Posted on January 10, 2017
By Alex Doty, WZZM
A plan that would have enlarged the space in front of the soon-to-be remodeled Waterfront Stadium looks as though it will remain just a dream.
“Even though the bulkhead was out farther in days past (in) Grand Haven than it is now, I think for the time being it’s going to stay put,” Mayor Geri McCaleb told the Grand Haven Tribune.
On Tuesday night, Grand Haven City Council decided to forgo spending additional money on work that would’ve helped the city in its efforts to get regulatory approval from state and federal officials to extend a portion of the waterfront bulkhead farther into the Grand River.
“I can’t in good consciousness spend taxpayers’ dollars trying to prove a point with the (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) and keep getting our toes smashed with a hammer,” McCaleb said.
Last year, the city began the regulatory work to make improvements to the bulkhead, from an area in front of the 1 S. Harbor Ave. building to the first Municipal Marina slip. City officials discussed a possible extension of the bulkhead in front of Waterfront Stadium, 29 feet into the river, in order to give planned stadium renovations more room, in addition to bulkhead improvements.
“We’ve already invested $30,000 in this effort,” City Manager Pat McGinnis said. “The next step is going to cost another $25,000.”
This next step, officials say, would’ve been an analysis of the hydraulic capacity of the Grand River and consideration of a compensating cut elsewhere in the nearby watershed to mitigate impacts of the proposed land extension.
“I think we’ve got a great argument,” McGinnis said. “I think the right thing to do is on our side. (But) is it worth continuing to invest in an uncertain outcome?”
Preliminary estimates from the city last year showed that the bulkhead extension project’s price tag would be between $600,000 and $1.2 million, depending on what mitigation efforts are needed. To only repair and replace the existing breakwall and drainage system would cost an estimated $525,000. Partial revetment repair and drainage improvements would cost about $203,000.
McGinnis said the chance of getting approval from state and federal agencies was, at best, 50 percent. He noted that it is likely that more money would need to be spent on additional research and permits.
“If you end up getting told ‘no,’ that’s all wasted money,” he said.
City officials have argued that the proposed extension wouldn’t have intruded on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ shipping lane. Instead, it would have lined up with the historic extent of the waterfront and the ends of the city’s fixed docks, and would’ve provided greater protection for the boaters that use the Municipal Marina.
“This is where it’s frustrating, because we have the compelling argument and they have the hammer,” McCaleb said. “Every time you stick your toe out or finger out, they smash it and charge you another $25,000.”
Source: WZZM
