESPONDENTS employed not emp1oyed 55.81 44.21 COMMUNITY Oougles City of Seugatuck Sougetuck Township Holfend other 9.41 7.11 34.01 15.61 34.01 PERCENT OF RESPONDENTS RETIRED 38.31 �APPENDIX D Soil Types - Tri-Community Area �SOIL TYPES - TRI-COMMUNITY AREA SOILTYPE AND SLOPE SOIL NUMBER . LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK , ABSORPTION FIELDS ~ LIMITATIONS FOR DWELLINGS WITH BASEMENTS CATEGORY A- SANDY, RAPID PERMEABILITY, LOW WATER TABLE ( Chelsea loamy fine sand, 0-6% Chelsea loamy fine sand, 6-12% Chelsea loamy-fine sand, 12-18% Chelsea loamy fine sand, 18-30% Oakville fine sand, 0-6% Oakville fine sand, 6-18% Oakville fine sand, 18-45% Oakville fine sand, loamy substratum, 0-6% Urban land - Oakville· complex, 0-6% 44B 44C 44D 44E 1 OB l0C l0E 53B 72B SE4 SE4 SEl, SE4 SEl, SE4 SE4 SE4 SEl, SE4 SE3, SE5, SE4 SL SL MDl SEl SEl SL MDl SEl SL SE4 I I CATEGORY B - SANDY, RAPID PERMEABILITY, man WATER TABLE Brady_sandy loam, 0-3% Covert sand, 0-4% Matherton loam, 0-3% Metea loamy fine sand, 1-6% Metea loamy fine sand, 6-12% Morocco fine sand, 0-3% Morocco-Newton complex, 0-3% Pi~estone sand, 0-4% Thetford loamy fine sand, 0-4% Tedrow fine sand,0-4% 19A 57A 22A 27B 27C 70A 15B 26A 51A 49A SE3 SE3, SE4 SE3, SE4 SE4, SE5 SE4, SE5 SE3, SE4 SE3, SE4 SE3,SE4 SE3 SE3, SE4 SE3 MD3 SE3 SL MDl SE3 SE3 SE3 SE3 SE3 SE3, SE3, SE3, SE5, SE5, SE3 SE5 SEl, SEl, SE3, SE5, SE3, SE5, SE3 SE3 SE3 MD3,MD2 MDl, MD2, MD3 SE3 MDl SEl SEl SL SE3 SE3 SL CATEGORY C - WET, HEAVY, SLOW PERMEABILITY Blount silt loam, 1-4% Capac loam1 0..:6% Capac-Wixom complex, 1-4% Glynwood clay loam, 1-6% Glynwood clay loam, 6-12% Kibbie fine sandy loam, 0-3% Marlette loam, 6-12% Marlette loam, 12-18% Marlette loam, 18-35% Marlette-Capa:c loams, 1-6% Metamora sari.dy loam, 1-4% Rimedoamy s·an:d; 0-4% Seward loamy fme sand, 1-6% 41B 16B 21B SB SC 33A 14C 14D 14E 75B 42B 28A 60B SE5 SE5 SE5 SE3 SE3 SE5 SE5 SE5 SE3 SE5 SE3 Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �.. SOILTYPE AND SLOPE •· ·LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELDS SOIL NUMBER LIMITATIONS FOR DWELLINGS WITH BASEMENTS CATEGORY D - VERY WET SOILS, ORGANICS, FLOODPLAINS Adrian muck Algansee loamy sand, protected, 0-3% Aquents and Histosols, ponded Belleville loamy sand Brookston loam Belleville-Brookston complex Cohoctah silt loam, Cohoctah silt loam, protected Colwood silt loam Corunna sandy loam Dune land and beaches Glendora loamy sand Glendora loamy sand, protected Granby sandy loam Houghton muck Martisco muck Na polean muck Newton mucky fine sand Palms muck Pewamo silt loam Sebewa loam Sloan silt loam 6 73A 50 48 17 64 29 65 30 36 4 2 74 39 5 67 47 69 7 45 23 62 SE6, SE4 SE3, SE4 SE6, SEl0 -SES; SE3 SE6, SE5 SE6 · SE6, SE5 SE3, SES -SE6 SE6 SE6, SE5 SE6 SE6 SE6 SES, SE3 SES, SE6 SE6 SE6 . SE6, SE3, SE4 SE6, SE4 SE6, SE4 SE6, SE5 SES, SE6, SE5 SE6 SE6, SE4 SEll, SE6 SE5, SE6 SE4, SE6 SES, SE3, SE5 SES, SE3. SES, SE6 SE6 SE6, SElQ'·; SES, SE6 SE6, SEl0 SE6 SE6, SEl0 SE6 SE6 SES, SE3. CATEGORY E - WELL DRAINED LOAM AND LOAMY FINE SAND Ockley loam, 6-12% Ockley loam, 12-18% Ockley loam, 18-30% Riddles loam, 6-12% Tekenink loamy fine sand, 6-12% Tekenink loamy fine sand, 12-18% Tekenink loamy fine sand, 18-35% 12C 12D 12E 63C 31C 31D 31E ~ ~. 1 . ·i'• MDl SEl SEl ' MDl MDl SEl . SEl MD2,MD1 SEl SEl MD1,MD2 MDl SEl SEl .:. '·' CATEGORY F - WELL DRAINED LOAM AND LOAMY'FINE SAND Ockley loam, 1-6% Oshtemo-Chelsea complex, 0-6% Oshtemo-Chelsea complex, 6-12% Oshtemo-Chelsea complex, 12-18% Oshtemo-Chelsea complex, 18-35% Riddles loam, 1-6% Tekenink loamy fine sand, 2-6% 12B llB llC llD llE : 63B 31B SL SL MDl ·" SEl SEl SL SL Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan MD2, · •; ;r SL ' •·: .MDl ·\'-; t '~'t ' r . S~l -F·;~,s :U·• .. SEl . · t:~ · ;~- r.')Mti2. ' . .. SL ··~· ~· : ·i.-: ', ~~ [f:Jh • c: �. •. UNCLASSIFIEB:SQILS 34 Aquents, ~andy and loE1-my Pits Udipsamments 18 66 KEY FOR LIMJTATION CODES SEVERE LIMITA'TIONS: SLOPE SHRINK-SWELL WET.NESS POU-.R-' FILTER PERC,S ·SLOWLY PONDING CUT-BANKS CAVE· FLOODING EXCESSIVE HUMUS LOW STRENGTH SUBSIDES SEl SE2 SE3 SE4 SE5 f· SE6 .. SE7 t ,.. SE8 SE9 SEl0 SEll t MODERATE LIM1TAT-IONS: MDl MD2 . MD3 SLOPE SHRINK-SWELL ·WETNESS ! SLIQHT LIMITATIONS: SL . SLIGHT LIMITATIONS ;, !;._.• • ,,. .;$'" -r·:-..p·~-, ,.. ,-::""":,~\ ~ ~....+ ,r, • ~ • • ' ., f &- Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan �. ·~ ~ . .. _::.i:: ·1 , ,l _, \ 1 N SOIL TYPES TOWNSHIP -NORTH 1/2 �0 ~ -.. . i '-.- .,.::_;._ . • � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Wyckoff Planning and Zoning Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Planning & Zoning Center (Lansing, Mich.) (Organization) Wyckoff, Mark A. Description An account of the resource Municipal master plans and zoning ordinances from across the state of Michigan, spanning from the 1960s to the early 2020s. The bulk of the collection was compiled by urban planner Mark Wyckoff over the course of his career as the founder and principal planner of the Planning and Zoning Center in Lansing, Michigan. Some additions have been made to the collection by municipalities since it was transferred to Grand Valley State University. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Michigan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960/2023 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/870">Planning and Zoning Center Collection (RHC-240)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/">No Copyright - United States</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Comprehensive plan publications Master plan reports Zoning--Michigan Zoning--Maps Maps Land use--planning Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-240 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Saugatuck-Twp_Comprehensive-Plan_1989 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Saugatuck Township Planning Commission, Saugatuck Township, Allegan County, Michigan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-11 Title A name given to the resource Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan Description An account of the resource The Saugatuck Township Comprehensive Plan was prepared by the Saugatuck Township Planning Commission in cooperation wit the Township Board of Trustees and Coastal Management Program, with the assistance of the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc., in November 1989. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. (consultant) Subject The topic of the resource Comprehensive plan publications Saugatuck Township (Mich.) Allegan County (Mich.) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/870">Planning and Zoning Center Collection (RHC-240)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/">No Copyright - United States</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/114ece16033d0a7a5eb4fca6640685c9.jpg 928256e5dfa2cd5f10553669b13f0312 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Summers in Saugatuck-Douglas Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Kutsche Office of Local History Description An account of the resource Collection contains images and documents digitized and collected through the project "Stories of Summer," supported by a National Endowment for the Humanities Common Heritage Grant. The collection aims to document the twin lakeshore communities of Saugatuck and Douglas, Michigan, as they transformed through the state's bustling tourism industry and acceptance of minorities. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1910s-2010s Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Douglas (Mich.) Michigan, Lake Allegan County (Mich.) Beaches Sand dunes Outdoor recreation Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries. Allendale, Michigan Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Saugatuck-Douglas History Center Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Stories of Summer (Common Heritage project) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Text Language A language of the resource English Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-07_SD-70s-coll_0061 Title A name given to the resource Saugatuck Village Hall Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of Saugatuck Village Hall, located across the street from the Kalamazoo River waterfront in downtown Saugatuck, Michigan. The building is surrounded by trees and a famiy appears to be walking by on the sidewalk out front. Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich) Allegan County (Mich) City halls Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Digital file contributed by the Saugatuck Douglas History Center as part of the Stories of Summer project. Relation A related resource Stories of Summer (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a2ea78b3c10b6b8d65a93ad1495b4ef5.pdf 732217bc98a4ec85f9cde75299c074f8 PDF Text Text · Sault Ste. 1\/larie Tribe of Chippewa Indians a R S'' ll::7C1 Traditional Pow-Wow located at the Community Action Center Grounds August24,25,1985 M.C. Joe Migwanabee ~ost Drum Smokey Town Drum and Four Winds Head Male Dancer~ Don Doud ~ •¥- Head Female Dancer Vicky Doud Registration 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., August 24 (No late registration) Cash for making all Grand Entries on time. $50 Travel Expenses will be paid to the first 'I> 50 families with drummers and/or dancers to register and participate (out of town). Traders not included. All monetary awards at Pow-Wow Committee discretion Trader fee - $20 a day or $30 both days - LIMITED ELECTRICITYGrand Entry: 1 :00 p.m. & 7:00 p.m. Saturday 1:00 p.m. Sunday For more information contact: Jolene McCoy (906) 635-6528 or St. Ignace Office 643-8689 Public Welcome - Indian Crafts Only- Security �~~)' SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE of CHIPPEWA IND!ANS 206 Greenough St Sault Ste. Mazie, MI 49783 . ,!, ) ~ I '; " ~ ~~ u ~ ~·~, ~~ . IJE. ~~ ~p - .U �Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians ''HONOR-THE ELDERS'' Traditional Pow-Wow . locateAa~~·~o{f~~~~~n935unds Head Male Dancer~ Don Doud Head Female Dancer Vicky Doud ~- $50 Travel Expenses will be paid to the first ~ 50 families with drummers and/or dancers to register and participate ·(out of town). Traders not included. Registration 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., August 24 · All monetary awards at (No late registration) Pow-Wow Committee Cash for making all discretion Grand Entries on time. Trader fee - $20 a day or $30 both days - LIMITED ELECTRICITYGrand Entry: 1:00 p.m. & 7:00 p.m. Saturday 1:00 p.m. Sunday For more information contact: Jolene McCoy (906) 635-6528 or St. Ignace Office 643-8689 Public Welcome - Indian Crafts Only- Security �.c: .· ~--::- • SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE" · of , . ., CHIPPEWA INDIANS • 206 Greenough St. ·=-·.l'!·r,. '·. 11 ! ::) - :'l, ~ 1 u "" Sault Ste. Marie, MI 49783 - - - .J• e,J ~ . fJ~ ~~-~-~ cJS:l?.--~ OJJ-f- D.LJ f,} - ;I I\ ) ,fYl:t ~q~ ~ . . � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native American Publication Collection Subject The topic of the resource Native Americans Indians of North America Anthropology Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Michigan Description An account of the resource Selected digital surrogates of published and unpublished materials from the Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection dealing with different aspects of human culture and anthropology, with an emphasis on Native American people, events, organizations, and activities in Michigan. Includes newsletters, event programs, flyers, posters and other printed materials. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gillis, Edward V. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American Publication Collection (RHC-14)</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-02-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Gi-gikinomaage-min Project (Kutsche Office of Local History) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1958-2000 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection, RHC-14</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14_sault-ste-marie-traditional-pow-wow_1985-08 Title A name given to the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow, August 1985 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-08 Description An account of the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow flyer, St. Ignace MI, August 24-25, 1985, collected by Edward Gillis included as part of his Native American publication collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Subject The topic of the resource Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Indians of North America Michigan Michigan -- Grand Rapids Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/e0d6a3caa9873f9d356792a5548805e7.pdf 0771f4094cf619c94c6313e1338040d7 PDF Text Text $111H SIii. M11i1 T1il,1 ol C/,ipp,wa Indian, TRADITIONAL INDIAN POW· WOW DAYS 2218 Shunk Road vicinity - Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan JULY 4 & 5, 1984 Registration at 9:00 a.m. Registration closes at 1:00 p.m. July 4 Admission: Cash for making all Grand Entries on time. All monetary awards at pow-wow committee discretion. $50. Travel Expenses will be paid to the first 50 families to register and participate (out of town) Contact: Bucko Teeple (906) 635-6050 or George Nolan (906) 635-6091 Traders fee: $20 a day or $30 both days LIMITED electricity- $2.00 extra per day. Traders should pre-register - Contact: Jolene McCoy - (906) 635-6528 Host Drum: Wolf River Singers From Zoar, Wisconsin Chuck Wynon, Head singer Grand Entry: 1:00 p.m. Master of Ceremonies: Butch Elliott Head Dancers: Apesanahkwat Julie Whitepigeon �SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS 206 Greenough Sault Ste . Marie , Ml 49783 Non -Profit Org . U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit No . 253 Soult Ste. Morie Michigan COUNCIL DRUM NEWS GRAND VALLEY AMER . I ND . LODGE 25 1 2 UNION AVE . N. E . 48909 GRAND RAPIDS , MI. PLEASE POST! I \ I I --!___. ,____________ _ J \ I "' ~-- ) -~) 1 ) 'r 75 \ \ / I ¼ mil" IIC:.11' 3 MILE ROAD C'ity Li � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native American Publication Collection Subject The topic of the resource Native Americans Indians of North America Anthropology Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Michigan Description An account of the resource Selected digital surrogates of published and unpublished materials from the Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection dealing with different aspects of human culture and anthropology, with an emphasis on Native American people, events, organizations, and activities in Michigan. Includes newsletters, event programs, flyers, posters and other printed materials. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gillis, Edward V. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American Publication Collection (RHC-14)</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-02-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Gi-gikinomaage-min Project (Kutsche Office of Local History) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1958-2000 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection, RHC-14</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14_sault-ste-marie-traditional-pow-wow_1984-07 Title A name given to the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow, July 1984 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1984-07 Description An account of the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow flyer, Sault Ste. Marie MI, July 4-5, 1984, collected by Edward Gillis included as part of his Native American publication collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Subject The topic of the resource Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Indians of North America Michigan Michigan -- Grand Rapids Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9c25d00e405a6d11ce2a0289278139a9.pdf 054e3968630b961bd7c7699d1c89f0fa PDF Text Text Saall Sle. Mari, Tril,1 ol t:l,i,,,. Indian, 11 1 HONOR THE WOMEN ' TRADITIONAL POW· WOW 2218 Shunk Road vicinity - Sault Ste. Marie, MI July 4 ~-_ 5, 1985 M.C. Butch Elliott Host Drum "',!, ' rtrs ,-,~:·/-'-.>J, <. Admission: $3.00 - Pow-Wow Button (Good for both days - ($2.50 in advance) OR Cumberland Singers, Cumberland, Wisconsin $1.50 - Adults $1.00 - Children, Elderly & Handicapped Head Male Dance~ Gerry Kaboni Wikwemikong, Ontario Children Under 5 FREE Head Female Dancer- $50.TravelExpenses Christine Migwans Wikwemikong, Ontario will be paid to the first 50 families with drummers and/ or dancers to register and participate. (Out of town). Traders not included. Registration 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. July 4 (No late registration.) All monetary awards at Pow-Wow Committee discretion. Cash for making all Grand Entries on time. Traders fee: $20 a day or $30 both days LIMITED electricity - $2. 00 extra per day. Traders should pre-register - Contact Jolene McCoy - (906) 635-6528 Grand Entry: 1:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. - Thursday 1:00 p.m. - Friday ABSOLUTELY For more information contact: NO DRUGS OR ALCOHOL Jolene M..:Coy - (906) 635-6528 or in Pow-Wow or Camping Areas. Susan Matrious - (906) 635-6050 Public Welcome Indian Crafts only - Security - Camping Accommodations Sault ~ Printing �SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS Non-Profit Org . U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit No. 253 Soult Ste . Marie Michigan 206 Greenough Sault Ste . Marie, Ml 49783 COUNCIL DRUM NEWS GRAND VALLEY AMER. IND. LODGE 2512 UNION AVE. N.E. GRAND RAPIDS, MI. 48909 PLEASE POST! =1~-- 8 TH AVE W 5! J 10nt \_ _ _ ;r_ '_____ - ) --- ----- - 26 +-' l 1-"'T'""..a.,;~~L !, .I I j _,._,....,.:..:.......,.IJ,,,1'~ ---l - 22 NO 1 " :, ~ ·~ >< "' XI "'"' m1lr 11caln 3 MILE ROAD F C' i t\" l � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native American Publication Collection Subject The topic of the resource Native Americans Indians of North America Anthropology Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Michigan Description An account of the resource Selected digital surrogates of published and unpublished materials from the Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection dealing with different aspects of human culture and anthropology, with an emphasis on Native American people, events, organizations, and activities in Michigan. Includes newsletters, event programs, flyers, posters and other printed materials. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gillis, Edward V. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American Publication Collection (RHC-14)</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-02-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Gi-gikinomaage-min Project (Kutsche Office of Local History) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1958-2000 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection, RHC-14</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14_sault-ste-marie-traditional-pow-wow_1985-07 Title A name given to the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow, July 1985 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-07 Description An account of the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow flyer, Sault Ste. Marie MI, July 4-5, 1985, collected by Edward Gillis included as part of his Native American publication collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Subject The topic of the resource Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Indians of North America Michigan Michigan -- Grand Rapids Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/0ebbdfb97d9ad8d6fd97ff738b7119a3.pdf 91a6271248a99627e68c73f079312b74 PDF Text Text ��' ....... . APPEARING JULY 5: WILLIE NELSON'S daughter ''SUSIE'' IN CONCERT AT THE PULLAR STADUIM, 500, Ml TWO SHOWS: 7:30 & 9 p.m. ADMISSION: Adults - $6 ($5 - advance) Children under 12 & Elderly • $2.50 Spirits Available Susie will also be at Vegas Kewadin after her last performance For more information contact: 906-635-6050 • • • • • • • • • �,. la11H lie. Ma1ie 11//Je ol CJ,i111r11 lnlian1 T DITIONAL INDIAN • OW DAYS 2218 Shunk Road vicinity· Sauh Ste. Marie, Michigan JULY 4, 5, & 6, 1986 FOSTER & ADOPTIVE HOMES NEEDED The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians has received a license fora child placing agency , 1 ... -- - .1,~ ++. ",......,..__ RENEW YOUR TRIBAL MEMBERSHIP! You can do it now with this form. Just fill it out and send to: June Nolan, Registrar Bonnie McKerchie Building 2218 Shunk Road Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan 49783 $10.00_ _ Adult for two years $ 1.00_ _ Child for one year .so__ lost card re-issue lifetime membership $10.00_ _ (over 60) Make checks payable to: Sault Ste. Marie Tribe qf Chippewa Indians PLEASE NOTEIII New Federal Regulations may require ¼ degree blood quantum for eligibility in some programs, therefore it's important to trace Indian ancestry of both parents . ..... __ -. " 1' .. .. ~ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native American Publication Collection Subject The topic of the resource Native Americans Indians of North America Anthropology Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Michigan Description An account of the resource Selected digital surrogates of published and unpublished materials from the Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection dealing with different aspects of human culture and anthropology, with an emphasis on Native American people, events, organizations, and activities in Michigan. Includes newsletters, event programs, flyers, posters and other printed materials. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gillis, Edward V. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American Publication Collection (RHC-14)</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-02-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Gi-gikinomaage-min Project (Kutsche Office of Local History) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1958-2000 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection, RHC-14</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14_sault-ste-marie-traditional-pow-wow_1986-07 Title A name given to the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow, July 1986 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-07 Description An account of the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow flyer, Sault Ste. Marie MI, July 4-6, 1986, collected by Edward Gillis included as part of his Native American publication collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Subject The topic of the resource Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Indians of North America Michigan Michigan -- Grand Rapids Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/7408867dcee46cd5429929f765ea56a0.pdf d275782142796f6702904b67919065bc PDF Text Text Sault lSte. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians ·Honor Mother Earth· Traditional Pow-wow July 1, 2, & 3, 1988 Shunk Road vicinity - on the reservation Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan 1st Annual Spiritual Conference June 30 & July 1 M.C. HEAD DANCERS Bucko Teeple, Sault, MI Allard Teeple, Sault, MI Rene Shipman, Sault, Ml Jim White, Red Lake, MN HOST DRUM HEAD VETERAN DANCER Medicine Hoop Singers, Kingston, Ontario Jerry Whitepigeon Holland, MI ReKistra tion: Friciay 6-8 p . m. Saturday 9 a.m. - 2 p.m. Drums must be registered before Grand Entry *AGENDA* 4th Annual Anishnabe Art Show Thursday. June 30: Spiritual Conference Potluck Brunch & Dinner Friday, July 1: In the pow-wow arena Originci.l w01·k by Native al'tists only Cash prize for Best of Show Spiritual Conference Potluck Brunch & Dinner Open Drum - 7 p.m. to Dusk Registration - 8 to 8 p. m. Traders Fee: $15 a day or $35 for all 3 days . Saturday. July 2: Indian Crafts Only - Registration - 9 a. m. to 10a.m. Continental Breakfast - 7 to 2p.m. 4th Annual Anishnabe Art Show - 10:30 a. m. to noon Grand Entry - 1 p.m. Dinner - 5 p.m. Grand Entry - 7 .m. LIMITED ELECTRICITY ($2 extra per day) (NO REFUNDS) Trader Space available on a first come first serve basis only. Admission: f $3.00 - Pow-Wow Button (Good for all 3 days) or Daily Rate: Sunday. Ju y 3: $1. 50 Adults $1 . oo Children , Elderly & Handicapped or $6. 00 Family Pass Children Under 5 FREE PUBLIC WELCOME TRAVEL MONEY FOR DANCERS AT GRAND ENTRY Breakfast - 7 to 10 a. m. Grand Entry - 1 p.m. *Sunrise Ceremonies - Location to be announced CONTACT: Jolene Robinette (906) 635-6534 Security - Camping Accommodations Carolyn Van ::dde (906) 635. 6530 ABSOLUTELY NO DRUGS OR ALCOHOL IN POW-WOW, CONFERENCE OR CAMPING AREAS Saul1-4.'li-P""nng �~~ui~,!~~=.~~:!:! Non-Profit Org. U.S. POSTAGE S I 206 Greenough au t Ste. Marie, Ml 49783 PAID Permit No. 253 Sault Ste. Morie • Michigan Council Drum News 2512 Union Ave, N,E, Grand Rapids MI 48909 PLEASE POST! "SWEETGRAs;""ART~ & CRArn--, ----- -,,~ I .I 8TH. AVE W I ( ~ I mile •u:aln 3 MILE ROAD G City Li • � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native American Publication Collection Subject The topic of the resource Native Americans Indians of North America Anthropology Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Michigan Description An account of the resource Selected digital surrogates of published and unpublished materials from the Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection dealing with different aspects of human culture and anthropology, with an emphasis on Native American people, events, organizations, and activities in Michigan. Includes newsletters, event programs, flyers, posters and other printed materials. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gillis, Edward V. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American Publication Collection (RHC-14)</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-02-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Gi-gikinomaage-min Project (Kutsche Office of Local History) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1958-2000 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection, RHC-14</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14_sault-ste-marie-traditional-pow-wow_1988-07 Title A name given to the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow, July 1988 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988-07 Description An account of the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow flyer, Sault Ste. Marie MI, July 1-3, 1988, collected by Edward Gillis included as part of his Native American publication collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Subject The topic of the resource Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Indians of North America Michigan Michigan -- Grand Rapids Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3cc0497ee7b0602eebce975c1d2989bf.pdf be6ead3559225764460f645c68e93473 PDF Text Text Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Presents: ~.. ~~~ ,_.._., ~£WA '"\)~ The 12th Annual Traditional Powwow and Spiritual Conference July 1 2 ·3 4 1993 ' ' ' ' "Strengthening Traditions" Shunk Road Reservation, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan 8THANNUAL ANISHNABE ART SHOW SPIRITUAL CONFERENCE feast for participants. In the lodge by the Joseph K. Lumsden Bldg. Bring your own chair and utensils. 1993 Billy ;\1ills Fun Run ·Origin~·! 'l,\'tia·k by Native Artists Only! Categories: 16 and under, Open-all ages. Demonstrations. Cash Prize for Best of Show SK - Run & 1 Mile Youth Run AGENDA: Awards to overall male, female & age group winners! HONORARIUM For Dancers at Grand Entry & First 15 Drums Registered (5 singers, minimum) Registration opens Friday July 1, THUR.: July 2, FRI.: TRADERS WELCOME Native Art by Native Americans Only! Absolutely no manufactured works. Food booths must meet health codes. Pre-registration. First come on site. July 3, SAT.: NEW POW WOW GROUNDS! New Pow Wow grounds for this year. There will be indoor toilet facilities and showers. CONTACT FOR INFO: Tribal Offices, (906) 635-6050 Traders, (906) 635-6535 Spiritual Conference, (906) 635-6075 Anishnabe Art Show, (906) 635-6538 Billy Mills Fun Run, (906) 635-6050 PUBLIC WELCOME July 4, SUN.: - Spiritual Conference & Pot Luck Luncheon & Supper - all day - Spiritual Conference & Pot Luck Luncheon & Supper - all day - Open Drum, 7 p.m. to dusk - Dancer re2istration opens 1 p.m. to 7 p.m. - Billy Mills Run SK & 1 Mile Youth Run SK run - 9:00 a.m. 1 Mile Youth Run -10:00 a.m. Race Awards - 2:00 p.m. - Women's Circle, 10:00 p.m. -Anishnabe Art Show 10:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. - Artist Re2istration 8:30 to 9:30 a.m. - Children's Carnival 9 - 11 a.m. Registration 9 a.m. - 1 p.m. Grand Entries 1 & 7 p.m. Top 40 Dance 10 p.m. - Anishnabe Art Show 12:00 - 3:00 p.m. Grand Entry 1 p.m. Giveaways ·I �l_ ' ' H ·'"'7'! ~ ; e· ~'.... t.i ;)·.'• : jt • ,, >OZtVUE . ··.,1;• l,ea, v. J A VE~ l::1-J I' .,, ..1 f!~·t· Nllll IProfit Org. ~.S POSTAGE PAID ,,., Sault Ste. Mafie, MI Pumlt rto. 26 3 e rm mtt ' ,, .~ . '• <·, . ;, • ..... ' Council Drum Ne~s ~ ~ 2512 Union Ave.' ~ E . ·- Grand Rapids MI ~ : ;~ • ' wt11 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native American Publication Collection Subject The topic of the resource Native Americans Indians of North America Anthropology Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Michigan Description An account of the resource Selected digital surrogates of published and unpublished materials from the Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection dealing with different aspects of human culture and anthropology, with an emphasis on Native American people, events, organizations, and activities in Michigan. Includes newsletters, event programs, flyers, posters and other printed materials. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gillis, Edward V. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American Publication Collection (RHC-14)</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-02-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Gi-gikinomaage-min Project (Kutsche Office of Local History) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1958-2000 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/446">Edward V. Gillis Native American publication collection, RHC-14</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-14_sault-ste-marie-traditional-pow-wow_1993-07 Title A name given to the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow, July 1993 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1993-07 Description An account of the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Traditional Pow Wow flyer, Sault Ste. Marie MI, July 1-4, 1993, collected by Edward Gillis included as part of his Native American publication collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Subject The topic of the resource Indians of North America -- Michigan -- Periodicals Indians of North America Michigan Michigan -- Grand Rapids Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2345b40ae171e519c39f82f46e211a22.pdf 70c07b64b355853cb376b2c5c45c6a89 PDF Text Text Grand Valley State University Veterans History Project Interview British Army Richard Saunders Length of interview: (24:48) (00:00) Early Life     Richard was born on January 25, 1930 in Plymouth, England He had three sisters; his father was in the navy and his mother was a cook Richard attended school until he was 15. After that, he got a job working for the railroad o His job was to take phone messages and record the contents of trains While he was working for the railroad, he was drafted into the army (2:35) Army Life      After basic training, Richard served in Germany and Holland In Germany, he worked for the army postal service o His was part of a mobile postal service that traveled from Herford, Germany to the Hook of Holland o In Germany, they were based in a clothing factory. The men working for the postal service received various courier duties (4:45) When Richard got out of the army in 1951, he returned to work on the railroad as a shunter o Shunters positioned the cars of the trains and put them together (5:30) Training for the army taught them discipline and how to shoot a rifle o Since all of the men that Richard trained with were drafted, they had little to no interest in the army When Richard was getting his first physical for the army, he had to stand naked in front of six doctors while they determined if he had flat feet o The doctors determined that he had flat feet, this was something that Richard took advantage of o On one occasion, Richard complained that his feet were hurting. He reported to the doctors who gave him a special, more comfortable pair of boots. The officers didn’t like that he was different boots than the other men (8:25) Post-Army Life/Reflections of the Past   After working as a shunter for a time, he was promoted to a head shunter and went to a new location (still near Plymouth) In June 1969, Richard came to the United States o He worked with a family member who was a painter, until he found work on the C&O (Chesapeake and Ohio) Railway �         Life in America was rough until he was able to make friends and settle in (10:10) Richard’s father was killed during the Second World War o Richard was only 11 at the time so he didn’t fully understand the gravity of the situation The military life was frustrating because he couldn’t say anything to the “morons yelling at him” (14:15) Life during the Second World War was difficult because no one knew when their town would be bombed o When the bombs fell, they went into a shelter that was partially buried in the earth. It protected them from anything other than a direct hit o Richard’s mother was an air raid warden. She walked around and reported extensive damage Richard never wanted to be in the service and therefore, never considered himself a soldier His time in the military was interesting because of the post-war dynamics that he observed (20:00) In a lot of the areas Richard was in, the bomb damage was too great for the British to clean up. However, the Americans and their bulldozers were able to clear up the damage with bulldozers The American railroad was very different from the British railroad o It was easier to work on the American railroad because the equipment was more advanced o Richard retired from the railroad in 1992 Since his retirement, Richard had done a lot of traveling in Europe o It was nice to see the places he had known as a child. Now that he had money, he was able to enjoy himself in ways that he couldn’t when he was a child o In 1994, he and his sister traveled to England. When he was there, he realized that he wasn’t and Englishmen, he was an American � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Veterans History Project Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. History Department Description An account of the resource The Library of Congress established the Veterans History Project in 2001 to collect memories, accounts, and documents of U.S. war veterans from World War II and the Korean War, Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to preserve these stories for future generations. The GVSU History Department interviews are part of this work-in-progress, and may contain videos and audio recordings, transcripts and interview outlines, and related documents and photographs. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1914- Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Afghan War, 2001--Personal narratives, American Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979-1981--Personal narratives, American Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American Michigan--History, Military Oral history Persian Gulf War, 1991--Personal narratives, American United States--History, Military United States. Air Force United States. Army United States. Navy Veterans Video recordings Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Personal narratives, American World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Smither, James Boring, Frank Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-27 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project interviews (RHC-27)</a> Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-27_SaundersR1821V Title A name given to the resource Saunder, Richard George (Interview outline), 2015 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2015-05-25 Description An account of the resource Richard Saunders was born on January 25, 1930 in Plymouth, England. He attended school until he began to work for the railroad at age fifteen. Richard was eventually drafted into the British Army and worked in the army postal service. His particular duties required him to frequently travel between Germany and Holland. After leaving the military in 1951, Richard returned to work on the railroad. In 1969, Richard moved to the United States where he worked for the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway until his retirement in 1992. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Saunders, Richard George Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Lewis, Emily (Interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Veterans History Project (U.S.) United States--History, Military Michigan--History, Military Veterans Other veterans & civilians--Personal narratives, American United States. Army Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project collection, (RHC-27)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">In Copyright</a> Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries. Allendale, Michigan Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3d5989623dd94cdc25ca444439a51ec2.mp4 ddb81dad9fe5cb4055e4ba89aa9ba815 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/cc107447034e1686f7807965ed59040e.pdf a6fe494432f1d10a6772ac99ab40eb58 PDF Text Text Grand Valley State University Veterans History Project Interview Charles W. Saur (15:58) (00:00) - Enlisted in the US Army Air Corps from February ’43- November “45 - 764th SQDN. 461 Bomb GP. 49th Wing - Highest Rank: Captain - Received an Air Medal and a DFC during service in World War Two (00:03) Life Before Service - Born in Sparta, MI - He was a student before joining the Air Corps - Charles went to school at Grand Rapids Junior College, which is now Grand Rapids Community College - He had been attending his second year in college when Pearl Harbor occurred (1:15) Enlistment - He had not cared about being drafted into the war - Charles enlisted because he found the Air Corps interesting - He thought by enlisting, he would later have some money to help him finish his college education, yet he did not continue back to college after serving (2:00) The Air Corps - He wanted to finish his education and fly planes (3:05) His First Days in Service - He had been called up in February of 1943 to travel to Chicago by train - From Chicago he went on a Pullman Train, yet did not even know where he was headed for at the time - He ended up in Miami Beach, where he stayed in a hotel on the coast (4:25) Military Occupation - 1092, First Pilot on a Heavy Bomber (4:40) Location Served - Training took place in the United States - Afterwards he flew overseas to Italy, where he was assigned to an airfield in Toreta (5:30) Most Memorable Moment - Germans fired and shot went through the wing of his plane - The shot was a dud, so it did not explode, but it did leave a very big hole in the wing of his plain - Other than the plain, no one was injured in the accident �(7:10) Passing of Time - Spent time at the Officer’s Bar, drank beer with friends - Lots of traveling, he wished they would have visited Rome - Ground Work was not very exciting compared to flying - Spent time playing table tennis and football (8:45) Holidays - Was in the service and missed Christmas, New Year’s Eve, Easter,… - They did not do much celebrating of holidays - A church was set up in the Officer’s Bar with a portable altar (9:55) Memorable Stories During Combat - There were many lucky and unlucky times - His radio operator lost an arm from “flak” of an exploded 88mm shell - A tail gunner was injured in the arm and back (11:05) Life After Service - His life was not much different than before joining the Air Corps - The experience did not greatly affect him (11:45) Friends in the Service - He made several friends in the service and still speaks to a few of them; some of them he even went to college with - The Air Force used to be called the Air Corps before World War Two (12:45) Post War Career - Received a degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan - He worked for IBM and afterwards worked for a hardware business - Became an engineer for an industry in Grand Rapids (13:35) Service Impact on Life - There were positive and negative times - It was a great experience, but not very pleasant � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Veterans History Project Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. History Department Description An account of the resource The Library of Congress established the Veterans History Project in 2001 to collect memories, accounts, and documents of U.S. war veterans from World War II and the Korean War, Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to preserve these stories for future generations. The GVSU History Department interviews are part of this work-in-progress, and may contain videos and audio recordings, transcripts and interview outlines, and related documents and photographs. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1914- Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Afghan War, 2001--Personal narratives, American Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979-1981--Personal narratives, American Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American Michigan--History, Military Oral history Persian Gulf War, 1991--Personal narratives, American United States--History, Military United States. Air Force United States. Army United States. Navy Veterans Video recordings Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Personal narratives, American World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Smither, James Boring, Frank Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-27 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project interviews (RHC-27)</a> Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SaurC Title A name given to the resource Saur, Charles (Interview outline and video), 2007 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Saur, Charles Description An account of the resource Charles Saur served in the United States Army Air Corps during World War II. He was in the 764th Squadron and received an Air Medal and a DFC while he was in the Air Corps. He served in the Air Corps from February 1943 through November of 1945. Charles said that his time in the service did not have much of an impact on his life, but he was able to make some memorable friends while serving. After serving, Charles received a degree in Mechanical Engineering from University of Michigan and then went to work for IBM. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Bradgon, Julia (Interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Veterans History Project (U.S.) United States--History, Military Michigan--History, Military Veterans United States. Army. Air Corps World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Video recordings Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2007-06-04 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project Collection, (RHC-27)</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf video/mp4 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/21cd305d838ce9492c6e8fcde5da3cb4.mp4 1819cb428649b2d0ba46c19f9c735edc https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/336b12b104a75e98f3be26703cf30ce0.pdf 1cada48bb678a7a2114f83b849a9bbd8 PDF Text Text Grand Valley State University Veterans History Project Interview Name of Interviewee: Arthur Sautter Name of War: World War II Length of Interview: (00:26:23) Childhood and Pre-Enlistment (00:17) • • • • Born in 1923 near Manistee, MI. Lived on a farm, and his father worked for the State of Michigan running a dairy farm Attended a one room school in Chatham, MI Enlisted in the Air Force as a Senior in High School. Training (09:30) • • Enlisted in the Army Air Force at Manistee, MI (10:30) Flew for the first time when he entered the Air Force. Trained on Piper Cubs in Texas. Active Duty (13:00) • • • He worked flying a number of different people around the country, on various different missions. (16:15) He flew a number of different airplanes while he was in the service. (18:45) He flew both single and double engine aircraft. Post Service (19:20) • • After his time in the service, he worked as a pilot for hire. He has a son and a daughter, and his son works as a pilot. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Veterans History Project Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. History Department Description An account of the resource The Library of Congress established the Veterans History Project in 2001 to collect memories, accounts, and documents of U.S. war veterans from World War II and the Korean War, Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to preserve these stories for future generations. The GVSU History Department interviews are part of this work-in-progress, and may contain videos and audio recordings, transcripts and interview outlines, and related documents and photographs. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1914- Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Afghan War, 2001--Personal narratives, American Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979-1981--Personal narratives, American Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American Michigan--History, Military Oral history Persian Gulf War, 1991--Personal narratives, American United States--History, Military United States. Air Force United States. Army United States. Navy Veterans Video recordings Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Personal narratives, American World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Smither, James Boring, Frank Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-27 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project interviews (RHC-27)</a> Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SautterA Title A name given to the resource Sautter, Arthur N. (Interview outline and video), 2008 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sautter, Arthur N. Description An account of the resource Arthur Sautter was born near Manistee, MI in 1923, and served in the Army Air Forces during World War II. He enlisted in the Air Force, and worked as a chauffeur, flying around Air Force personnel that needed to go places. After the war, he continued working as a pilot. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Collins Sr., Charles E. (Interviewer) Collins, Carol (Interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Veterans History Project (U.S.) United States--History, Military Michigan--History, Military Veterans Video recordings World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American United States. Air Force Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2008-08-18 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project Collection, (RHC-27)</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf video/mp4 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4346462aa3c863be5a9b5b2bd9e0473e.jpg fdf3c5e6501075b689644b17bd1cf95a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource GVSU Concert & Event Posters Subject The topic of the resource Posters Events Michigan Universities & colleges--Michigan Description An account of the resource Division of Student Services provides programs, services, and environments that enhance the personal, social, and intellectual growth of undergraduate and graduate students at the University. Events including concerts were managed by the office of Student Life. Posters for music, speakers, poetry readings and other campuswide events are included. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Division of Student Services Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/106">Student Services concerts, events, and posters files, (GV028-06)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-07-17 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context GV028-06 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1963 – 1981 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context GV028-06_SavageGrace Title A name given to the resource Savage Grace concert poster Subject The topic of the resource Grand Valley State University Grand Valley State College Michigan Allendale (Mich.) Universities & colleges--Michigan Events Posters Description An account of the resource Savage Grace in concert, featuring The Frut, Trax, The Generation Gap, and a light show by Phantasmagoria. 44th St. Armory in Grand Rapids on Friday, August 20, 1971. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1971 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/106">Student Services concerts, events, and posters files, (GV028-06)</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/fd84611457c22171f25390a804f6104c.jpg 354dc947e2e10dd3e2b2c314f5ee150b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Douglas R. Gilbert Photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R., 1942-2023 Description An account of the resource Photographs scanned from negatives and transparencies from the Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183). Douglas R. Gilbert (b. 1942) is an American photographer from Michigan. He was born in Holland, Michigan and is the son of Russell W. and Carmen (Andree) Gilbert. Gilbert earned a B.A. in social sciences and art at Michigan State University in 1964, an M.S. in photography from the Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology in 1972, and a M.S.W. from Salem State College in 1993. He is married to Barbara (McDonald) Gilbert, and has three daughters, Robyn, Rachel, and Anne. Gilbert took a serious interest in photography at the age of fourteen. In 1963 he joined the staff of Look magazine in New York as the second youngest photojournalist in the magazine's history. As a Look photographer from 1964 to 1966, he photographed folk musician Bob Dylan, the Newport Folk Festival, Simon and Garfunkel, the New York City Financial District, the children and facilities at the Manhattan School for Seriously Disturbed Children. From 1967 to 1969, Gilbert did several shoots, including that of folk singer Janis Ian for Life magazine. After moving to Chicago, Illinois in 1969 to attend the Illinois Institute of Technology, Gilbert conducted notable photo shoots of business and political figure Lenore Romney, and pursued more personal and artistic photography, focusing on urban and rural landscapes in Illinois and Michigan. He then joined the faculty of Wheaton College, where he taught from 1972 to 1982. In 1993, Gilbert graduated from Salem State College, Massachusetts, with a Masters in Social Work, and later pursued a second career as a psychotherapist. Douglas Gilbert died in June 2023. Throughout his photography career, he pursued both freelance commercial work as well as artistic work. His art photography is characterized by its classic black-and-white format, and features people, places and objects shot great attention and sensitivity. Gilbert's works are held in the permanent collections of the Art Institute of Chicago, the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, The Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, and the Grand Valley State University Art Galleries, as well as in numerous private and institutional collections. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-2011 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="%E2%80%9Dhttps%3A//gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783%E2%80%9D">Douglas R. Gilbert Papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography -- United States Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections and University Archives. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image Type The nature or genre of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183_M192-0013 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972-06/1972-08 Title A name given to the resource Savernake Forest, Wiltshire, England Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph featuring a dirt road winding through the ancient trees of Savernake Forest in Wiltshire, England. Scanned from the negative. Subject The topic of the resource Savernake Forest (England) Wiltshire (England) Trees--England Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783">Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1970s Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3a617cc14fed04be5aaf87dfe2b458a1.jpg a92ae92dea4654fcfda6d0cbdba3a2ad Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Douglas R. Gilbert Photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R., 1942-2023 Description An account of the resource Photographs scanned from negatives and transparencies from the Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183). Douglas R. Gilbert (b. 1942) is an American photographer from Michigan. He was born in Holland, Michigan and is the son of Russell W. and Carmen (Andree) Gilbert. Gilbert earned a B.A. in social sciences and art at Michigan State University in 1964, an M.S. in photography from the Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology in 1972, and a M.S.W. from Salem State College in 1993. He is married to Barbara (McDonald) Gilbert, and has three daughters, Robyn, Rachel, and Anne. Gilbert took a serious interest in photography at the age of fourteen. In 1963 he joined the staff of Look magazine in New York as the second youngest photojournalist in the magazine's history. As a Look photographer from 1964 to 1966, he photographed folk musician Bob Dylan, the Newport Folk Festival, Simon and Garfunkel, the New York City Financial District, the children and facilities at the Manhattan School for Seriously Disturbed Children. From 1967 to 1969, Gilbert did several shoots, including that of folk singer Janis Ian for Life magazine. After moving to Chicago, Illinois in 1969 to attend the Illinois Institute of Technology, Gilbert conducted notable photo shoots of business and political figure Lenore Romney, and pursued more personal and artistic photography, focusing on urban and rural landscapes in Illinois and Michigan. He then joined the faculty of Wheaton College, where he taught from 1972 to 1982. In 1993, Gilbert graduated from Salem State College, Massachusetts, with a Masters in Social Work, and later pursued a second career as a psychotherapist. Douglas Gilbert died in June 2023. Throughout his photography career, he pursued both freelance commercial work as well as artistic work. His art photography is characterized by its classic black-and-white format, and features people, places and objects shot great attention and sensitivity. Gilbert's works are held in the permanent collections of the Art Institute of Chicago, the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, The Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, and the Grand Valley State University Art Galleries, as well as in numerous private and institutional collections. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-2011 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="%E2%80%9Dhttps%3A//gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783%E2%80%9D">Douglas R. Gilbert Papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography -- United States Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections and University Archives. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image Type The nature or genre of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183_M192-0031 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972-06/1972-08 Title A name given to the resource Savernake Forest, Wiltshire, England Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph featuring a close-up view of the ancient trees of Savernake Forest in Wiltshire, England. Scanned from the negative. Subject The topic of the resource Savernake Forest (England) Wiltshire (England) Trees--England Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783">Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1970s Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1997dbdb9762fcd14ab7841144c11d50.jpg 00cd11791cdc61bff6723a7e8ab8f676 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Douglas R. Gilbert Photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R., 1942-2023 Description An account of the resource Photographs scanned from negatives and transparencies from the Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183). Douglas R. Gilbert (b. 1942) is an American photographer from Michigan. He was born in Holland, Michigan and is the son of Russell W. and Carmen (Andree) Gilbert. Gilbert earned a B.A. in social sciences and art at Michigan State University in 1964, an M.S. in photography from the Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology in 1972, and a M.S.W. from Salem State College in 1993. He is married to Barbara (McDonald) Gilbert, and has three daughters, Robyn, Rachel, and Anne. Gilbert took a serious interest in photography at the age of fourteen. In 1963 he joined the staff of Look magazine in New York as the second youngest photojournalist in the magazine's history. As a Look photographer from 1964 to 1966, he photographed folk musician Bob Dylan, the Newport Folk Festival, Simon and Garfunkel, the New York City Financial District, the children and facilities at the Manhattan School for Seriously Disturbed Children. From 1967 to 1969, Gilbert did several shoots, including that of folk singer Janis Ian for Life magazine. After moving to Chicago, Illinois in 1969 to attend the Illinois Institute of Technology, Gilbert conducted notable photo shoots of business and political figure Lenore Romney, and pursued more personal and artistic photography, focusing on urban and rural landscapes in Illinois and Michigan. He then joined the faculty of Wheaton College, where he taught from 1972 to 1982. In 1993, Gilbert graduated from Salem State College, Massachusetts, with a Masters in Social Work, and later pursued a second career as a psychotherapist. Douglas Gilbert died in June 2023. Throughout his photography career, he pursued both freelance commercial work as well as artistic work. His art photography is characterized by its classic black-and-white format, and features people, places and objects shot great attention and sensitivity. Gilbert's works are held in the permanent collections of the Art Institute of Chicago, the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, The Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, and the Grand Valley State University Art Galleries, as well as in numerous private and institutional collections. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-2011 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="%E2%80%9Dhttps%3A//gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783%E2%80%9D">Douglas R. Gilbert Papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography -- United States Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections and University Archives. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image Type The nature or genre of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183_M192-0041 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972-06/1972-08 Title A name given to the resource Savernake Forest, Wiltshire, England Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph featuring a canopy view of the ancient trees of Savernake Forest in Wiltshire, England. Scanned from the negative. Subject The topic of the resource Savernake Forest (England) Wiltshire (England) Trees--England Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783">Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1970s Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a748f5fe36a168f00f8659bb6c0273c8.mp3 32f591b058308dc1d4d6a132c11bdbe8 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent IV Scripture Text Isaiah 7:14, John 3:16 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19851222 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-12-22 Title A name given to the resource Saviour of the World Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 22, 1985 entitled "Saviour of the World", on the occasion of Advent IV, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 7:14, John 3:16. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c6f483c844fe538e7f8241d35d356abb.jpg 62f523cee8053c6761f73d4d483ffbca Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00088 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource circa 1918-1919 Title A name given to the resource Sawing lumber by hand Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide of two Chinese laborers operating a hand saw to cut lumber in a lumber yard. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides Tianjin (China) China Building Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b2f2e04d49a5e8cc66b7c91991b6cc64.jpg 2f0a6eb57ca6a53323961a359adbcf79 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Summers in Saugatuck-Douglas Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Kutsche Office of Local History Description An account of the resource Collection contains images and documents digitized and collected through the project "Stories of Summer," supported by a National Endowment for the Humanities Common Heritage Grant. The collection aims to document the twin lakeshore communities of Saugatuck and Douglas, Michigan, as they transformed through the state's bustling tourism industry and acceptance of minorities. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1910s-2010s Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Douglas (Mich.) Michigan, Lake Allegan County (Mich.) Beaches Sand dunes Outdoor recreation Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries. Allendale, Michigan Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Saugatuck-Douglas History Center Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Stories of Summer (Common Heritage project) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Text Language A language of the resource English Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-07_SD-July-1962-6 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1962-07 Title A name given to the resource Saxophonist Description An account of the resource A black and white photo of two men who wear polo shirts and glasses. The man on the right also wears a tie. Both men are seated and play the saxophone. Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Saugatuck (Mich.) Allegan County (Mich.) Musicians Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Digital file collected by the Kutsche Office of History as part of the Stories of Summer Project. Relation A related resource Stories of Summer (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/">Copyright Undetermined</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/7ff9108cafc4e8ba610283bdaa5d2872.mp3 0a8be81db48242d5fdb82882b9421fae Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Pentecost X Series Human Transformation: The Gospel & AA Scripture Text Psalm 34:6, 18, II Corinthians 5:17, 20 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19890723 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-07-23 Title A name given to the resource Say Yes to God Who Has Said Yes to You Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 23, 1989 entitled "Say Yes to God Who Has Said Yes to You", as part of the series "Human Transformation: The Gospel & AA", on the occasion of Pentecost X, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Psalm 34:6, 18, II Corinthians 5:17, 20. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/734044e5575a03417e7a53d2759c8a7a.jpg 90865c0142f1c3bbe0345a4899af213a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Naval Recognition Training Slides Subject The topic of the resource Slides Military education Airplanes, Military--Recognition Warships--Recognition World War, 1939-1945 Description An account of the resource Slides developed during World War II as a training tool, for top-side battle-station personnel on board ship and for all aircraft personnel, by the US Navy. In 1942 a Recognition School was established by the Navy at Ohio State University where the method of identification was developed. In 1943 the school was taken over by the US Navy. The importance of training in visual recognition of ships and aircraft became even more evident during World War II. Mistakes resulting in costly errors and loss of life led to an increased emphasis on recognition as a vital skill. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource United States. Navy Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/477">Naval recognition slides (RHC-50)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-04-04 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/?language=en">No Copyright - United States</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-50 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1943-1953 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Source <a href="http://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/477">Naval recognition slides, RHC-50</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-50_M4127 Title A name given to the resource SB-3, Russian medium bomber Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource United States. Navy Description An account of the resource SB-3 Russian medium bomber (aircraft), November 20, 1944. Subject The topic of the resource United States. Navy Military education Airplanes, Military--Recognition World War, 1939-1945 Slides Russia Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/?language=en">No Copyright - United States</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Naval recognition slides (RHC-50) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1944-11-20 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives