[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
IOD .06011, rogg", 1PM-1 -.4 0-4 A A Resort Township HD source Use il M"7 161 R4 R47 inage ent Plan '9" Resort Township 1,0 Resource Use ent Plan, Prepared for: Resort Township Prepared by: Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May, Inc. Engineers -- Planners 2330 East Stadium Boulevard Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 yzlz Administered by: Division of Land & Wa ter Management Great Lakes Shoreland Section Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Office Of Planning and Zoning Emmet County l4ovember, 1988 Financial assistance for this Plan has been partially provided through the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 adminis- tered by the Office of Coastal Zone Man- agement National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Division of Land & Water Management Great Lakes Shoreland Section. Resort Township Resource Use Management Plan Plan Participants Resort Township Planning Commission Robert Greenwell, Chairman Marvin Veurink Leon Fish Norm Eppler Richard Carlson Don Caird Maureen Radke, Emmet County Office of Planning & Zoning We also wish to acknowledge the Resort Township Board for financial assistance and Township residents who participated in this project. Resort Township Board John (Tony) Fellows Karl Crawford Marvin Veurink Fred Foltz Ralph Eppler TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Title Page ........................................... i Acknowlegements .................................... ii Table of Contents .................................... iii-v List of Tables ........................................ vi-vii List of Figures ....................................... iix List of Maps ......................................... ix I INTRODUCTION ..................................... 1-3 Purpose ........................................ 2 Process ........................................ 3 11 BACKGROUND STUDIES .............................. 4-69 Community Description .......................... 4-7 Population ...................................... 8-13 Economy ....................................... 14-16 Public Facilities ................................. 17-24 Transportation .................................. 25-27 Natural Resource Inventory and Capability .......... 28-41 Existing Land Use ............................... 42-47 Housing ........................................ 48-50 Ownership ...................................... 51-53 Analysis of Current Zoning Ordinance .............. 54-57 Citizen Questionnaire ............................ 58-66 Conclusions from Background Studies ............... 67-69 III ANALYSIS OF SUB-PLANNING AREAS ................. 70-77 IV CONCEPT PLAN ..................................... 78-79 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) SECTION PAGE V RESOURCE USE MANAGEMENT PLAN ................. 80-129 Land Use Plan ................................... 80-94 Natural Resources Plan ........................... 95-104 U.S. 31 and Coastal Area Plan ..................... 105-122 Recreation Plan ................................. 123-129 VI IMPLEMENTATION ................................... 130-135 VII APPENDIX Citizen Questionnaire The Importance of Resort Township's Water Resources (By the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council) U.S. 31 Highway Alternative Treatments LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE Table I Emmet County Population Change by Township, City and Village ........................ 9 Table 2 Population Characteristics by Age - Resort Township, Emmet County and State of Michigan ..................................... 10 Table 3 Emmet County Population Projections by Township, City and Village ........................ 12 Table 4 Resort Township Population Projections Including the Potential Bay Resort Population ................ 13 Table 5 Resort Township State Equalized Valuation by Class of Property ..................... 15 Table 6 Resort Township Employers ......................... 16 Table 7 Resort Township Recreational Lands ................. 18 Table 8 Recreational Opportunities Offered within the City of Petoskey ....................... 20 Table 9 Recreation Standards .............................. 21 Table 10 Resort Township Average Daily Traffic Counts Major Intersections ................. 26 LIST OF TABLES (cont.) TABLE PAGE Table I I Resort Township Land Use Acreages for 1988 and 1968 ................................ 45 Table 12 Resort Township Number of Housing Units, 1988 ..................................... 49 Table 13 Emmet County and Resort Township Average Household Size .......................... 50 Table 14 Resort Township Land Ownership, 1988 ................ 52 Table 15 Resort Township Existing Zoning Districts ............ 56 Table 16 Resort Township Sub-Planning Zones - Analysis ........ 72 Table 17 Resort Township Sub-Planning Zones - Strategies ...... 73 Table 18 Evaluation Matrix Alternative Land Use Strategies .............................. 77 Table 19 Resort Township Land Use Acreages ................. 94 Table 20 Laws with Direct Applicability to the Management of Natural Resources within Resort Township ........................... 103-104 Table 21 Resort Township U.S. 31 Corridor Management Plan ................................ 121 LIST OF TABLES (cont.) TABLE PAGE Table 22 Resort Township U.S. 31 Corridor Strategies for Protection of Natural Resources ................ 122 Table 23 Resort Township Implementation Strategies ........... 131 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE Figure I Proximity of Resort Township to Other Communities .............................. 4 Figure 2 Clustered Development Concept ..................... 86 Figure 3 Regulated Rural Growth Concept .................... 88 Figure 4 Regulated Waterfront Residential Concept ............ 89 Figure 5 Strategies for the Protection of Natural Resources ............................... 97 Figure 6 Entrance Treatment ............................... 108 Figure 7 Shared Parking .................................... 110 Figure 8 Secondary Road Access ............................. III Figure 9 Uncombined Driveways ............................. 112 Figure 10 Combined Driveways ............................... 112 Figure I I Bicycle/Recreation Pathway ........................ 114 Figure 12 Bicycle Lanes ..................................... 114 Figure 13 Section of U.S. 31 ................................. 119 LIST OF MAPS MAP PAGE Map I Soils .............................................. 29 Map 2 Slopes ............................................. 33, Map 3 Wooded Areas ...................................... 36 Map 4 Wetlands and Streams ............................... 38 Map 5 Development Capability ............................. 41 Map 6 Existing Land Use .................................. 43 Map 7 Active Farmlands ................................... 47 Map 8 Land Ownership .................................... 53 Map 9 Zoning Districts .................................... 55 Map 10 Sub-Planning Zones ................................. 71 Map I I Concept Plan ...................................... 79 Map 12 Land Use Plan ...................................... 81 Map 13 Recreation Plan .................................... 124 I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I Introduction - I INTRODUCTION The high quality of life found in Resort Township is in part a result of the outstanding variety of natural resources and scenic amenities offered within the Township. These some resources and amenities, however, will attract development to the area which will either positively or negatively impact the environment and the perceived quality Of life within the Township. A desire to protect Resort Township's resources and guide future development activities has led to the formation of the Resource Use Management Plan, as initiated by the Resort Township Planning Commission. PURPOSE The purpose of the Resort Township Resource Use Management Plan is to provide guidelines for future, specific land use planning The plan will accomplish the following items to fulfill its purpose. � Gather background information regarding human and natural resources found within Resort Township. � Gather input from residents concerning potential future developments and their perception of the Township resources. � Analyze existing resources and land uses, and any associated problems or concerns. � Identify goals and policies for managing the Township resources. � Develop strategies for improvements and protection of resources especially coastal area and waterfront resources. � Develop an im plementation program to carry out the strategies. 2 PROCESS The Resort Township Resource Use Management Plan was developed over a period of approximately seven months. It involved periodic meetings by the Resort Township Planning Commission and numerous sub-committee meetings. Development of *the Plan Was assisted by the consulting firm of Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. A primary consideration in development of this Plan was the incorporation of citizen input. This input Was gathered at the monthly meetings (Ind through G citizen questionnaire. The planning process involved four major work elements. These elements are identified as follows: 1) Background Studies and Analysis - This task involves an inventory and analysis of the existing condition's of the Township. This includes such physical features such as land use, population, recreation, transportation, etc. 2) Community Input - As mentioned above, the concerns of the Township residents were viewed as an important component within the overall plan. A questionnaire and community meetings were used to gather input from the residents. 3) Identification of Concerns, GoGIs and Policies, - Upon completion of the background studies and analysis of existing conditions and input from local citizens, the special concerns, problems, and needs of the Township were identif ied. 4) Development of Final Plan and Imple!nentution Strategy- - The end product of this planning process is the final plan which documents this process and develops strategies to guide future growth within the Township. 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 11 I I - Background Studies I COMMUNITY DESCRIPTION Regional Context Resort Township is located within a highly scenic resort region of 'Michigan. Found in the southwest corner of Emmet County, Resort Township is bordered on the north by Little Traverse Bay, on the east by Bear Creek Township and the north arm of Walloon Lake, on the south and west by Walloon Lake and Charlevoix County. The City of Petoskey borders the northeast corner of Resort Township. The City of Charlevoix and Traverse City are approximately 10 and 62 miles southwest of Resort Township. Figure I illustrates Resort Township's proximity to a number of other communities in Michigan. Figure 1 Proximity of Resort Township to Other Communities 4 Community ChGrGcter The outstanding natural resources found within Resort Township and the close proximity of the Township to resort centers such as the cities of Petoskey, Charlevoix and Boyne, help to make Resort Township an attractive living environment. The characteristics of those who reside and/or are employed in the Township vary. Many individuals reside in Resort Township on a seasonal basis as indicated by the 1988 Inventory of Land Uses and the Walloon Lake Association members list. Those who reside in Resort Township part of the year live in other areas of Michigan such as the cities of Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills and Ann Arbor, and in other states such as Florida, Illinois and Indiana during the off seasons. The majority of these seasonal residents rent or own single family homes fronting Walloon Lake. Most of the year-round residents live within several relatively new subdivisions in the northeast portion of Resort Township and in single family homes scattered throughout the Township bordering the main roads. These year-round residents are either employed by industrial or commercial businesses within the Township, self-employed, retired or find employment in nearby communities such as the cities of Petoskey and Charlevoix. Agricultural activities account for much of the self-employment within the Township. Many Resort Township residents actively farm land cleared by their ancestors who founded the Township. Historiccil Context The following information on the history of Resort Township is taken from the "Historical Notes About Resort Township" prepared by the Resort Township I History Committee I Resort Township History Committee: Alden Genshaw, Frank Holzchu, Fred Miller, Gilbert Morford, Gorden Rehkopf, Mildred Rehkopf, and Edna Risk. 5 Prior to the arrival of the white settlers, the area now known as Resort Township was inhabited by Indians of the Ottawa Tribe. Most of these Indians spent the winter months farther south but returned year after year to their settlements along the Bay and Walloon Lake. Access to Walloon Lake was not easy; it required a one mile land portage from Little Traverse Bay to the head of the Lake. The Indians, however, liked to camp near Walloon Lake because there they found good fishing and hunting opportunities. After the arrival of the white settlers, the Indians stayed throughout the winter months and helped in the lumber camps. For many years white settlers and Indians were friendly neighbors. Th e boundaries of the area now known as Resort Township changed several times between 1853 and 1897. In 1853, this area was included in the newly organized Emmet County. In 1869, this area became part of Charlevoix County. The Charlevoix County Board of Supervisors organized Resort Township in 1880. In 1896, however, Resort Township was attached again to Emmet County by an act of the legislature. In 1897 the Emmet County Board of Supervisors altered the boundaries once again which created Resort Township as it is known today. The major activities carried out by the new Township officials and settlers included building new roads and maintaining the schools. Included among the list of Township founders are the names Bacon, Botsford, Couch, Conn, Cole, Davis, Depew, Ernot, Eppler, Genshaw, Grimes, Henderson, Light, March, Morford, Miller, McConnell, Nadolsky, Nickles, Piehl, Ranall, Ramsby, Rehkopf, Reise, Rebery, Kalbfleisch, Shepard, Stark, Storck, Tubbs, Williams, Wright, Woode and Zirk. Several descendants of these early settlers live in Resort Township today. Growth Characteristics The natural resources of the Township and the close proximity of the Township to urban centers has also influenced the types of growth and development experienced by the Township. The once abundant deposits of natural limestone, for example, supported several industrial businesses along the northern boundary of Resort Township. As noted in the "Historical Notes About Resort Township", 6 the Petoskey Lime Company was started along the shores of Little Traverse Bay in 1884. This company changed hands in 1912 and became the Northern Lime Company, which continued until the 1940's. In 1920 the Petoskey Portland Cement Company began operating a two-kiln cement plant within the coastal area. This company continued to expand its operation until the 1950's when Penn Dixie took over. The Penn Dixie operation employed cis many as 300 workers at one time, but went bankrupt in about 1980 due to financial difficulties. In 1981 the Dundee Cement Company acquired the property via public auction, but never reopened the plant. In addition to the limestone resources, the timber resources of Resort Township supported a variety of businesses in the early years. Several saw mills, a wooden bowl factory, a broom factory and a cedar shingle mill were operating in the early 19001s. Today, only a veneer manufacturing operation is located in Resort Township. The clearing of woodlands during the beginning years of Resort Township created excellent opportunities for agricultural activities. Soils which were prime for forests were also prime for farming. Consequently, agriculture has been the dominant land use throughout the Township's history. Today development pressures for residential and recreational properties are beginning to impact these valuable agricultural lands. Increased demand for housing in scenic areas which are close to urban centers and their associated conveniences is evident in Resort Township. It is because of these demands and anticipated growth that this Management Plan has been developed. 7 POPULATION Resort Township has experienced substantial growth in population since 1960 as shown in Table 1. The total growth rate from 1960 to 1980 for Resort Township was over 125%. This growth rate has been consistantly greater than Emmet County's total growth rate of 44.6%. The 1980 census indicated Resort Township had 1,687 people, ranking it fourth in population among all Emmet County municipalities. Characteristics A review of the general population characteristics is necessary to provide local government with guidelines in determining future land use, community facility and service needs. The following is a summarization of general population characteristics for Resort Township. These Statistics were compiled from U.S. Bureau of Census Data. Other statistical information is presented in Tables I and 2. 1. In 1980, Resort's population was 1,687, of which 866 or 51.3% were female and 821 or 48.7% were male. 2. The median age was 28.7, while 31.6% were under 18 years old and 9.0% were 65 years and over. 3. The population distribution by age for 1970 and 1980 is displayed in Table 2. The comparison shows that the preschool and school age population declined from 40.4% in 1970 to 31.7% in 1980. During that same time period the labor force population grew from 50.3% to 59.4% and the elderly population decreased slightly from 9.3% to 9.0%. 8 Table I Emmet County Population Change by Township, City and Village % Change % Change 1980 f rom 1970 1970 from 1960 1960 Emmet County 22,992 25.4 18,331 15.2 15,904 Townships: Resort 10687 67. 2 1,009 34.9 748 Bear Creek 3,287 34.2 21450 31.8 11859 Bliss 441 56.4 282 -5.4 298 Carp Lake 637 45.1 439 -5.4 464 Center 435 24.6 349 62.3 215 Cross Village 215 16.2 185 32.1 140 Friendship 467 94.6 240 -24.5 318 Littlefield 1,822 43.9 1,266 16.0 906 Little Traverse 1,574 59.8 985 63.6 602 McKinley 961 15.1 835 -1.0. 843 Maple River 654 57.6 415 23.9 335 Pleasant View 212 71.0 124 -37.4 198 Readmond 356 52.1 234 -4.9 246 Springvale 1,073 61.8 663 42.0 467 Wawatarn 510 18.3 431 17.1 368 West Traverse 997 137.4 420 28.8 326 Cities and VillogeS: Harbor Springs 1,567 -5.7 1,662 16.0 1,433 Alanson 508 40.3 362 24.8 290 Pellston 565 20.5 346 9.3 429 Petoskey 6pO97 -3.9 6,342 3.3 61138 Source: 1980 U.S. Census 9 Table 2 Population Characteristics by Age Resort Township, Emmet County and State of Michigan Age 1970 1980 % of Government Unit (years) Population Total Population Total Resort Township -18 408 40.4 534 31.7 18-64 507 50.3 1,002 59.4 +64 94 9.3 151 9.0 Total 1.,009 100.0 19687 100.1 Emmet County -18 6,728 36.7 69714 29.2 18-64 9,367 51.1 13,404 58.3 +64 29218 12.1 2,874 12.5 Total 189331 99.9 22,992 100.0 State of Michigan -18 3,248,280 36.6 2Y750,837 29.7 18-64 4,872,421 54.9 59594,295 60.4 +64 754,382 8.5 907,684 9.8 Total 898759083 100.0 992629078 99.0 Source: U.S. Bureau of Census 1980, 1970 and ALNM 10 4. Based on inventory information gathered in 1988, approximately 183 seasonal dwelling units are found in Resort Township. Assuming a 3.0 person occu- pancy rate, the seasonal population could potentially number 549 persons on any given day in Resort Township. In addition to the seasonal housing inven- tory, two motels located along U.S. 31 provide accommodations for approx- imately 80 persons. Population Trends and Projectioms Population trends for Resort Township are shown in Table 1. Resort Township grew 34.9% from 1960 to 1970 and 67.2% from 1970 to 1980. In comparison with surrounding villages, cities and townships, Resort Township ranked fourth in population growth from 1970 to 1980. The three factors which influence population characteristics and trends are birth, death and migration. Of these three factors, in and out migration are very much influenced by local government decisions which affect economic conditions, employment opportunities, community facilities and services, and local develop- ment policies. In addition to population trends, population projections provide local government with useful guidelines in determining future needs and planning. Although popu- lation cannot be predicted with absolute accuracy, a reasonable estimation can be determined. Population projections provided by. Emmet County are presented in Table 3. The Township's population is expected to grow by 26% from 1980 to 1990. This population projection table does not indicate the potential increase in year- round or seasonal population which may occur as- a result of the Bay Resort pro- ject. This project proposes a mixed-use development to be located on property owned by the Dundee Cement Company. Most of the property is located just west of the City of Petoskey limits and bordered by Townline Road, Little Traverse Bay and U.S. 31. The project site encompasses approximately six miles of Lake Table 3 Emmet County Population Projections by Township, City and Villages Townships 1985 1990 2000 Resort 1,932 22141 2,560 Bear Creek 3,700 4,128 4,985 Bliss 500 556 669 Carp Lake 718 800 966 Center 497 551 660 Cross Village 247 273 326 Friendship 528 588 708 Littlefield 2,070 2,301 2Y764 Little Traverse 1 P794 19992 2,388 McKinley 1,095 12216 1,458 Mapleriver 746 828 992 Pleasuntview 246 271 320 ReGdmond 407 451 540 Springvale 1,209 11349 19628 Wawatarn 578 643 774 West Traverse 1,033 1,192 11512 Sub-Total 17,300 19)280 23,250 Cities and Villages: Harbor Springs 1,500 12570 1,650 Petoskey 6,000 6,300 6,600 TOTAL 24,800 273,150 319500 Source: Emmet County Solid Waste Management Plan 12 Michigan shoreline. An estimated 3,000 dwelling units have been proposed by the developers. The full impact on seasonal and year round population in Resort Township, added by the Bay Resort development, would not be realized until approximately the year 2010. Table 4 shows a population projection for Resort Township including the potential population residing within the Bay Resort development. A 3.0 person per dwelling unit was used to calculate the population projection. Table 4 Resort Township Population Projections Including the Potential Bay Resort Population 1985 1990 2000 2010 Resort 19932 29141 8,141 119560 Source: ALNM Population Analysis A comparison of Township, County and State data reveals that Resort Township has a lower median age (28.7) than Emmet County (30. 1) and the State of Michigan (28.8). In 1980 the Township also had a lower percentage of persons 65 years and over (9.0%) compared with Emmet County (12.5%) and the State of Michigan (9.8%). The percentage of persons in the preschool and school age population and the labor force population, however, was similar in 1980 for Resort Township, the County, and the State. 13 ECONOMY Tax Base Residential land use has been the predominant contributor to the tax base of Resort Township. A comparison of State equalized valuation is presented in Table 5. Residential land use, in 1987, accounted for approximately 81% of the total tax base. Furthermore, residential valuation increased approximately 36.2% from 1983 to 1987. Commercial valuation also increased over the four year period by approximately 47.2%. Industrial and agricultural valuation, however, dropped between 1983 and 1987. Table 5 shows a substantial drop in State equalized valuation for industry in 1985. Employment Type During the 1988 land use inventory, both major and minor employers were identified. As indicated by the list of employers in Resort Township, shown in Table 6, industrial businesses appear to provide most of the employment within the Township. Given the limited amount of employment opportunities within Resort Township, an assumption can be made that the majority of residents are self-employed or find employment elsewhere, possibly in Petoskey or Charlevoix. 14 TWe 5 Resort Township State Equalized Valuation by Class of Property % Change from 1983 Class 1987 SEV 1985 SEV 1983 SEV to 1987 Agriculture * 2,881,316 3,179,700 3,527,754 -18.3% Commercial 1,493,722 999,815 1,015,073 47.2% Industrial 2,631,800 1,295,200 3,545,700 -25.8% Residential * 30,372,600 25,547,000 22,307,369 36.2% Timber-Cutover ----- ----- 164,565 ----- Total Real 37,379,438 31,021 p715 30,560,461 22.3% Total Real Plus Personal 39,028,539 32,644,554 33,575p436 16.24% Since 1984 selective agricultural parcels less than 20 acres have been reclassified as residential. This has contributed to the decrease in agricultural SEV and increases in residential. Source: Emmet County Equalization Department and Emmet County Office of Planning and Zoning 15 Table 6 Resort Township Employers Employer Product/Service Employees Manthei Company manufacturing veneer 95 Petoskey Plastics manufacturing plastic products 75 Northwood Transportation bulk cement trucking 20-25 Brecheizen diesel service 16 Gray's Patrol Service cottage maintenGnce@ boat storage 12 Steindler Paper Company distributor of paper products 9 Jensen's Animal Hospital veterinary services 8full-time 2part-time Bay Area Motors used car dealership 5 Artisan's Gallery handcrafted sales' 4full-time 3seasonal Coach House and motel Ifull-time Carriage House Motels 3season"al Ed's Electric repair of electrical appliances I Public Letter Shop bookkeeping David Kay Miller dentist Joseph's World antique dealer Northern Pet Center veterinary hospital and animal boarding facility Sturgeon River Pottery handcrafted pottery Nicol Pottery handcrafted pottery Less than four employees or information unavailable. Source: Emmet County Office of Planning and Zoning and ALNM Inventory 16 PUBLIC FACILITIES Public facilities are an important component in the scheme of a growing township. Recreation, government and education facilities as well as police and fire protection services may be both positively and negatively impacted by future economic development. A general understanding of the current supply and characteristics of these public facilities will assist planners and local government in determining whether existing facilities are capable of serving additional needs. Parks and Recreation Facilities Although Resort Township has no large developed recreation facilities, there are G number of areas within the the Township which offer opportunities for informal recreational activities. The five public access sites to Walloon Lake and two to Lake Michigan, for instance, provide limited access to these two lakes. Table 7 shows a breakdown of acreage for waterfront public access sites in Resort Township. Nine miles of Walloon Lake frontage and approximately six miles of Little Traverse Bay frontage are located within Resort Township. Almost all of the Little Traverse Bay and Walloon Lake frontage, however, is under private ownership. In addition to the limited lake access, 10 acres of school property located off Resort Pike may be used by the public for recreational purposes. The use of this site after school hours, however, is primarily by young children who are attracted to the available playground equipment. Resort Township also owns 50 acres of wooded land, known as the Black property, located between Lake Grove Road and Resort Pike in the southern portion of the Township. This property was donated to the Township with the provision that no motorized vehicle use would be allowed on the land and the parcel would be maintained in its natural state. 17 Table 7 Resort Township Recreational Lands Type Acres School Property 10.0 Public Access to Walloon Lake - Resort Pike Road -- - Lake Grove Road/Morf ord Road 1.1 - Townsend Road 0.2 - Stolt Road 0.2 - Cherry Avenue 0.2 Public Access to Lake Michigan - Horton Bay Road (steep grade) 0.2 - Townline Road (footpath) 0.2 Conservation Areas - Black Property 50.0 - Harold Covert Preserve 61.5 - Woodland and Partnership property 40.0 - Indian Garden Group property 100.0 - Reycraft Preserve 40.0 Total Acreage (excluding Conservation Areas) 13.1 Less than one acre, exact size not provided All unimproved with no turnarounds or parking areas and generally restricted to a right of way which may or may not be 66 feet. Source: Emmet County Staff 18 Another wooded area having similar use restrictions is the Harold Covert Preserve, known locally as the old Bacon Form, located south of the Black property. The Little Traverse Nature Conservancy, a private organization, manages this land as a wildlife preserve. Informal recreational activities such as hiking, bird watching, and cross-country skiing are allowed in the preserve while hunting, camping and motorized vehicles are not permitted. In addition, the Walloon Lake Association Trust manages approximately 140 conservation acres located in the southeastern portion of the Township. The Woodland Partnership property accounts for 40 of these acres. The other 100 acres is known as the Indian Garden Group property. A fifth parcel maintained as conservation land is known as the Reycraft Preserve. This forested land is managed by Petoskey Public Schools as part of their forestry management program. Unlike many other Townships in northern Michigan, no State land is found within Resort Township. Consequently, the potential for development of State recreation facilities or conservation areas will be limited. Table 7 provides an inventory of Township recreation and conservation sites. This includes the school property, waterfront access sites and conservation areas. It should be noted that a number of the waterfront access sites offer only limited access and are unimproved. Steep terrain, narrow frontage, restricted parking and limited turn around areas Make the landing of small boats difficult if not impossible. Many Resort Township residents utilize the 185 acres of parkland offered within the City of Petoskey. As noted by the City of Petoskey's City Planner, approximately 17% of those participating in organized recreational activities are residents of Resort Township. Resort Township contributes to the City of Petoskey's Recreation Program; which means Resort Township residents do not have to pay extra fees to utilize the City of Petoskey's recreation facilities. 19 Recreation facilities, in the City of Petoskey, most often used by Resort Township residents are summarized in Table 8 and include: Turcott Field, Buy Front Park, Magnus Park, Petoskey Winter Sports Park and Pennsylvania Park. Ballgame fields are located in Turcott Field and Bay Front Park. In addition, Bay Front Park offers the only boat launch and marina facility in the City. Both year round and transient boat slips are found within the Bay Front Park marina. As indicated by the City Planner, the boat launch and marina are heavily used. The Magnus City Park offers a swimming beach on Little Traverse Bay in addition to a camp- ground. Year round recreational opportunities are available at the Petoskey Win- ter Sports Park. Activities provided within this 20 acre multi-facility park lo- cated in the northeastern portion of the City include cross-country and downhill skiing, figure and sport skating and soccer. The Pennsylvania Park is located in downtown Petoskey and is used primarily for community events and as a passive recreation area. In addition, Resort Township residents may participate in the excellent salmon and steelhead fishing at the mouth of the Bear River in the City of Petoskey. Table 8 Recreational Opportunities Offered Within the City of Petoskey Park Activities Offered Turcott Field Baseball/Softball Bay Front Park Baseball/Softball Boat Launch Marina Picnic Areas Magnus City Park Swimming Beach Campground Playground Petoskey Winter Sports Park Downhill and Cross-Country Skiing Figure and Sport Skating Soccer Pennsylvania Park Community Events Source: City Planner, City of Petoskey Personal Communication, 1988 20 Although there are a number of recreation facilities within the City of Petoskey, the current lack of developed recreational lands within Resort Township must be addressed in future planning efforts. Table 9 suggests the desirable amount and diversity of recreational facilities appropriate within the Township. Table 9 Recreation Standards Type of Area Acres Per 1000 Population Radius of Area Served Playgrounds 1.5 0.5 miles Neighborhood Parks 2.0 0.5 miles Playf ields 1.5 1.5 miles 8ource: Joseph De Chiara and Lee Kopplernan, Planning Design Criteria - Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1969, pg. 203. By 1990, the Township will need approximately three acres of playgrounds, four acres of neighborhood parks, and three acres of playfields. In addition to the diversity of recreational activities provided, the location of park facilities should be considered when planning for future recreation needs. Medium density residential subdivisions should have playgrounds within one half mile. Recreation facilities in Petoskey, for example, may be available to Resort Township residents; however, the distance of those facilities may make them inaccessible to many including small children and other persons who lack available transportation. The importance of determining appropriate locations for recreational facilities will be discussed further in later chapters. 21 State and national recreation surveys consistently rank water recreation activities as one of the most popular. This is supported by the Resort Township 1988 Citizen Questionnaire, which found that there is a strong desire among Resort Township residents for additional waterfront access and parks. Although most of the Little Traverse Bay frontage and Walloon Lake frontage is controlled by private ownership, there may be opportunities in the future for acquiring lands for public use. Presently, Resort Township is considering land north of U.S. 31 and west of Resort Pike Road for use as a public roadside park which overlooks Little Traverse Bay. It may also be possible to negotiate a land swap, lease or easements for waterfront access sites within the Bay Resort Project, preferably towards the western end of the development. Government Facilities The new Town Hall, built in 1982, is located on the west side of Re sort Pike between Sterzik Road and Intertown Road. This attractive modern facility replaced the old Town Hall, located at U.S. 31 and Resort Pike, which was converted into an antique store. Although the new Town Hall adequately accommodates public meetings, there is a growing need for additional office space. Education Facilities Public education is provided by the Petoskey Public Schools. School age residents of Resort Township travel by bus to schools in the City of Petoskey. In addition to one high school, one junior high, and three elementary schools in Petoskey, there are two parochial schools and one private school. The only school property in Resort Township is located on the east side of Resort Pike Road across from the new Town Hall facility. Learning disabled students attend special programs provided by the Char-Em. Intermediate School District. 22 In addition to K-12 grades offered by Petoskey Public Schools, North Central Michigan College located in the City of Petoskey, offers two year programs and special four year programs such as business in cooperation with Lake Superior State College. Police and Fire Protection Police protection is provided by the Emmet County Sheriff and the Michigan State Police. Fire protection is provi ded by Bear Creek and Resort Township Joint Volunteer Fire Department. The existing fire service is currently meeting the needs of residents and businesses located within . the eastern portion of the Township. Response t imes to the western portion of Resort Township, however, are extremely poor because many western areas are beyond five miles of the fire station. The Township is presently pursuing the potential use of the vacant Air Force Station off of Townline Road as a water resource. In the future, fire stations should be located in close proximity to the centers of development, as recommended by Resort Township's Fire Chief. The Bay Resort development is one such potential area which will require a major investment in fire protection manpower and equipment to properly protect new development areas in the Township. Furthermore, an adequate central water supply system with domestic mains is needed to service other high valve areas of the Township. There are five existing dry hydrants in the Township which serve a radius of 1000 f eet each. The adoption of a Fire Prevention Code is also recommended. Based upon discussions with the Emmet County police sheriff there are seven patrol cars, one animal patrol car and two unmarked police cars, plus a staff of 14 law officers currently serving Emmet County. The current police service is capable of meeting existing needs. With future Bay Resort development, however, approximately two or three additional patrol cars and associated personnel would be required. 23 Water, Waste Water and Solid Waste Disposal The majority of Resort Township residents obtain their fresh water through on- site wells and dispose of waste water through on-site septic fields. Vantage View Subdivision, however, is connected to the City of Petoskey sewer and water lines. This is the only development in the Township serviced by the existing franchise -agreement with the City of Petoskey for sewer and water. The Township is currently involved in discussions with the City of Petoskey for franchise agreements to service additional areas within the Township. While the boundaries of future service districts are unknown, the availability of utilities will impact the rate and type of development and must therefore be carefully planned. Most of the solid waste generated in Resort Township is removed by private haulers and taken to the Emmet County Transfer Station located in Little Traverse Township. Recently, this facility expanded its production by adding a second compactor with financial assistance made available through the Clean Michigan Fund. Furthermore, a recycling center connected to the transfer station is currently under construction. Presently, the privately owned Charlevoix County Sanitary Landfill serves the Emmet County transfer station. Charlevoix County and Emmet County are now in the process of updating their Management plans for long term disposal of solid waste. 24 TRANSPORTATION A review of the existing transportation network is an important component in the Resource Use Management Plan because future development within Resort Township will be influenced by the Township's transportation characteristics. Identification of the various roads within the Township and an analysis of future needs follows: U.S. 31 is the dominant east/west route through the Township. It is a state highway under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Department of Transportation. The total length of U.S. 31 Passing through Resort Township is approximately six miles. The other roads in Resort Township fall into the primary Grid local categories and are maintained by the Emmet County Road Commission. Public roads within the Township are categorized as follows: Stu te Rou te covering approximately 6 miles in length Primary Hardtop cover .ing approximately 7.8 miles in length. Local Hardtop covering approximately 32 miles in length Local Gravel covering approximately 8.8 miles in length From a regional perspective, U.S. 31 connects the communities of Traverse City, Charlevoix, and Petoskey. . U.S. 31 links Resort Township to Mackinaw City and U.S. 131 links Resort Township to the City of Cadillac. The increasing average daily traffic counts, displayed in Table 10, confirm the use of this state highway as a principal, rural artery connecting these communities. An important east/west connector road is Intertown Road which crosses U.S. 131' east of the Township and several roads within the Township including Lake Grove Ro ad and Resort Pike Road. 25 Table 10 Resort Township Average Daily Traffic Counts Major Intersections Location 1986 1983 1980 U.S. 31 and 131 13,000 ----- 9,200 One Block West U.S. 31 and Eppler Road 3,000 8,200 ----- One Block West U.S. 31 between 8,000 6,500 ----- Lake Grove Road and Resort Pike Road U.S. 31 between 5,600 ----- 5,700 Camp DGgget Road and Townsend Road Source: Aichigan Department of Transportation Horton Bay Road is a County route within Resort Township. This road connects U.S. 31 with the community of Horton Bay in Charlevoix County. Horton Bay Road, Resort Pike Road and Morford Road are classified as county primary roads by the Emmet County Road Commission. The other roads in the Township are classified as local roads, most of which are black topped. 26 Based upon information gathered from the County Road Engineer and the 1988 Resort Township Citizen Questionnaire, the main roads within the Township are adequate and capable of handling existing traffic. There are concerns, however, that Resort Pike Road and Intertown Road are not adequately accommodating existing traffic volumes and will be adversely impacted by additional traffic loads. Currently, a U.S. 31 bypass proposal is being examined by the Michigan Department of Transportation. The purpose of.this bypass is to relieve traffic congestion along the urbanizing U.S. 31 corridor which is caused by population growth, commercial development, industrial expansion and new resort co mmunities. A U.S. 31 by-pass would offer an alternative travel route, thereby relieving some traffic demands on existing routes. A new thoroughfare could also have many negative effects to the Township involving environmental, social and economic impacts. The bypass concept will also have to be carefully studied to determine the impacts on future land use and development in the Tawnship. 27 NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY AND CAPABILITY The natural environment of Resort Township offers both opportunities and limitations on the type and extent of future development. Certain areas are unsuitable for septic systems, unstable for building foundations, poorly drained and susceptible to flooding. While these factors place restrictions upon development, other natural resource factors present opportunities for development. The historical, scenic and recreational attractiveness of the lakes, hills and woodlands offer a unique residential setting. It is helpful to examine these natural resource factors in detail to determine both the opportunities and constraints to future development. This examination involves an inventory of resource factors, and a determination of the capability of the natural resource base to support future development. Additional information concerning natural resources, water resources and management recommendations has been furnished by the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council (see Appendix). Soils In order to minimize construction costs and risks to the environment it is desirable for future development to be constructed upon sites with suitable soils. Poor soils present problems such as poor foundation stablity and septic field failure. The three major soil characteristics considered in the analysis of soil conditions are drainage, foundation stability and septic suitability characteristics. Each of these factors were mapped under one generalized category (see Map I - Soils) according to information provided by the Emmet County Soil Survey, prepared by the Soil Conservation Service. The Soils map outlines general areas within the Township which would pose serious limitations to development. The areas include soils associated with a high seasonal water table, high organic content and severe limitations for siting septic fields. 28 LTffRN R. R. AI 'GOP IRTYDNE RD. SV K*WA T I [email protected] Rwral@., RD. R KALCHI N, S OOL RD. % L0 F NDIAN %I %*%* %*%- % RD. % MAP % SOILS ARE" CONTAINING POOR SOILS AND DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS *% AREAS CONTAINING ACCEPTABLE SOILS FOR DEFELOPMENT ....... RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN Ayms. Lemft, Norris and MW, Im. ir- :* E@@ rt 6mm=mmmi Pik Outlined areas on the Soils map also include areas where slopes exceed 18% grade. Specific soil classifications are as follows: - Au Gres Sand/Loamy Sand - Carbondale Muck - Charlevoix Sandy Loam - Emmet Sandy Loams (greater than 18% slope) - Ensley Sandy Loam - Linwood Muck - Roscommon Mucky Sand - Tawa Muck - Wheatley Loamy Sand Drainage Soil. drainage characteristics are examined because of the potentially high development costs, maintenance costs and sanitary problems encountered on poorly drained soils. These costs and problems are often associated with septic field failures, flooded basements and susceptibility to frost action. Dense mucks, silts and clays with high water tables are the soils most often associated with drainage problems. In general, poorly drained lands lie in close relationship to Walloon Lake and other lands associated with the numerous creeks, streams and/or depressions throughout the Township. Foundation Stability Shifting foundations, cracked walls and cracked pavement in roadways are some of the potential problems associated with foundation instability. These problems often result in increased development and maintenance costs or, in extreme cases, structural failure. 30 Generally, well drained, coarse-textured soils provide the most suitable foundations. Soils with good or fair Stability are located in the scattered upland sections of the Township. Poor soil stability occurs with soils containing large concentrations of organic materials, such as muck, silt and clay. The areas of poor soil stability are concentrated in the low lying and poorly drained areas adjacent to Walloon Lake and numerous creeks. In those low lying areas the presence of water at or near the surface contributes to frost heave, compression, shrinking and swelling. Septic Suitability Because there is not a central wastewater collection system within Resort Township, individual septic systems are the primary means of wastewater disposal. Therefore, the location of septic systems on proper soils is extremely important. Septic field failures are often the result of poor soil permeability, high water table or excessive slopes. Soils such as compacted clays and silts will not allow wastewater to percolate through the filtering layers of soils. Furthermore, a high water table prohibits adequate filtering, thereby allowing the sewage effluent to pollute the groundwater supplies and contaminate residential wells, lakes and streams. Finally, excessive slope does not provide adequate time for percolation. Instead, wastewater will drain to the low end of the septic field and the filtering action of the entire septic field will not be utilized. Topography The surf ace geology of the Township was formed 10,000 to 12,000 years ago when glacial activity deposited rock, soil and large blocks of ice. The ice blocks embedded within the soils eventually melted and left depressions which are today's lakes and interconnecting creeks. 31 Slope is an important development consideration associated with topographic features. Steep roadway grades, septic field failures, soil erosion and excavation costs are some of the difficulties associated with severe grades. Areas of extreme slope (18% and greater) have been mapped (see Map 2 - Slopes) to indicate the opportunities and constraints for potential development. There are a few major areas of extreme slope in Resort Township. These are the areas surrounding portions of Walloon Lake, its neighboring creeks and immediately south of U.S. 31. The remainder of the Township is generally flat to rolling with isolated areas of severe or moderate slope. Areas that contain severe slopes and ravines should remain undisturbed. These areas should be viewed as natural and aesthetic open space areas. If development should occur, sensitive site planning would be required along these steep slopes to prevent soil erosion. Care must be taken to ensure that extensive grading is minimized and to ensure that other natural features such as vegetation and topsoil are retained. Hydrology Groundwater and surface water deposits are a vital resource within Resort Township. Because there is no central water distribution system, residents must rely upon individual wells for their water supply. The lakes and creeks of the Township are also an important resource for scenic, recreational and groundwater recharge amenities. It is therefore important that water resources be protected and Managed in a manner which would ensure their quality. Groundwater Important factors in the evaluation of groundwater are the quantity and quality of the water. Quantity or yield standards for a typical residential or commercial use range from 7 to 20 gallons per minute. It appears the geologic and hydrologic features of the Township do provide its residents with sufficient water quantities and will not likely be a factor in limiting growth. 32 SHERIDAN 4dL MICHIGAN NORTHERN R.R. V -------- - CS liiiil@qlllli =r.-dw NOW THIRTYONF RD KWIN STERZIK R HE MA HEI RD. cs d d W Z C z CPTEftR*T%.IRD. INTERTO RNIIIIIiii-, K RD. ------------- % STUW RD. % W KALCHI ------ An. u 0 X a 1! MOM ORD RD INDIAN G D. RD. qqft 16 MAP 2 SLOPES A EAS CONTAINING SLOPES R GREATER THAN 18% AREA CONTAINING SLOPES LESSOTHAN 18% --------- RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN Ayres, Lewis. Norris and Me , Inc. Ilk Water quality is a more important factor than water availability. Water hardeners, iron content, salinity and septic field contamination are problerns encountered in Resort Township. While hardness and salinity are rninor problems, high iron content is common throughout the Township. A more important possible concern is septic field contamination of well water supply. Although the County Health Department record has no documented occurrences of contamination to date, residents should be aware that the potential exists. Surface Water One of Resort Township's greatest assets is the availability of fresh water resources, including nine miles of Walloon Lake frontage and six miles of Lake Michigan frontage. These lakes and their associated streams and creeks offer scenic and recreational amenities to Township residents and visitors. It is extremely important that the quality of these surface waters be protected from the negative impacts of development, such as pollution and loss of scenic views to open water. A report prepared by the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council is presented in the appendix and offers additional information concerning the water resources found within Resort Township. Water pollution is a major concern which jeopardizes the residential and recreational setting. Proper land management can improve the current water quality conditions of Resort Township. Sources of pollution can be controlled through drainage and runoff controls, septic field corrections, proper treatment of sanitary wastes, land use planning and zoning, limitation of fertilizer applications and action by the Walloon Lake Association and Township residents. Associated with Walloon Lake and major creeks is a corridor of adjacent wetlands. The lakes, creeks and wetlands are important for surface drainage, groundwater recharge and wildlife habitat. Alterations to the water features can contribute to flooding, poor water quality, insufficient water supply and loss of valuable wildlife habitat. 34 Sensitive Environmental Features In addition to soils, topography and hydrology, there are other natural resources which influence future land use and development. Sensitive environmental features such as woodlands, fish and wildlife habitat, wetlands and scenic features can present either constraints or opportunities for development. Principal Wooded Areas Approximately forty percent (40%) of the total land area of the Township is wooded and a majority of these areas are adjacent to the lakes, creeks and wetlands. Wooded areas primarily contain northern and lowland (water tolerant) hardwood species such as sugar maple, elm, beech, ash, cottonwood, birch and aspen. Where mature vegetation meets the waters edge, areas of unique scenic resources and wildlife habitat are found. Future development should be planned in G manner to protect these woodlands. The number of large wooded areas provide a visual break and interest in the varying landscape. They also provide a visual contrast to agricultural and urban lands. These areas are located on the Principal Wooded Areas Map and are divided into deciduous and coniferous woodlands. The MGP is based on information derived from the 197 9 Michigan Resource Information System (MIRIS) map furnished by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife The continued existence of fish and wildlife depends upon the maintenance of adequate habitat. While some species can adapt to the pressures of urbanization, others cannot live in close proximity to humans. According to the. Michigan 35 SHrRrnAN Rn. vu W LZNCHWEK RD. MANTHEI RD. d d z 0 ANTERTOWN I NTERTOWNI RD. KIEBLE RD. STLVP RD. KALCHICK RD. RD. Lit SCHOOL RD. % a c W RD. %* PE D. MAP 3 .. . .. . .... WOODED AREAS WOODLANDS CONTAINING DECIDUOUS/ HARDWOOD PREDOMINATES WOODLANDS CONTAINING CONIFEROUS/ EVERGREEN PREDOMINATES RESORTTOWNSHIP EMMETCOUNTY MICHIGAN 3 Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. @ E@i-- P.-r. "I Department of Natural Resources, existing wildlife populations for Resort Township are stable and unless prime habitat and cover areas are destroyed, the populations are expected to remain stable. Walloon Lake is especially good for fishing. Trout, pike, walleye, perch, bass and bluegill are the primary species. Wetlands adjacent to Walloon Lake are used as spawning for bass, trout and northern pike. Populations of songbirds, muskrat, mink and raccoon are also dependent upon these wetlands. Fox, squirrel, grouse, rabbit and deer are the predominant mammals. Wetlands Wetlands play a very important part in hydrological and ecological systems. In addition to providing fish and wildlife habitat, wetlands also maintain and stabilize groundwater supplies, reduce the dangers of flooding and improve water quality. The majority of forested and nonforested wetlands are located adjacent to Walloon Lake, Little Traverse Bay and the chain of creeks (see Map 4 - Wetlands and Streams). Other wetlands are found scattered within the numerous kettle depressions and upland areas throughout the Township. The Wetlands inventory is based upon surveys conducted by the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council which identified wetlands within 1000 feet of Little Traverse Bay and Walloon Lake shorelines and the 1979 Michigan Resource Information System (MIRIS) map provided by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Scenic Features The most picturesque scenic views in Resort Township are of Little Traverse Bay from U.S. 31 and its neighboring hill tops, and of Walloon Lake from along its shoreline. Protection of these lake views should be a major goal of Township decision makers. 37 SHERIDAN Rn. NORTHER 0 0 -------------- OLD THIRTYONE RD. w MARTINCHEK RE). MANTHEI RD. STER71K Rn. cs z z INTERT@.. RD. KIEBLE RD. ------------- STUW RD. 114111, AL % 6 KALCHICK RD. > WTI IT@ Rn F_ m 0 IS SCHOOL RD. m v MORFORD RD. INDIAN (;@RbElil RD. DEPEW RD. MAP 4 WETLANDS & STREAMS FORESTED WETLANDS -FORESTED WETLANDS NON % EMERGENT WETLANDS STREAMS & CREEKS ...... INTERMITTENT STREAMS & CREEKS RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN :3@ Ayres. Lewis. Norris and May, Inc. "Ahl PI.... Outstanding scenic views of Little Traverse Bay from U.S. 31 occur primarily between Eppler Road and Lake Grove Road. Any future development which would obstruct these views should be discouraged or regulated through height restrictions and land use regulations. Views of Lake Michigan from existing and future residential sites should be maintained. The existing residential areas which have outstanding views of the Lake are primarily located along the hill tops paralleling U.S. 31. Consideration of future building heights along Sheridan Road, U.S. 31 and within the Bay Resort property will be discussed in later chapters. The dynamic, year round views of Walloon Lake from along its shoreline is another important asset to Resort Township. Development which occurs within the Walloon Lake shoreline area may be visible to many other property owners along the Lake's edge. Just as consideration is given to the impact of development on water quality, the III, N impact of development on visual quality should be recognized. . .... ... In addition to Lake Michigan and Walloon Lake, wooded areas, farmlands, streams and creeks, rolling topography and historical structures are all important scenic attributes found within Resort Township. Extensive panoramic views encompassing these features help create the pleasant rural and scenic character appreciated by residents and visitors alike. 39 Development Capability The development capability of lands within Resort Township is illustrated in Map 5. This map is a composite of the following natural resource characteristics: soils which pose serious limitations to development, slopes greater than 18%, (Ind areas characterized cis wetlands and streams. The Land Capability Map offers a generalized indication of which areas within the Township are Most Capable and least capable of supporting development based on the above mentioned natural resource characteristics. The Land Capability Map is useful for general planning purposes; however, detailed site-specific inventory and analysis information should be required for any proposed development plans. 40 DAN RD '4TGAN ORTHERN R.&- J- HIRTYONE RD. KARTINCHE RD. d R KALCHIC" Lot" S OOL RD. a C FORD RD. @lAt. - ,7 RD. % V11 MAP 5 LAND CAPABILITY LA D AREAS LEAST CAPABLE OFISUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT LAND AREAS MOST CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN Ayres. Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. -gm- mm EXISTING LAND USE An inventory of existing land use was conducted in Marchy 1988 for Resort Township. All lands within the Township were inventoried, classified into the following catGgories and mapped (see Map 5 Existing Land Use). A description of the categories follows: AgriculturGI and Vac(mt Includes lands devoted to agriculture, farm residential or which are vacant. Single FGmily Residenticil - Low Density Includes all lands where single family residences are located at a density of one dwelling unit per one or more acres. Single Family Residential - Medium Density Includes all lands where single family residences are located at G density of one dwelling unit per one quarter to one acre. Season(il Residential Includes all lands where seasonal, single family residences are located. Multiple Family Residenticil Includes all lands where two or more family residences are located. Mobile Flome Park Includes all lands where mobile homes are located in a cluster development. Commercial Includes all lands and buildings where products, goods or services are sold. 42 MICHIGAN NORTHERN R.R. D. _-4@ I I cs THIRTYONt. RD. -_t"_ElNCHEK RD. %AEI RD. W INTEATOWN RD. C; IRTERTIAWN RD. o KIESLE RD. ........ - ------------- STLIMP RD. w ILI 'T. r Fr- KALCHICK RD. 'S5 @ D 0. 3. 17 N GAR_ MORFORD R . DE14 RD. MAP 6 % EXISTING LAND USE DEPEW RD. VACANT I AGRICULTURAL LANDS SINGLE FAMILY N LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IINCL DES FARM HOMES IF) AND SINGLE FAMILY MOBILE HOMES NOT IN A MOBILE HOME ftRK JMHJ MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1* EM MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SEASONAL RESIDENTIAL MEN' MOBILE HOME PARK COMMERCIAL OFFICE r LIMITED INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC WATERFRONT ACCESS CONSERVATION LANDS OTHER USES RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. 7 1087 1 Engin.... Pi,n,,r, Industrial Includes all lands devoted to manufacturing, processing, warehousing, storage and services of an industrial nature. Institutional includes all lands and buildings used for government facilities, schools, churches, cemeteries, quasi public and private institutions. Parklands and Waterfront Access Includes Gil lands developed for active and/or passive recreational uses. Such as picnicking, boat launching and sports. Conservation Includes all lands preserved in their natural state. Limited recreational acti vities such as hiking and bird watching may be allowed in these areas. Roads Includes all state highways, primary and local streets. Active Railroad Includes railroad tracks and right-of-ways allocated for active railroad use. Lukes Includes all lake surfaces and shorelines within the Township. In addition to the existing land use information, data on the 1968 land use acreage is presented in the following table (Table 11). In comparing the existing land use acreage with the 1968 data provided by the Emmet County Office of Planning and Zoning, agricultural and vacant lands continue to be the single largest land use within the Township. Total vacant and agricultural lands have decreased by approximately 345 acres over the last twenty years. 44 Table I I Resort Township Land Use Acreages for 1988 and 1968 1988 % of 1968 % of Acres Total Acres Total Agricultural/Vacant 12,084 80.87 12,372 82.81 (includes farm residential) Single Family Residential 297 1.99 142 0.95 Low Density Single Family Residential 99 0.66 Medium Density Seasonal Residential 183 1.22 66 0.44 Multiple Family Residential 3 0.02 Mobile Home Park 13 0.09 Commercial 20 0.11 19 0.13 Industrial 25 0.17 150 1.0 Institutional 12 0.08 22 0.15 Recreation Conservation Lands 110 0.75 Waterfront Public Access/Park lands 3 0.02 14 0.09 Roads 510 3.41 504 3.37 Active Railroad 0 0 70 0.47 Lakes 19582 10.59 11582 10.59 Total 14,941 100.00 141,941 100.00 Information unavailable or zero acres for land use recorded. Source: Emmet County and ALNM Inventory 1988 45 An inventory of existing, actively formed lands in Resort Township was compiled in August, 1988. These farmlands are illustrated in Map 7. Industrial and institutional land uses have also declined over the past two decades. A major loss of industrial land use occurred as a result of the Penn Dixie Cement Company closing. Institutional acreage decreased between 1968 and 1988 in response to the sale of Township land. In contrast, the amount of land devoted to single family residential, seasonal residential around Walloon Lake and mobile home park development has risen substantially. The amount of land set aside for conservation use in the Township has increased since 1968. The Covert property, the Black property, the Reycraft property and the two properties owned by the Walloon Lake Trust (ire quasi-public lands preserved for wildlife habitat, forest management and/or low-impact recreational uses. Although conservation land has increased, the amount of parkland has decreased in Resort Township. As indicated by the 1968 data, a strip of land east of Resort Pike on U.S. 31 is privately owned but was once used as a public roadside park. The park facilities have been removed and there is a residence located on the privately owned parcel. Since 1968, the land use trends in the Township have been toward residential development while vacant and agricultural lands have decreased. 46 3 A. .1 BAY SHORE MICHWAN NORTHERN R.R. 9 -8 OLD TKIRTYONE RD. 10 PART HEx RD. I RD. 16 INTERGIM RD KIESLE RD. STL" RD. 41 KALCHICK Ja 24 ACTIVE FARMLANDS 27 26 OTHER LAND USES -T7 36 % 2 MAP 7 % RESORT TOWNSHIP RESOURCE USE MANAGEMENT PLAN ACTIVE FARMLANDS, 1988 "Aw Source: Emmet County Office Of Planning and Zoning- as HOUSING A review of existing housing characteristics within the Township will be beneficial to predicting future housing needs. An estimate of existing housing types and numbers was prepared from field inventory data obtained in March, 1988. This information is presented in Table 12. A summary of housing characteristics follows: 1. A variety of housing types are found in Resort Township. Single-family residential low density is the most common (32%), followed by medium density single-family (24%) and seasonal residential (22%). 2. Multiple family residential consists of 20 housing units or 3% of the total number of housing units. 3. Mobile homes located in the mobile home park (88 units) and throughout the Township (56 units) account for 17% of housing units in Resort Township. 4. Farm homes (27 units) represent 3% of the total housing in the Township. This housing type is important because it is associated with the dominant land uses in Resort Township, that being agriculture and vacantl and use. 5. There are four multiple family complexes in Resort Township. One is located off of Resort Pike Road in. the southern portion of the Township. Another is situated off Sheridan Road near the eastern Township boundary. The other two multiple family structures front on U. S. 3 1 east of Resort Pike Road. 48 Table 12 Resort Township Number of Housing Units, 1988 Percent of Type Number of Housing Units Total Single Family/Low Density 269 32% Single Family/Medium Density 198 24 Seasonal 183 22 Multiple Family 20 2 Mobile Homes in a Mobile Home Park 88 10 Mobile Homes not in a Mobile Home Park 56 7 Farm Homes 27 3 Total 841 100.0 Source: Emmet County Inventory and ALNM 49 6. Seasonal residential housing units are located primarily near Walloon Lake. The State-wide trend of fewer persons per household is also occurring in Resort Township. Table 13 illustrates the drop in the number of persons per household at the State level, for Emmet County and Resort Township since 1960. Resort Township, however, has consistently had a slightly higher average household size than the County or State. Possibly the low number of multiple family housing units is, in part, responsible for this trend. Table 13 Emmet County and Resort Township Average Household Size 1980 1970 1960 Resort Township 2.99 3.47 Emmet County 2.76 3.25 3.33 State of Michigan 2.84 3.27 3.42 Information unavailable Source: U.S. Bureau of Census 50 OWWRSHIP A study of land ownership plays an important role in determining which properties have G strong potential for future development. A comparison of lot size to the number of land owners in Resort Township was conducted using the 1985 Township Plat Map. Table 14 shows an estimate of the number of land owners per acreage size category. Map 8 illustrates the distribution of acreage size categories within Resort Township. Dundee Cement Company is the major land owner in the Township. Dundee owns approximately 1,050 acres of land between U.S. 31 and Little Traverse Bay. Roughly 25 landowners maintain properties greater than 100 acres while 72 persons own 40 to 100 acres. A large number of land owners, approximately 204, own 2 to 40 acres. An estimated 380 persons own property less than two acres. This estimate was obtained by subtracting the number of landowners maintaining properties greater than two acres from the total number of housing units under the single family, seasonal and farm homes categories. 51 Table 14 Resort Township Land Ownership, 1988 Acreage Size Number of Owners less than 2 acres 380 2 - 40 acres 204 41 -100 acres 72 more than 100 acres 25 Note: The "number of land owners" represents an cipproximation of land owners per a given acreage size category. Source: 1985 Emmet County Plat Book 52 'MfCHIGAN NMTHERN A. R..:. -.!@W [email protected] V,: % 12= -r NC14KEK Ro mm RD. 7_1 INTERT 13 iKIME CK 2@ L ACRES ESS THAN 2 2-40 ACRES P 41-100 ACRES Oro- MORE THAN 100 ACRES MAP 8 RESORT TOWNSHIP RESOURCE USE MANAGEMENT PLAN LAND OWNERSHIP, 1988 Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May, Inc. Engineers Planners ANALYSIS OF CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE The Zoning Ordinance for Resort Township is an important tool for implementing the Resource Use Management Plan. The ordinance should be reviewed to determine the compatibility with the Resource Use Management Plan. An analysis of the existing zoning districts will also influence recommendations for future land use. The zoning districts within Resort Township are illustrated in Map 9 and a brief summary of the districts is presented in Table 15. Most of the Township land is zoned FF-I, Farm and Forest. This area is designed to promote the use of wooded and rural areas of the Township in a manner that will retain the basic attractivness of the natural resources. The intent is to hold areas for agricultural and forestry uses while allowing some multiple uses of marginal farm/forest lands. Within this zoning district in Resort Township, single family-low density and mobile home dwelling units are found. However, the overall character of the land is agricultural and forestry. Another large zoning district in Resort Township is RI-B, One Fami IZ Residential. This district is primarily located within the northeast corner of the Township and includes several medium density residential subdivisions. The close proximity of this zoning district to the City of Petoskey creates additional opportunities for residential development. The lands adjacent to Walloon Lake are zoned RR-2, RecreGtion/ResidentiGI. These areas are designed to accommodate cottage and seasonal home developments. Several small narrow areas are zoned B-2, General Business, and B-1, Local Tourist Business, along U.S. 31 and old U.S. 31. A limited amount of land is zoned 1-1, Light Industrial along the north side of U.S. 31 between Black Bird Road and Resort Pike Road. The Bay Resort property located between Little Traverse Bay and U.S. 31 is zoned 1-2, General Industrial. A planned unit development overlay zoning district, allowable by a special use permit, has been proposed for this property. 54 r r L or r N A V f 9 1 f .4 r PT PUD- KTOSKE -21 R R-28 B-2 8 T FF-1 9 -IA ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL f T_iij R-IS ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL C"Aft9voix r, -,--2 A 1R-2A GENERAL: RESIDENTIAL RR- R-28 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL RR-I RECREATION RESIDENTIAL R =R-2 RR-2 RECREATION RkSIDENTIAL f&:;q SR-1 SCENIC RESOURCE f;:=q tfl-2 SCENIC RESOURCE 8-1 LOCAL-TOURIST BUSINESS NEW DISTRICTS SINCE 1982 8-2 GENERAL BUSINESS '1;;AL 14 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL R-2C GENERAL RESIDEN B-3 COMMERCIAL- INDUSTRIAL 1-2 GENERAL INDUSTRIAL P-T 'PARKING TRANSITION FF:il FF-I FARM & FOREST pUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT "FF-2 F F-2 FARM & FOREST MAP 9 RESORT TOWNSHIP RESOURCE USE MANAGEMENT PLAN L ___; i _: @ = FE _=11 L ZONING DISTRICTS FA 41 Source: Emmet County Office Of Planning and Zoning am Table 15 Resort Township Existing Zoning Districts Zoning Districts Approximate Land Acreage R-IA One-Family Residential R-113 One-Family Residential 1280 ac res R-2A General Residential 28 acres R-213 General Residential 100 cc res RR- I Recreation Residential I Iacres RR-2 Recreation Residential 2200 ac res SR- I Scenic Resource SR-2 Scenic Resource B-I Local-Tourist Business 89 acres B-2 General Business 120 acres 1-1 Light Industrial 100 cc re s 1-2 General Industrial 1100 acres @F- I Farm & Forest 8451 acres FF-2 Farm & Forest R-2C General Residential B-3 Commercial-Industrial P-T Parking Transition PUD Planned Unit Development 56 The predominance of agricultural, recreational and forest zoning districts in the Township emphasizes the interest on the Township and County level in preserving the rural character. The question remains of how effective these districts will be in managing future growth and the conversion of open space to residential and other uses. Specific recommendations on improving land use regulations and zoning will be included in later chapters. 57 CITIZEN QUESTIONNAIRE Prior to the development of the Resource Management Plan and other components of the Management Plan, it is necessary to incorporate summary findings concern- ing citizen attitudes. A major component of the overall planning process was to solicit citizen input regarding the attitudes of the Resort Township residents regarding future development. Issues such as the developing character of the US-31 corridor, the types of development along waterfront property, and the density of future development are all critical issues which must be addressed in this Plan. The Planning Committee and Township officials feel that it is important to solicit citizen attitudes regarding these important issues. To ascertain this information, a questionnaire survey was prepared and distributed to each household within the Township. A total of 1045 questionnaires were distributed in March 1988. Three hundred and one (301) residents responded to this questionnaire for a response rate of 29 percent. A copy of the questionnaire is attached within the appendix of this report. A summary of the results is as follows: PART A - COMMENTS I General Comments: Residents were asked to submit comments regarding the character of Resort Township, their likes and dislikes, and problems facing the Township. A summary of selected comments follows. A more detailed listing is attached in the appendix of this report. - Keep a high quality of life in Resort Township. The rural atmosphere is the best attraction. - Encourage light industrial and resort development in the right places. - Taxes are too high - too few services. 58 The US-31 bypass will relieve traffic congestion. The US-31 bypass will destroy farmland. The Dundee Resort complex will bring many problems. In favor of Dundee Resort but keep Township rural. PART B - BACKGROUND DATA 2. Number of years as a Resort Township resident? The average length of residence of the respondents is 17.9 years. 3. Age Respondents were fairly well distributed between all age groups. A slightly higher response rate was measured for citizens 62 years and over. The vari- ous age groups and corresponding percentage of all residents responding are (is follows: Years of Age % 18-25 1.4 26 -35 13.5 36-45 23.0 46 -55 16.9 56-61 15.5 62 and over 29.0 no response 0.7 100.0% 4. Are you a year-round or seasonal resident? The majority of respondents, 85.4 percent are year-round residents. Only 14.6 percent of the respondents indicate that they are seasonal residents. 5. Do you own waterfront property? Approximately 28.3 percent of the respondents indicated that they owned waterfront property, while 71 percent of the total respondents indicated that they did not own waterfront property. 59 6. How much property do you own? The majority of the respondents indicated that they own one or more acres of land. A specific breakdown of land acreage and ownership is as follows: Acres Owned % of Respondents 0 acre 3.0 I cc re 48.3 2-10 acres 26.3 3 acres 0.3 4 acres 0.3 5 acres 0.3 11-40 acres 12.3 41+ acre s 9.0 PART C - HOUSING AND LAND USE PREFERENCE Residents were asked if they agree or disagree with the following statements: 7. The Township should promote efforts to retain farming and the rural charac- ter of the area. The majority of the respondents indicated that they felt the Township should promote efforts to retain forming and the rural character. The following responses were recorded: No response 1.0% Strongly disagree 3.6% Somewhat disagree 8.0% No opinion 7.0% Somewhat agree 22.6% Strongly agree 57.8% 60 8. Large lots (1-2 acres) per individual non-waterfront home sites should be encouraged. A majority of residents believe that large lots and low density housing should be encouraged. No response 1.0% Strongly disagree 7.3% Somewhat disagree 6.0% No opinion 5.0% Somewhat agree 28.9% Strongly agree 51.8% 9. Development of single-family subdivisions in appropriate locations should be encouraged. The results of this question were somewhat mixed. The results are as fol- lows: No response 0.7% Strongly disagree 20.9% Somewhat disagree 13.3% No opinion 8.3% Somewhat agree 27.9% Strongly agree 28.9% 10. Development of -apurtment/townhouse/condominium complexes in appro- priate locations should be encouraged. The Majority of respondents strongly disagree with this statement and would indicate that high-density housing is not a preferred land use. Specific responses are as follows: No response 0.7% Strongly disagree 46.8% Somewhat disagree 18.9% No opinion 5.0% Somewhat agree 17.3% Strongly agree 11.3% 61 Development of senior citizen housing should be encouraged. The results to this statement were somewhat mixed. Specific responses are as follows: No response 1.3% Strongly disagree 17.3% Somewhat disagree 14.6% No opinion 16.0% Somewhat agree 25.9% Strongly agree 24.9% 12. The Township should promote efforts to retain the scenic and rural charac- ter of US-3 1. A significant majority of respondents strongly agreed with this statement. Specific results are as follows: No response 1.0% Strongly disagree 7.0% Somewhat disagree 6.6% No opinion 5.0% Somewhat agree 17.6% Strongly agree 62.8% PART D - COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PREFERENCE Residents were asked if they agree or disagree with the following statements: 13. The US-31 corridor should be primarily developed for residential use. Most of the respondents agreed with this statement. However, overall response was somewhat mixed. The specific responses areas follows: No response 2.7% Strongly disagree 12.6% Somewhat disagree 20.9% No opinion 8.0% Somewhat agree 27.2% Strongly agree 28.6% 62 14. Some industrial development should be allowed along US-31. Response to this statement was varied. Specific results areas follows: No response 1.3% Strongly disagree 27.0% Somewhat disagree 17.6% No opinion 5.3% Somewhat agree 33.2% Strongly.agree 15.6% 15. Some commercial development along US-31 should be allowed. The responses to this question included a wide range of results. Responses are tabulated as follows: No response - Strongly disagree 32.6% Somewhat disagree' 14.6% No opinion 4.3% Somewhat agree 31.2% Strongly agree 16.3% 16. Development of convenience shopping facilities should be encouraged where appropriate. Most of the respondents agreed with this statement. Specific results are as fol lows: No response 1.3% Strongly disagree .22.6% Somewhat disagree 14.9% No opinion 7.0% Somewhat agree 34.9% Strongly agree 19.3% 63 17. Resort Township should promote efforts to attract new industry. Again, the response to this statement was somewhat mixed. Specific results are as follows: No response 1.3% Strongly disagree 25.9% Somewhat disagree 12.3% No opinion 8.6% Somewhat agree 24.9% Strongly agree 27.0% 18. The Township should promote efforts to construct on industrial park. Response to this statement varied with a slight majority indicating that they are not in favor of the Township promoting an industrial park. Specific results are as follows: No response 0.7% Strongly disagree 31.9% Somewhat disagree 12.3% No opinion 12.6% Somewhat agree 19.9% Strongly agree 22.6% PART E - ATTITUDES ON ROADS AND PARKS Residents were asked if they agree or disagree with the following statements. 19. Main roads within the Township are adequate and capable of handling exist- ing traffic. Most of the respondents agreed with this statement. Results are as follows: No response 1.0% Strongly disagree 10.0% Somewhat disagree 12.6% No opinion 2.3% Somewhat agree 31.2% Strongly agree 42.9% 64 20. The main roads within Resort Township will support future traffic demands. Most of the respondents indicated that they are concerned about the main roads within the Township and their capability of handling future traffic loads. Specific results are as follows: No response 1.0% Strongly disagree 28.6% Somewhat disagree 25.2% No opinion 10.6% Somewhat agree 16.3% Strongly agree 18.3% 21. The Township should promote efforts to provide waterfrontparks. A significant majority of the respondents indicated support for this con- cept. Other responses are as follows: No response - Strongly disagree 10.0% Somewhat disagree 6.4% No opinion 7.0% Somewhat agree 21.7% Strongly agree 54.2% From the results of this survey, it would indicate that a majority of the respon- dents would be in favor of carefully managing growth and development within the Township. Residents are concerned about the change in character of the Town- ship. They are also not in favor of promoting efforts for an industrial park, nor are they in favor of extensive commercial development. A majority of the respondents also indicated that they would not be in favor of higher density hous- ing types such as apartments, condominiums, or townhouses. In summary, it appears that the respondents are in favor of retaining the rural character of the Township. 65 The results of this survey will be helpful in determining the future land use plan and management Plan for the Township of Resort. In addition, the adopted goals and policies which will help govern future development within the community will also be based upon the results of this survey. 66 CONCLUSIONS FROM BACKGROUND STUDIES The following conclusions are derived from the research and studies conducted on the physical and socio-economic characteristics of Resort Township. Certain conclusions concerning the opportunities and constraints for future development within the Township can be identified. They are listed as follows: Constraints 1. Resort Township contains many areas where the topography and soil characteristics are unsuitable for intensive development (see Soils and Slope maps). Areas of steep slope, areas of high water table and unstable soil conditions for foundations and drainfields will present constraints to development. 2. Resort Township contains many areas of significant wetlands. The wetland areas will present limitations for future development and are important resources which should be preserved. 3. The U.S. 31 corridor has areas of extreme limitations for future development. Areas of steep slope, wetlands and unsuitable soils will present limitations for future commercial, residential or industrial development. 4. The Township lacks a certain image or identity within its geographic boundaries. Resort Township's U.S. 31 corridor must establish its own identity and promote a "Township Center" concept. 5. Nearly all of Lake Michigan frontage in Resort Township is privately owned. The lack of publicly owned shoreline frontage currently limits waterfront access and recreation opportunities for Township residents and visitors. Future resort development within the Dundee Cement Company 67 property may offer opportunities for public enjoyment of Lake Michigan frontage. 6. Walloon Lake and its associated watershed are fragile environments which are sensitive to many human activities such as the development of septic fields within the watershed area. Future development within the watershed will require careful controls and inspection. Opportunities 7. Resort Township's population base will continue to increase and will significantly increase if the Bay Resort property is developed. 8. Growth of the City of Petoskey and the opportunities associated with the U.S. 31 corridor will be important in shaping the Township's future. 9. The U.S. 31 corridor is receiving significant pressures for development and will continue to do so especially if the Bay Resort property is developed. The south side of U.S. 31 will be especially impacted. Development should occur in pocket areas where there are no natural resource limitations. 10. The scenic views of Lake Michigan and Walloon Lake will continue to be a tremendous asset and resource for the Township. These areas will be especially important for future residential development. Views to the lakes should be protected. 11. Land west of the City of Petoskey will continue to receive development pressure and is likely to be one of the fastest growing residential areas in the Township. 12. The current level of development along U.S. 31 creates an opportunity to establish a positive image for the corridor. This may be accomplished through zoning guidelines and site design treatments. 68 13. The abandoned railroad right of way located within the Bay Resort property offers excellent opportunities for recreational activities. Ownership of the right of way, however, will be determined by the Courts once the tracks are removed by the Michigan Department of Transportation. 19 0 t I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I'll I Analysis Of I sub-Planning Zones I ANALYSIS OF SUB-PLANNING ZONES The previous section presents information on the base studies of Resort Township, including information on population, economic characteristics, natural resources and land use. With this information the Township can now proceed on a more detailed analysis of the specific characteristics of Resort Township. To help accomplish this goal, the Township can be divided into four sub-planning z ones. The four areas are based upon natural resource characteristics of the Township as well cis land use and transportation. The four sub-planning zones are listed as follows: (1) Northeast Residential Area, (2) Coastal Area, (3) Central Uplands and (4) Walloon Lake Area. A map (Map 10) illustrating these four sub-zones is presented on the following page. Each area can be characterized by unique land use and natural resource conditions. For example, the Northeast Residential Area is primarily single family residential land in close proximity to the City of Petoskey. The Coastal Area is strongly influenced by a major transportation corridor. The Central Uplands includes Many low density rural and agricultural areas of the Township. Finally, the Walloon Lake Area includes those lands in close proximity to Walloon Lake which are characterized by se asonal and year-round waterfront residential properties. Preliminary assessment regard ing existing land use, natural resources, development capability and other planning issues can be made for each sub- planning area. These are presented in Table 16, Sub-Planning Zone Analysis, as well as a summary of resource characteristics, development capability and planning issues. Table 17, Alternative Strategies, presents a summary of alternative land uses and management strategies for each sub-planning zone. 70 E ... .... ..... ...................... ............................... ... . ...................... ... ..................... .................. .................... .. .. ...................................... ............ ...... ............ ...... .. ...... ....... ... . ... . . . ........... . . ... ................. .. ........... . ............... . ...... .. .... .... ....... .. .... ... .. ..... .................. ............. ........... .......... I@TLIRMN RD ......... ....... . ........ ...... INTERT Ro. E R().: . ........ ..... ..... .... . . .............. .......... . .......... . ....... . ........ ..... ............. .............. ......... ...... A .......... ............. .......... ................ ............... ............... ........ .. ..... K -LVa Rn.:.:.:. ......... ... ... ......... .... ........... lA/ AlIll"ll SUB ZONE NORTHEAST RESIDENTIAL AREA SUB ZONE 2 .......... lo, .......... .......... COASTAL AREA SUB ZONE 3 .1 CENTRAL UPLANDS SUB ZONE 4 LAKE AREA WALLOON lo, ///A ...................... /zl l/z MAP 10 N, ,e RESORT TOWNSHIP RESOURCE USE MANAGEMENT PLAN .......... .... . ... . . ....... ... . .. .... ........ . SUB-PLANNING ZONES Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. Engineers Planners RESORT TOWNSHIP SUB-PLANNING ZONES ANALYSIS Table 16 SLA3 ZONE I Sm ZC*E 2 SUB ZONE 3 SUB ZONE 4 NORTII-11EAST RESIDUMAL AREA COASTAL AREA CENTRAL LFLANDS WALLOON LAKE AREA Existing Land I.Im and Natural Resource Existing Laid Llse and Natural Resource Existing Land Use arid Notural Resource Conditions "d LJs& and Notuirai Resoirrce Canditioris Conditions Exis=seristics Existing land use - medium density, Existing land um - primarily agricul. Existing land use - medium density/seas- single and multi-family residential and Existing laid use . mix of conwriercial, turai/vocant land and low density rest- onai residential along laketrant, light ogriculturalivocant land residential. conservation and light indus- dentiaL The Resort Township ftli is lo- industry at northern tip of Walloon Lake. trial use along US. 3 1. Say Resort com- cated in this zone. and low density resklential and agricul- Good soils available for septic fields plex is in a transitional stage from turalivocant land in southern area of and building foundations inctroetivehridustrial to residential/. - Primarily ulsland/oisen and rural in zone Lipland, non-forested topography recreationicammercial. character with 0=0310n0l W0013103 offer opportunities for good views to - Both gooo and bad soils for septic Variable topography ard soils Littl* Traverse Bay Rural corridor connecting Charle- fields and building foundations Lakefront property already heavily Close proximity to City of Petoskey voix, MI and Petoskey, Mi. - Several large areas with greater developed residential Zone characterized by intermittent than 18% slopes Clevelopi to t CApability steep slopes along south side of US. Development ifify 3 1, poor soils and wetiond areas Covelopines A Capability The upland areas are capable of suo- Good views to Little Traverse Bay Pocket areas with good soils and rela- polling additional oevisicomeol, Ile" The upiand areas are capable of sup- lively flat topography are capable at slopes and drainage ways. however, may DweiaW M I Capability Parting additional development. Steep supporting additional develooment. Lake limit development. slopes# poor soils and existing Iona wateroea consists of fragile environment Tharit are several pocket areas with good ownership may limit development. associated witttconc*rns for water qual- Planning Issues soils and flat topography along US. 31 ity and lake matagernent. which are capable of supporting addi. Planning Issues - Loss of farmland and rural character tionai development. - Loss of formiand and rural character Planning Issues Increased dereal on existing Planning issues concerns Loss of formlarvi and rural character institutional 3emices if development - Potential user conflicts between dif- concerns - c__s Future development of major resort ferent land uses (e.g. agricultural Ph"icai, economic and social occurs - Increased need for commercial complex aid medium density residential impacts an Walloon Lake services if development occurs Potential Ion of rural character ar4lor industrial uses) Septic disposal and water quality Development may ieod to traffic Concerns reiated to future develop. - Establish policies on low density Maintenance of visial quality coniestim ciong US. 31, the county ment rural residential housing and isspro. Lake management roads, and of existing inter clions Proliferation of strip commercigi priate lot size Encroachment from the7ty of development Petoskey Impact an traffic confession aid safety along U.S. 31 Impact an existing institutional ser. @icss (police. fire protection, util. ities, etcJ Lost of existing scenic views to Lake Michigan Lack of Township identity RESORT TOWNSHIP SUB-PLANNING ZONES STRATEGIES Table 17 SU13 ZONE I SUB ZONE 2 SLIS ZONE 3 SUB ZONE 4 NORTHEAST RESIDENTIAL AREA COASTAL AREA CENTRAL UPLANDS WALLOON LAKE AREA Alternative Land Use Strategies Altentativet Land Use Strategies Alternative Land Lhe Stira"giss Alto io two Land Uss, Strategies � ConservationiAgriculture a ConservistionlAgriculture a ConservationlAgriculturit � Residential 0 ConservationiAgricuiture a Residential 0 Residential Law Density 0 Residentia - Low Density - Low Density Medium Density Low L.Ity - Medium Density . Medium Density High Density Medium Density - High Density � Professionni/Office High Density 0 Prof*ssicnal/Office a Parks and open space � Local Commenciai 0 Professional/Office 0 Industrial Allies a-We 11, -1 SI ahg* 0 ComillOncial - Light Industrial Allernamlim It- eg- Strwillegies Local Commercial - Heavy industrial Highway Commercial 0 Perks and oven space Enactment of State Legislation Enforcement of State Legislation 0 Industrial - Light Industrial Alselmative Management Strategies Some as Sub-Zone I and 2. and: P.A' 347 of 1970 - Heavy industrial P.A. 345 of 1966 (Sail Erosion & Sedimentation 0 Parks and Open Space Enforcement of State Legislation (Inland Lake Improvement Act) Control Act) P.A 203 of 1980 Allis tive Mom" ism t Strategies Some as Sub-Zone 1, and. Enactment of Local Zoning (We;Jonds Protection Act) P.A. 346 of 1972 Enforcement of State and Federal P.A. 116 of 1974 Some as Sub Zone I , arid: (Iniands Lakes & Stearns Act) Legislation (Formiand and Open Space Preser. Waterfront zoning provisions. P.A. 127 of 1970 vation Act) Anti funneling or keyhoiing (Michigan Environmental Protection Some as Sub-Zone 1. and: Waterfront setbacks Act) Enactment of Local Zoning Accessory use (boat house) P.A. 245 of 1970, as a * ed provisions Enactment of Local Zoning (Shorelands Protection am Manage- - Same as Sub-Zone I ment Act) Enforcement of County & State t,*aith Site plan review P.A. 247 of 1955, as amerided Special Purpose Zoning L*partm flt r4equiation Greenbelt zoning (Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act) High risk erosion setbacks . Subdivision ordinance Septic fields ArM Setback, height regulations Enforcement of County and State Health . Lot splitting regulations Wells Us& regulations Department Kegulations - Anti-keyholing provisions Landscape buffer zones - Private road ordinance Special Puroose Zoning Performance controls Septic fields Planned unit development Wells Enfam emof County & State Health - Subdivision ordinance L)= __ I n, megijiat.- - Lot splitting regulatioris Special Purpose Zoning Enactment of Local or County Zoning - Anti4ceyholinig provisions - Septic flows - Private road ordinance Subdivision ordina e Some as Sub-Zone 1, and: - Wells Lot splitting regulations Enfo=rcet .0, County & State i,*olth Anti-keyholing provisions Scenic Easements Alle sa-hreOrganizationStramigies "m ;Z equiction Private food ordinance Flood hazard regulations Leflturn Ws Building Official Septic fields Enforcement of Court, & State Health Decitilocclration fares Zoning Administrator W*113 Lm-partment Requia Signage control and setbacks Planning Commission Utility tree let t (buriea electric Master Planning and periodic update Alternative Organization Strategies Septic fields fir" Wells Traffic signal treatment - uniform 3uilding Official design Zoning Administrator Alternative Orgartization Strategies Planning Commission Master Planning and periodic update Building Official Street lighting treatment - uniform Zoning Adrrinistral r design Planning Commission Secondary access roads Master Ptanning and periodic update Minimize curt) cutsiconsolidate driveways Shared parking Parking location and screening - preferably back and $ice yard parking as opposed to front yard use. Special Purpose Zoning Subdivision ordi e Lot splitting regulations Anli-keyholing provisions Private rood ordinance Organizing for Public Improvements Formulation of DDA COn3idel'0110111 of TIFA Consideration of impact fees Special Assessment Z Capital improvements planning Allev tiveOrganization Strategies Building Official Zoning Administrator Planning Commission Master Planning ar-4 periodic update Sub-Zone 1, Wrtheast Residential This area is characterized by (3 predominance of residential properties at low and medium densities. The area is in close proximity to the City of Petoskey and as such, will likely be affected by future development from the perimeter areas of the City. Alternative land use strategies as presented in Table 17 inc lude conservation/agriculture, residential, professional office, and local commercial. It is believed that future land use will be predominantly residential because of the proximity to the City of Petoskey. This would include low density residential (I dwelling unit per acre), medium density residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and high density residential (5-7 dwelling units per acre). Alternative management strategies include implementation of a variety of state legislation, local and county zoning regulations, special purpose zoning regulations and county and state health department regulations. These alternative Management strategies are listed within Table 17. Sub-Zone 2, Coastal Area This area included the U.S. 31 corridor and land areas encompassing the Dundee property (Bay Resort Project). Of all the land areas within Resort Township, it is likely that these areas will receive the most severe pressures for future development. The proposed Bay Properties "super resort" and high traffic volumes associated with U.S. 31 will exert significant development demand. Planning issues for this area include concerns that the U.S. 31 corridor may develop into a "strip commercial development corridor". There are also concerns that the rural character of the Township within this-area will be lost as well as scenic views of Lake Michigan. 74 Alternative land use strategies for this area include a wide array of uses including conservation/agricultural, residential, professional/office, commercial, industrial, parks and open space. Table 17 includes a listing of possible management strategies. These strategies are listed GS potential tools for the control of future growth and development. County zoning or local zoning options will be the primary vehicle for regulating the growth and development within this sub- planning area. Sub-Zone 3, Central Uplands Th is a rea is characterized by a predominance of agricultural, vacant lands and low density residential. Planning issues (ire centered upon the loss of farm land and the encroachment of single family residential parcels upon open space areas. Alternative land use strategies include conservation/agricultural, residential, professional/office, industrial and parks and open space areas. Alternative management strategies include measures to protect farm land areas such as inclusion of Public Act 116 as well cis recognition of the importance of prime agricultural lands for agricultural production GS well as the maintenance of the rural character of the Township. 75 Sub-Zone 4, Walloon Lake Area A large portion of this area includes medium density /seasonal (Ind year-round waterfront residential uses near Walloon Lake. Selected areas have limited development capability because of poor soils. Intensive use of the shoreline along Walloon Lake and the associated demands for on-site sanitary disposal and waterfront recreation places extraordinary demands 'on the natural features of these lands. The water quality of the Walloon Lake system must be maintained. Alternative land use strategies include consideration of conservation/agriculture, residential and park and open space areas. Future commercial or industrial uses are believed not to be appropriate due to the sensitive environmental characteristics of this area. Alternative management strategies include implementation of state legislation which protects inland lake areas, wetlands, and other resource management strategies as well as local and County land use regulations. Evaluation of Alternative Land Use Strategies The next step in the planning process is to evaluate possible -alternative land uses. This can be done by comparing these alternative land uses with various planning issues and policies established by the Planning Commission. Th is evaluation is summarized in Table 18 and presented on the following page. Each sub-planning area and corresponding alternative land uses are evaluated for the compatibility within the specific sub-planning area. Based upon this analysis and through careful consideration of all planning options, a preferred resource use management plan can be developed. 76 Table IS Evaluation Matrix Alternative Land Use Strategies ALTERNATIVE LAND USES 4) Impact Assessment 2 U * Low impact potential .0 b. fn * Moderate impact potential C2 - -hu. EJ -a .2 0 * High impact potential >. 4) E 'C E E E PLANNING ISSUES Compatibility with adjacent land uses 0 0101010 0101010 01 Z Compatibility with natural resources 0 0191010 001010 0 Maintenance of scenic views 0 081010 0 01010 0 Preservation of Township's rural character 0 09010 40 6140010 0 Dependence upon transportation artery 0 09 Ole 0 01490.9 Dependence upon central sanitary/water services .2.2.a e 10 0 00 0 0 X Potential for increase tax base 0019 010 0 0 0 0 0 z Potential for tax burden/Township services 0 09 0 1LO 0 Compatibility with adjacent land uses 0 0 0 919 9 e 0 0 0 Compatibility with natural resources .0 0 9 Ole 9 0 0 40 0 Maintenance of scenic views 0 0 9 0141 0 49 41 41 0 Preservation of Township's rural character 0 0 9 010 4D 0 0 a 0 Dependence upon transportation artery 0 0 9 GIG GIGIG1910 Dependence upon central sanitary/water services 9 4910 00000 0 Ul Potential for increase tax base 0 91010 4000 0 0 Potential for tax burden/Township services .2 1910149 000 0 e I Compatibility with adjacent land uses 0 01914010 0101010 0 Compatibility with natural resources 0 01914010 0 0 0 0 0 Maintenance of scenic views 0 0101016 0 61610 0 Preservation of Township's rural character 0 .0 0 9 0 0 * 0 0 0 Dependence upon transportation artery 0 0 91010 0401010 01 X Dependence upon central sanitary/water services 0 0 9 Is *.101919 0 ZI Potential for increase tax base 0 9 *10 S Ole 0 Potential for tax burden/Township services 010 elele 0 !41 i0e J-0 Compatibility with adjacent land uses- 0 0191010 0 0101010 < Compatibility with natural resources 0 0 q Ole, 0 6191910 LU Maintenance of scenic views 4 0 0 0 Ole * Olele 0 J Preservation of Township's rural character - z 0 0 9 Ole 0 *lei* 0 0 Dependence upon transportation artery - 0 o o e Ole 0 91ole o -J Dependence upon central sanitary/water services 0 019191411 41 4D 0 0 0 OOJ @ 0 00 0 0 0 Potential for increase tax base Potential for tax burden/Township services 818181911 @010191010 *I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IV I I 'Concept Plan I CONCEPTIPLAN Based upon the analysis of alternative land use strategies as well as input received from the background studies, policies and citizen questionnaire, a land use concept plan can be developed. The concept plan roughly follows the boundaries of the sub-planning areas and recommends conceptual land uses for these areas. The land uses are as follows: - Medium density uses and rural transitional - PUD residential and mixed development - Low density uses and conservation/agriculture - Waterfront residential and resource conservation The concept plan is intended to be used as a representation of the desired intensity of use for various areas. It does not represent specific land uses. More specific land uses are presented in following sections of this plan. 78 MEDIUM DENSITY USES and RURAL TRANSITIONAL PUD RESIDENTIAL and MIXED DEVELOPMENT ..... ...... .............. E: .. ......... . .... ......... .......... ....... @"TiNCNFK Rn .......... ......... ......... . ........ .. ............ ..... ...... .... INTr RTOWN Ro@ ..... INTFkM" ........... E RD. .. ..... .. ............... ......... . ............ 5 MW I RD. % KALCH I LOW DENSITY USES and CONSERVATION/AGRICULTURE WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL and RESOURCE CONSERVATION MAP 11 RESORT TOWNSHIP RESOURCE USE MANAGEMENT PLAN ----------- CONCEPT PLAN Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. pv,'jj Engineers Planners I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I v Resource Use ____ Management Plan 'A LAND USE PLAN The Master Land Use Plan (Map 12), presented on the following page, illustrates the proposed physical arrangement of land use for the Township. The Land Use Plan serves to translate community goals into (3 narrative and graphic illustration. It is based largely upon existing land use patterns, current zoning, market demand and the desires of the residents of Resort Township. The Plan was prepared to serve GS G policy guide to Resort Township regarding current issues, land use decisions, investments in public improvements and to guide zoning decisions. The Plan is intended to be a working document which will provide for the orderly development of the Township, assist the community in its effort to maintain and enhance a pleasant living environment while retaining the rural character of the Township. The Land Use Plan is based upon comments and opinions gathered during the planning process and input gathered from the citizen questionnaire. To this extent it reflects general policies towards growth and development within the Township. The following policies are an important facet in guiding future development in Resort Township. 80 31 7 .......... n '30 !@e v 'D R. R. L ... ........ .........W % _1_11_1@-" ".U.M.M.MM "RER", T 5 z . .... .... .... I N .......... .......... . ......... .............. ................. IEBLE RD. .......... -.- - - - - - - - - - - 0 W CS W _1_1@11_1'1;1'1'11'1_1@@T[ IJAMS RD. > C:' Cr Ld he . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 0 @D_ 4 m 0 T'. m m _'M MAP 12 Preserve 0 ft Preserve @iRFORn Rn. V GAR LAND USE PLAN RESERVE AGRICULTURAL and OPEN SPACE PEW RD. PRIME AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Wooden, rin rshl WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL WIN` 'A_ Cn Land OFFICE PROFESSIONAL LOCAL BUSINESS in ii n arde Grou v 0 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL V 0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LIMITED INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATION - - - - - - - - - PUBLIC WATERFRONT ACCESS PARKLAND RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. Engine- Plan- D low Land Use Goals The Resort Township Planning Commission has prepared the following goals as overall statements of principle to guide future growth and development in the Township. These goals are listed as follows: 0 Retain the unique natural and manmade qualities of Resort Township. 0 Shape and control the form and quality of new development. 0 Maintain an ecologically sound balance between human activities and the environment. 0 Promote the health, safety and welfare of Township residents by coordinating the uses of land with the provision of efficient public services. Land Use Policies Non-Residential Development Policies 0 Discourage the fragmentation of land parcels within rural area. Where parcels are split encourage platting techniques which minimize the effect on land consumption. 0 Encourage non-residential uses to concentrate in clusters in order to better provide necessary services and minimize the impact on the rural character of the Township. 0 Establish buffer zones and/or transitional uses between urban areas and agricultural uses. 82 Residential Policies 0 Utilize zoning regulations to protect the environment surrounding seasonal and permanent homes. 0 Ensure that public services and facilities keep pace with residential development. 0 Utilize State and Federal programs (MSHDA, HUD, etc.) to improve existing housing quality. 0 Encourage clustering of residential units when possible to alleviate the need for multiple driveways onto main roads, promote efficient layout of utilities and services, and respect environmental features. 0 Realize that not all areas (especially environmentally sensitive areas) are suitable for residential development. Economic Development Policies � Permit and retain job opportunities that are compatible with a rural resort community. � Permit only non-polluting, low impact industries within the Township. 0 Ensure adequate buffering of industrial and commercial businesses from adjacent uses and roadways. 0 Encourage compatibility of industrial and commercial uses with environmental resources, scenic views, soils, topography and other locational factors. 83 0 Encourage active/productive use of prime agricultural lands for farming operations. 0 Recognize importance of the agricultural economy for both employment opportunities and the production of foodstuffs. 0 Ensure opportunities for the development of forest products, including timber production and finished wood product manufacturing. 0 Ensure opportunities for recreational boating and marine development and services. 0 Recognize importance of tourism for job opportunities and capital investment in Resort Township. 0 Ensure adequate and appropriate landscaping between businesses and roadways. 0 Encourage efficient site layouts for development, such as cluster development, and discourage uncontrolled strip development. 0 Establish beautification requirements such cis appropriate setbacks, retainment of green space and landscaping techniques for areas undergoing land use change. Land Use StrGtegies for Sub-Plunning Zones A generalized Land Use Concept Plan is presented in Map 11, which outlines sub- planning zones. More specific land uses are detailed in the Land Use Plan (Map 12). Generalized land use strategies, however, can be considered for each sub- planning zone. These (ire as follows: 84 Sub-Zone I - Wrtheast Residential Existing land use within this zone is low to medium density residential. The proposed land use will be for continued low and medium density residential uses. Average densities will likely be in the range of I to 2 units per acre. The sub- planning zone also contains a small section of multi-family uses along Sheridan Road. This is proposed for a density of approximately 5 to 12 units per acre. The generalized land capability map indicates the soils are generally good within this area for development activities. However, the limiting factors for development will be the steep slopes which are common in areas near U.S. 31. The slopes and hillsides offer excellent views of Lake Michigan. These views must be protected. In some regards the area could be considered rural transitional. This is primarily due to impacts associated with development on the western fringes of the City of Petoskey. It is likely that over the next 10 or 20 years the area will be subject to intense development pressures because of the close proximity to urban services. As development increases, increased traffic loads on the existing roadways will also increase. This will be especially noticeable on Intertown Road. Intertown Road provides a link between Resort Township, Bear Creek Township and U.S. 131. With increased traffic loads, it is likely that the development pressures along Intertown Road, as well as Resort Pike Road, Blackbird Road and Eppler Road will also become more intense. Sub-Zone 2 - Coastal Area and U.S. 31 Sub-Zone 2 includes the coastal area and the U.S. 31 corridor. It is characterized by high traffic volumes along U.S. 31 and a predominance of commercial and industrial land uses. The Land Use Plan proposes that this area be planned for a mixture of commercial, industrial and conservation lands. The concept of clustering land uses along this corridor is recommended to avoid a strip 85 development pattern. The Township's intent is to minimize a proliferation of unplanned commercial and industrial development along the entire corridor. By concentrating development within planned areas, it is intended that the resources, scenic views and rural character of the Township can be protected. Figure 2 illustrates the clustering concept. Figure 2 Clustered Development Concept The conservation designation is recommended for areas containing steep slopes and wetlands where intensive commercial or industrial development would be incompatible with the existing natural resources. Conservation areas can include low density residential uses and or open spaces. The development concept for this area also emphasizes the need for detailed site plan review to control and regulate the character of uses along the U.S. 31 corridor. The following chapter outlines specific guidelines for the future use of this area. 86 The Dundee property (Bay Resort Project) is located within Sub-Zone 2. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) project involving a mixture of residential and commercial uses is proposed within the Dundee property. While the project will have a major impact upon the coastal area and U.S. 31, the Township has begun establishing management policies for this complex which will help mitigate its impacts. These preliminary policies include: 0 Protect important natural resources of the project site, especially scenic views, wetlands, woodlands and coastal resources. 0 Minimize impacts to the U.S. 31 corridor by buffering development with greenbelts and by controlling off-site commercial development. 0 Provide public access to waterfront areas and waterfront facilities. The size and scale o f the Bay Resort project will have a major impact on the Township. This will be especially true in regards to traffic and public utilities. Traffic counts on U.S. 31 will see a significant increase. The developers will be required to create a centralized water and wastewater system. It is conceivable that utilities could be extended from the City of Petoskey to service this development. While the exact route and capacity of these utilities are not known, the Township must plan any extension and develop policies for off site hook up. If utilities are available within the U.S. 31 corridor, future water and sewer service districts should be planned to discourage strip development. Conservation zones and development setbacks should be used to encourage planned clustered development regardless of whether utilities are extended from the City of Petoskey. Sub-Zone 3 - Central Uplands The current uses in this central upland area are predominantly agricultural and vacant. It is widely recognized that in addition to the waterfront resources of the Township the agricultural character of the Township is one of its most important resources. Therefore every attempt will be made to retain agricultural lands. 87 The Land Use Plan recommends agricultural and low density residential uses for these areas. Existing agricultural lands which are actively being farmed, classified as prime or unique farmlands by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and are mostly isolated from intensive development areas are recommended as a prime agricultural district by the Land Use Plan. In this zone agricultural production, farm related homes a nd structures will be the primary land uses. Other agricultural lands are recommended as reserve agricultural and open space. Some non-fGrm single family development will be considered acceptable in this zone. Typical recommended density patterns for non-form residential areas will not exceed I dwelling unit per acre and average lot sizes are expected to be 2 to 5 acres in size. Lo;wp ......... . . . . . . . . A A& . .......... . L40W M@461TY WOOPL(rrio LOW rue ....... ..... *:4 L - Figure 3 Regulated Rural Growth Concept 88 The Township Board and Planning Commission recognizes the importance of preserving agricultural lands within the Township. They will continue to promote efforts of farm land preservation and will continue to promote land use policies which preserve agricultural uses and prevent encroachment of non-agricultrual land uses on these properties. Sub-Zone 4 - Walloon Lake Area This area includes properties along Walloon Lake which are predominantly single- family residential type uses. This area is one of the more environmentally sensitive areas within the Township because of its inclusion within the Walloon Lake watershed. Several areas bordering Walloon Lake are classified as wetlands by the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council. These areas fronting Walloon Lake are recommended for conservation use. WATERSHED LIMITS MAINTAIN WATERFRONT VEGETATION CONTROL USE OF LAWN FERTILIZER & NUTRIENT LOADING INSURE PROPER ISOLATION DISTANCE FOR SEPTICS PRESERVE VEGETATION INSURE PROPER SETBACKS FOR HOUSING WALLOON LAKE Figure 4 Regulated Waterfront Residential Concept 89 Recommended densities for this area are approximately 2 dwelling units per acre. This is contingent upon suitable soils for septic disposal. The Walloon Lake area will be primarily reserved for waterfront residential. However, accessory uses such cis boat storage which detract from the residential character are discouraged. Likewise, the development of inland properties which are 300 to 1000 feet from the shoreline, should also be retained for low density residential uses. Land Use Map The land use map is based on consideration of a number of factors. Such factors include: - population projections - roadway access and adequacy - availability of utilities - compatible uses - community goals and objectives - citizen opinions - existing land use - existing zoning In consideration of these factors, various land use categories can be established. The following land use classifications are used in developing the land use plan for Resort Township. Prime Agriculturcil is intended for existing agricultural areas which are actively being farmed and are classified as prime or unique farmlands by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. In addition, these lands are primarily isolated from intensive development. 90 Agricultural and Open Space-is intended for existing agricultural areas or previously farmed open space areas, woodlands and non-developable areas due to natural resource limitations. These areas include transitional, reserve agricultural lands which are likely to evolve to low density residential. Single Family Low Density Residential is intended for existing and proposed residential development. Densities for this area will be proposed to accommodate a minimum of I dwelling unit per acre. It should be noted that this is a minimum standard and average lot sizes are expected to range between 2 and 10 acres in size. Single Family Medium Density Residential are areas capable of supporting higher density residential developments at a density of approximately 2 dwelling units per acre. These areas are considered to be rural transitional and are in close proximity to suitable roads and commercial services within the Township and the City of Petoskey. Multi-Family Residential are areas Capable of supporting development at higher density levels. The higher densities will include a range of housing alternatives which can include apartment units, condominiums, townhouses, etc. Densities will range between 5 and 8 units per acre. It is anticipated that these developments will offer centralized water and sewer services. Waterfront Residential are residential areas adjacent to Walloon Lake. These lands are often environmentally sensitive because of their close proximity to the waterfront. Typical densities will not exceed 2 dwelling units per acre. Local Business/Office Professional includes medical offices, office complexes, retail uses and convenience retail uses. The intensity of use for this district is moderate in that parking needs, signage, and buffer landscaping are minimal. 91 Highway Commercial are areas intended for more intense commercial Usage. The land use district is heavily dependent upon highway frontage, high traffic volumes and visability from a major thoroughfare such cis U.S. 31. Typical uses include automobile dealerships, service centers, restaurants and other commercial uses. Planned Development land use is recommended for the lands included in the Dundee Property (Bay Resort Project). The planned development classification incorporates a mixture of land uses such as residential and commercial within an overall planned- development area. The area will likely be served by central water and sewer service. Limited Industrial incorporates low impact industrial uses such as light manufacturing, warehousing, and services. Institutional includes existing and proposed governmental land uses such as Township Hall, library, school sites, and churches. Conservation includes public and private land areas reserved for conservation and open space uses or very low density residential uses where there will be minimal impact upon areas containing steep slopes, fragile wetlands or other limiting natural resources. The conservation category also includes lands maintained as preserves, such as the Reycraft Preserve, the Black Preserve, the Harold Covert Preserve, the Woodland Partnership Conservation Area and the Indian Garden @ Group Conservation Area. Only low impact recreational uses and specified forest management activities are allowed within these lands. 92 Public Waterfront Access and PGrkland includes publically owned access sites and large acreages for waterfront recreation. This may include picnicking, swimming, and other waterfront recreation uses. The allocation of proposed land uses is depicted in Map 12 and on Table 19. This table summarizes the proposed land use acreages for each district. The Land Use Plan is not intended to serve as a zoning map nor to dictate the use of individual parcels of property. Instead, the purpose of the Plan is to provide guidance for zoning decisions and management of important resources. 93 Table 19 Resort Township Land Use Plan Acreages Planned % of Land Use Acres Total Reserve Agricultural and Open Space 3725 24.93 Prime Agricultural 1403 9.40 Single Family Residential - Low Density 1630 10.91 Single Family Residential - Medium Density 2139 14.32 Multiple Family Residential 72 0.48 Waterfront Res idential 1360 9.10 Local Business/Off ice Professional 68 0.46 Highway Commerc ial 99 0.66 Planned Development 850 5.69 Limited Industrial 84 0.56 Institutional 25 0.17 Conservation 1039 6.95 Waterfront Public Access/Park lands 355 2.37 Roads 510 3.41 Lakes 1582 10.59 State Owned Lands 0 0.00 TOTAL 14,941 100.00 94 NATURAL RESOURCES PLAN The Natural Resources Plan presents the various strategies available to achieve the goals and policies identified for the management of Resort Township's natural resources. Goals and policies for steep slopes, sensitive soils, wetlands, wooded areas, scenic views, the coastal area, Walloon Lake, and protection0f agricultural lands are combined. Strategies for these resources, however, are presented separately. Laws which apply to the management of the above mentioned resources are displayed in Table 20 at the end of the Natural ResourcesPIGn. Go,als � Promote the protection of sensitive features including wildlife habitat, wetlands, lakes, streams, steep slopes and wooded areas. � Recognize the importance of managed forests in providing wildlife habitat, erosion control, micro-cliMGte control and scenic views. � Recognize the importance of agricultural production within Resort Township. Recognize that the presence of agricultural lands add to the scenic and rural character of the Township. Policies � Retain natural vegetative cover within conservation areas. � Encourage planting of tree species associated with the Northern Hardwoods community such as eastern white pine, balsam fir, eastern hemlock, basswood, yellow birch, sugar and red maple, beech and striped maple. � Encourage planting of Northern Hardwoods related shrub species in appropriate areas such as along slopes and in areas where visual buffers are desired. Roundleaf serviceberry, roundleaf dogwood, atlantic leatherwood, 95 Canada yew and american cranberrybush vi burnum are a few examples of the shrub species native to northern Michigan. 0 Promote the continued use of the Reycraft Preserve as a study area for forestry management students. 0 Retain and manage existing forested areas. 0 Promote re-forestation and sound forestry management practices of productive forest soils. o Maintain productive agricultural farmland . 0 Encourage farmers to use programs such as P.A. 116, the Farmland Open Space Act, which is intended to retain farmland. 0 Support legislative reform measures to assist in retaining farmland. 0 Discourage the conversion of farmland into other more intensive uses. 0 Protect the water quality and scenic views of Walloon Lake, its shoreline and its sensitive watershed. 0 Protect groundwater and surface water resources. 0 Promote shoreline use along Little Traverse Bay which is non-detrimental to lake water quality and/or scenic views. 0 Obtain scenic easements to Lake Michigan and Walloon Lake where appropriate. 0 Protect the sensitive and natural resources and scenic amenities within the Township such as steep slopes, wetland soils, wooded areas and wildlife habitat. 96 Strategies Figure 5 Strategies for the Protection of Natural Resources Steep Slopes 0 The Slopes map identifies slopes greater that 18% within the Township. This map will assist in the review of proposed developments. 0 The Land Capability map identifies areas least acceptable for development (slopes greater than 18% is one of the limiting factors). Site Plan Review conducted by the County and the Township Planning Commission,offers an excellent opportunity to identify potential development impacts on steep slopes. 97 0 Steep slopes within the U.S. 31 corridor have been classified as conservation areas. Sensitive Soils 0 The Soils map identifies the location of soils with poor septic field and building foundation characteristics within the Township. 0 The Land Capability map identifies areas least acceptable for development (sensitive soils is one of the limiting factors). 0 The Land Use Plan identifies conservation areas containing sensitive soils. 0 Site Plan Review offers an opportunity to regulate the location and size of new buildings and paved surfaces. Wetlands 0 The Wetlands map identifies the location of wooded, non-wooded, emergent wetlands, streams and creeks found within Resort Township. 0 The Land Capability map identifies areas least acceptable for development (wetlands and drainage patterns are included (is limiting factors). 0 The Land Use Plan recommends preserving wetlands within the U.S. 31 corridor. ConserVGt ion areas have been designated. 0 The Site Plan Review process should require the identification of any wetlands within a proposed project area. 0 Act 203, P.A. 1980, Wetlands Protection Act requires a permit from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) to dredge, fill, construct, 98 or drain any wetland contiguous to inland lakes or streams, the Great Lakes, or greater than 5 acres in size. Wetlands less than 5 acres in size and not contiguous to inland lakes, streams or the Great Lakes may require a MDNR permit for the above mentioned activities if the department determines the protection of the area is essential to the preservation of the natural resources of the state. Wooded Areas � The Woodlands map illustrates the location of deciduous and coniferous woodlands within the Township. � The Township's development review process provides an opportunity to determine the potential impact of development on existing vegetation. � Regulations on buffer zones or setbacks established through the zoning ordin- ance can help preserve desired existing vegetation. � Landscape requirements for new developments can ensure appropriate plant- ing and maintenance of desired plant species. Scenic Views 0 The Township's Site Plan Review process provides opportunities to determine if proposed building locations and building heights will negatively impact scenic views within the Township. 0 The Township should consult contour maps to determine how future buildings will impact scenic views. 0 Utilize underground utilities to protect scenic views. 99 0 The Township or private groups may wish to consider the purchase of scenic easements to protect valuable view areas. 0 The Township may wish to acquire lands offering scenic views for public enjoyment. COGStGI Area 0 Much of the coastal area is categorized as a Planned Unit Development in the Land Use Plan. The area generally extends from the shoreline of Lake Michigan to U.S. 31. Associated with the PUD Classification are special setbacks, buffer areas, landscape requirements, open space and density requirements. 0 Development activities within the coastal area may be subject to several re- strictions as identified by: - Act 247, P.A. 1955, as amended Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act - Section 404, Dredge and Fill Permits; Rivers and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 - P.L. 95-217, Clean Water Act, Section 401, Water Quality Certification - Act 347, P.A. 1970, Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act - Act 245, P.A. 1970, as amended Shorelands Protection and Management Act - Act 203, P.A. 1980, Wetlands Protection Act 100 Walloon Lake Area 0 The land surrounding Walloon Lake is recommended for waterfront residential use and waterfront public access/parkland use in the Land Use Plan. Within the waterfront residential category, only areas containing acceptable soils, moderate slopes and absence of wetlands and drainage ways should be used for single family residential purposes. Areas containing sensitive resources within this zone, however, should not be developed. 0 A lot width minimum of 1001 would be appropriate for areas recommended as waterfront residential in the Land Use Plan. 0 The County Health Department provides guidelines for septic tank size and locations. The Walloon Lake Association also recommends setbacks to preserve a greenbelt of vegetation around the lake and appropriate lawn fertilizing maintenance activities. 0 Act 346, P.A. 1972, Inland Lakes and Streams Act requires a permit from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to dredge, fill or construct in inland lakes or streams below the ordinary high water mark. Agriculture � A MGP prepared by the U.S. Department of Agricultural Soil Conservation Service, presented in the appendix section of the Resource Use Management Plan, illustrates areas within the Township containing prime, unique and other important farmlands. � The Land Use Plan recommends certain areas as a prime farmland district. Land within these areas would be used only for agricultural purposes and associated farm dwelling units. � The Township MGY wish to consider agricultural zoning. 101 0 Development activities within lands proposed for reserve agricultural and open space uses in the Land Use Plan may be subject to lot size restrictions. 0 Non-agricultural land uses within agricultural areas should be clustered to preserve large tracts of land for agricultural activities. 0 The Township may provide information to private land owners regarding land use covenants such as Act 116, P.A. 1974, Farmlands and Open Space Preservation Act or deed restrictions to preserve their land for agricultural activities. 102 Table 20 Laws with Direct Applicability to the Mangernei t of Natural Resotnces within Resort Township Resource Law Type of Jurisdiction Steep Slopes Act 347, P.A. 1970 Permit from local enforcement Soil Erosion and Sedimen- agency required if a proposed pro- tation Control Act ject would disturb one or more acres of land or move earth within 500 feet of a lake or stream. Act 245, P.A. 1970, as amended Local zoning or MDNR permit ShorelaWs Protection and process regulates new construc- Management Act tion in designated environmental, high risk erosion, and high risk flood areas. Sensil We Solis Act 347, P.A. 1970 Permit from local enforcement Soil Erosion and Sedimen- agency required if a proposed pro- tation Control Act ject would disturb one or more acres of land or move earth within 500 feet of a lake or stream. Act 245, P.A. 1970, G3 amended Local zoning or MDNR permit Shorelands Protection and process regulates new construc- Management Act tion in designated environmental, high risk erosion, mid high risk flood areas. Wetlands Act 203, P.A. 1980 Permit from MDNR required to Wetlands Protection Act dredge, fill, construct, or drain any wetland contiguous to infand lakes and streams, the Great Lakes, or greater than five acres. Woodlands Act 347, P.A. 1970 Permit from local enforcement Soil Erosion and Sedimen- agency required if a proposed pro- tation Control Act *t would disturb one or more acres of land or move earth within 500 feet of a lake or stream. Act 245, P.A. 1970, as amended Local zoning or MDNR permit Shorelands Protection and process regulates new construc- Management Act tion in designated environmental, high risk erosion, and high risk flood areas. Farmland anid Open Space Act If 6, P.A. 1974 Voluntary enrollment by private Farmland and Open Space landowner. Places restrictions an Preservation Act types of land use allowed on property in return for tax credits for landowner. Coastal Area Act 247, P.A. 19559 as amended Permit from MDNR required to Great Lakes Submerged modify or construct in Great Lands Act Lakes bottomlands. Marina leases also issued under this Act. Section 404 Army Corps of Engineers permit Dredge end Fill Permits program jointly administered with State Acts 346 and 247. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Administered in conjunction with Section 10 Section 404 permit program. P.L. 95-217, Clean Water Act Administered by MDNR - Certifi- Section 401, Water Quality cation that project is in compli- Certification ance with State water quality standards. 103 Resource Law Type of Jurisdiction Coastal Area (cont.) Act 347, P.A. 1970 Permit from local enforcement Soil Erosion and Sedimen- agency required if a proposed pro- tation Control Act ject would disturb one or more acres of land or move earth within 500 feet of a lake or stream. Act 245, P.A. 1970, as amended Local zoning or MDNR permit Shorelands Protection and process regulates new con3truc. Management Act tion in designated environmental, high risk erosionp and high risk flood areas. Act 203, P.A. 1980 Permit from MDNR required to Wetlands Protection Act dredge, fill, construct, or drain any wetiond contiguous to inland lakes and streamsv or the Great Lakes. Walloon Lake Area Act 346, P.A. 1972 Permit from MDNR required to Inland Lakes and Streams Act dredge, fill or construct in inland lakes or streams. P.L. 95-217, Clean Water Act Administered by MDNR - Certifi- Section 401, Water Quality cation that project is in compli- Certification once with State water quality standards. Act 347, P.A. 1970 Permit from local enforcement Soil Erosion and Sedimen- agency required if a proposed pro- tation Control Act ject would disturb one or more acres of land or move earth within 500 feet of a lake or stream. Act 203, P.A. 1980 Permit frord MDNR required to Wetlands Protection Act dredge, fill, construct, or drain any wetiond contiguous to inland lakes wid streams, or the Great Lakes. Act 243, P.A. 1951 Persons engaged in servicing and Servicing of Septic Tanks, cleaning of septic tonkst seepage Seepage Pits or Cesspools pits or cesspools must be licensed and bonded by the commissioner of health. 104 U.S. 31 A ND COASTAL AREA CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLAN Of all the study areas within Resort Township, U.S. 31 and the Coastal Area remains one of the more important areas in the Township for the study of land use. First, it is part of the coastal area and as such is likely to receive significant development pressures. The proximity to Lake Michigan and the availability of a major state highway such as U.S. 31 makes this corridor prime for development. The development potential is also compounded by the fact that Dundee Cement Company owns significant land holdings within this corridor with Stated plans for future development. Together, these factors make this area unique to both the Township and the region. Regardless of the future development, the U.S. 31 corridor is already experiencing problems. Since 1980, traffic has significantly increased. New industrial uses, commercial uses and residential uses have also developed within the corridor caus- ing impacts on natural resources, disruption of scenic views and a general change in the rural character of the Township. The purpose of this section is to develop long range strategies for the control and management of future growth within the corridor. This can be accomplished by establishing development policies, recommended land uses, development guidelines and an implementation plan. Recommended land uses for the corridor were pre- sented in the preceding chapter. Policies, development guidelines and an imple- mentGtion plan is provided in the following pages. Table 21, presented at the end of this Plan, summarizes the proposed development policies and guidelines in re- lation to specific areas found within the U.S. 31 corridor. Goals 0 Recognize the importance of the U.S. 31 corridor in providing a positive image of Resort Township to visitors and Township residents. 105 0 Promote the protection of sensitive natural resources and scenic amenities within the corridor. Policies 0 Cluster commercial uses in non-sensitive areas while discouraging strip corridor development. 0 Encourage the use of attractive entrance signs and landscaping at the main intersections leading into Resort Township. 0 Minimize traffic hazards at Major intersections and along U.S. 3 1. 0 Encourage development of non-motorized transportation routes (i.e. sidewalks and bicycle lanes and/or paths to improve safety along U.S. 3 1). 0 Establish secondary access roads to businesses. 0 Minimize driveways off of U.S. 31 by combining access to two or more businesses when possible. 0 Require on-site facilities such as retention and detention ponds to handle stormwater runoff serviced by storm sewers. Consider off-site drainage way patterns to reduce the potential of storm water flooding and soil erosion. Development Guidelines One of the characteristics associated with development along transportation corridors is the constantly changing scene. Unfortunately, the changes in land use along a corridor can result in confusing and unsafe conditions for both pedestrians and motorists. The disarray of signs, varying land uses, numerous unregulated curb cuts and overhead wires are just a few of the problems often experienced by those passing through an urbanized transportation corridor. 106 Presently, U.S. 31 is not located in a highly urbanized corridor within Resort Township. Anticipated future development pressures, however, will eventually alter the character of U.S. 31. The following development guidelines will assist Resort Township decision-makers in controlling future development practices and consequently guiding the appearance of U.S. 31 while integrating environmental and economic resources. Circuicition Associated with any new development along U.S. 31 will be impacts on the existing circulation patterns. New development will attract non-Township residents and consequently increase traffic volumes within the Township. As (I result, entrance areas will become important points for communicating the Township's identity. Furthermore, new development will require additional driveways, roads, parking areas and non-motorized circulation routes. The impact of these additions on circulation patterns and the character of the U.S. 31 corridor will depend on their design treatment. Design guidelines pertaining to circulation and traffic flow are therefor presented. Entrance Areas The primary entrances to Resort Township are at the intersection of U.S. 3 1 /Epp ler Road and U.S. 3 1 /Town line Road. A secondary entrance area occurs at the Intertown Road and Cemetery Road intersection. These three areas offer an opportunity to promote a stronger township identity and hopefully reinforce Resort Township residents' pride in their community. As presently viewed, the motorist on U.S. 31 has no clear image of which political subdivision they are in nor is there an established identity to the Township. Entry signs along U.S. 31 will help address this problem and promote the Township's committment to an improved corridor. 107 Attrac-tive welcome signs to residents and visitors in addition to associated landscaping should be located adjacent to the three intersections facing the direction of incoming Resort Township traffic. A sketch of a possible design treatment for a welcome sign at the U.S. 31 and Eppler Road intersection follows. IWP Figure 6 Entrance Treatment Dundee Property Development With the development of the Dundee Property (Bay Resort Project) numerous impacts can be anticipated. First of all the development of this resort will create a significant increase on traffic along the US. 31 Corridor. Traffic engineers estimate that for every residential unit 7 to 10 trips per day can be generated. If full development occurs the resort complex could generate anywhere from 20,000 to 30,000 extra trips per day on the U.S. 31 highway. This would nearly triple the current traffic loads and would necessitate widening of U.S. 31, installation of traffic lights, and curbing and drainage improvements. 108 Design improvements are impossible to predict or even recommend at this time. The future design of U.S. 31 will of course be dependent upon actual traffic loads, surrounding land uses, the status of the U.S. 31 bypass and design recom- mendations by the Michigan Department of Transportation. Possible alternatives as to the widening of U.S. 31 are presented as part of the Appendix of this report. These alternatives include consideration of a center left hand turn lane, expansion to four lanes and even the creation of a boulevard or parkway concept. In terms of combining traffic efficiency and aesthetics, the boulevard concept is recommended. The boulevard concept will insure space for landscaping, retention of significant views and excellent traffic flow. Existing right of way width is 150 feet. A total right of way width of 200 feet will be required for development of a boulevard. Another impact associated with the development of the Bay Resort Properties will be the location and character of entrance drives from U.S. 31 to the resort com- plex area. As presently proposed, the developers are considering two primary en- trance drives. The first would be near the current driveway entrance for Dundee Cement. This is east of Lake Grove Road and would provide direct access to the proposed marina area. The second driveway access would be approximately one mile west of this near Camp Doggett Road. Near both these intersections it is likely that a traffic signal would have to be considered. The entrance drives and intersections would also have a significant impact upon surrounding land use. It is likely that there will be significant development pres- sures for commercial or residential uses on the south side of U.S. 31 and near these intersections. The Township must carefully monitor future plans for this complex and pay particular attention to future entrance drives as they interface with U.S. 3 1. 109 Greenbelts and Shared Parking Parking and service areas associated with development along U.S. 31 should be located primarily in the rear and side yards. The land in front of future and existing buildings should be retained as green space thereby establishing a formal greenbelt with landscaping. This practice will help create a continuous greenbelt along U.S. 31 and maintain its rural character. Shared parking for two or more commercial businesses will benefit shoppers and store owners. Shoppers will be able to park in a central location and access two or more businesses without re-parking. Businesses can share in the costs of parking lot maintenance and combine their landscaping efforts within the parking lot area to create a more unified appearance of landscaped areas. Shared parking, however, will require cooperation and good communication between private and public parties. The following diagram illustrates the advantages of shared parking. A I I I I Figure 7 Shared Parking 110 Secondary Roadways Another method to reduce the number of driveways intersecting the main corridor road is the use of secondary roadways. The following sketch shows how a second road may be developed parallel to the main corridor but located behind a cluster of buildings. This secondary road will collect traffic from the various buildings and funnel it to a major intersection with the main corridor road. As a result, fewer driveways will intersect the main corridor and fewer points of potential traffic conflict will occur. The development of secondary roadways will also foster cluster commercial centers instead of strip commercial development. PvTulee I'S A Figure 8 Secondary Road Access Driveway Consolidation A common problem associated with urbanized corridors is the large number of driveway cuts occurring along the main corridor road. Each entrance and exit driveway is a potential point of conflict between two or more motorists and between motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. The following diagrams illustrate that by combining driveways the number of possible conflict areas can be reduced. Furthermore, the land set aside for landscaping and buffering is less divided by driveways. A simplified road edge will help motorists focus their attention ahead and improve traffic safety. As new land use plans are proposed for the land adjacent to U.S. 31, consideration should be given to limiting the number of driveways developed. IL Figure 9 Uncombined Driveways Figure 10 Combined Driveway 112 Pedestrian and Bicycle Use U.S. 31 is viewed differently by those traveling by foot or on bicycle than by those in automobiles. Smaller details have a greater impact on pedestrians and bicyclists than compared with motorists. The guidelines for developing pedestrian and bicycle paths should reflect the different characteristics associated with these slower moving forms of travel. Currently, U.S. 31 has no sidewalks or bicycle paths. Resort Township encourages the development of non-motorized pathways along U.S. 31 in addition to road improvements as traffic increases over time. There are several alternative methods to achieve a pedestrian and bicycle pathway along the U.S. 31 corridor. -The most preferred design treatment for a bicycle pathway would involve developing the abandoned C & 0 Railroad right of way. The abandoned railroad tracks run parallel to U.S. 31 through the Dundee Cement Company property and connect the City of Petoskey with the City of Charlevoix. The Michigan Department of Transportation currently owns the tracks and right of way. Once the tracks are removed, however, the Courts will determine ownership of this land. Efforts should be made to encourage the future landowner of the right of way to develop at least part of this linear strip ot land for public use. A bicycle pathway could be located within a portion of the abandoned railroad right of way and continue on within the U.S. 31 right of way to create a continuous bike route between the City of Petoskey and the City of Charlevoix. 113 LAMP66AP6 Aecma*-riom Ulb - 31 PATM Figure 11 Bicycle/ R ecreatio n Pathway SIKe SIK9 LAMV*ZAM MATH Uep-41 PATA WPPOr- L p UO-SI WJ4-mr o ro WAf Figure 12 Bicycle Lanes T.4 4 114 Another alternative design treatment would involve paving the shoulders of U.S. 31 for use as bicycle lanes. The width of these lanes should be between four to eight feet. White pavement striping on the outside edge of the highway should be used to help separate the shoulder from the roadway. Sidewalks should be developed in areas along U.S. 31 where commercial businesses are located near residential areas. Sidewalks should be separated from the roadway by a ten foot wide lawn extension (minimum). Protection of Naturcif Resources and Coastul Areas The natural resources which require protection from development activities along the U.S. 31 corridor and coastal area are the steep slopes, sensitive soils, wetlands and drainage ways, the wooded areas, views of Little Traverse Bay and the overall visual character of the corridor. Similar to development activities such as siting new buildings, roads and parking areas, future landscaping efforts will greatly influence the natural resources found within the U.S. 31 corridor. Strategies for protecting the natural resources within the corridor are presented below. A table (Table 22) which identifies the location of the sensitive resources within the U.S. 31 corridor and the strategies to protect these resources is presented at the end of the U.S. 31 Corridor Management Plan. Steep Slopes Two important tools for limiting development on steep slopes along the U.S. 31 corridor are consideration of the proposed Land Use Plan and implementation of site plan review procedures. The proposed Land Use Plan recognizes areas of slopes greater than 18% as conservation lands. These lands containing slopes of 18% to 30% will require very sensitive site planning and restricted development activities. Additional landscaping with indigenous plant Material, however, would be acceptable and advantageous to controlling soil erosion. 115 Sensitive Soils Soils sensitive to development practices are identified in the Background Studies chapter of this Resource Use Management Plan. Soils identified as sensitive are associated with a high seasonal Water table, high organic content and severe limitations for siting septic fields such as steep topography. Most of the areas containing sensitive soils within the corridor are recommended for conservation use by the proposed Land Use Plan. Wetlands and Drainage Ways Wetlands and drainage ways found within the U.S. 31 corridor zone are very sensitive to development activities. Wetlands within 1000 feet of Little Traverse Bay, as surveyed by the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, are identified in the Wetlands and Stream map found in the Background Studies chapter. Most of these wetlands are recommended as conservation zones in the Land Use Plan. Wetland areas not identified beyond the 1000 foot band around Little Traverse Bay and found within the U.S. 31 corridor may be recommended as conservation zones because of their sensitive soil characteristics. Additional field inspection, however, should be carried out for any proposed development plans to ensure accurate identification of wetland areas and drainage ways. Woodlands Mature stands of conifers and deciduous trees along the U.S. 31 corridor enhance the rural character associated with the Township. Woodland areas are classified as conservation zones in the Land Use Plan where associated with steep topography. Development within the U.S. 31 corridor, however, should be sensitiv6 to the preservation of existing vegetation. Proposed development should capitalize on the benefits of incorporating existing vegetation into plan layouts. Site plan review procedures should include G thorough inspection of existing vegetation within a proposed development site and evaluate its importance to the corridor's desired character. 116 Views Views of Little Traverse Bay from U.S. 31, neighboring businesses and residences are one of the most important resources of the Township. These views create an impression of the Township to visitors and re sidents. Some of the strategies available to protect these views include developing parklands overlooking Little Traverse Bay, negotiating scenic easements within the Bay Resort properties, selective clearing of wooded areas to open or define views and restricting building heights within the coastal area. Similar to the protection of other sensitive resources within the U.S. 31 corridor, scenic views should be considered during site plan review. Landscaping The appropriate use of plant materials along the U.S. 31 corridor will help to maintain the rural character associated with Resort Township. Future landscaping in both development and conservation zones will fulfill a variety of functions, such as directing views, buffering unattractive views, controlling soil erosion, modifying microclimates and improving the visual impact of development. Future planting efforts within development zones will most likely be different from that of conservation zones, however, smooth transitions between zones should occur to reflect the overall rural character. Development Zone Landscaping Landscaping along the edge of U.S. 31 where development occurs should be uncluttered and consist primarily of large canopy trees and ground cov6rs, turf grass or other low growing herbaceous plants. The large deciduous trees should have a minimum six foot branching height to permit views to buildings and signs from the road. Evergreen trees should be located only in areas where they will not obstruct views to buildings, signs or driveways. In addition, trees planted in 117 masses or double rows will have more visual impact and will be better sheltered from deleterious environmental factors such as a lack of soil moisture than trees planted in single rows. A variety of tree species should be planted to reduce the chances of disease spreading from one tree to another of the same species. Shrub planting along the edge of U.S. 31 in development areas should be encouraged only in areas where it will not interfere with safe site distance. Motorists need to see driveways and signs well in advance of the time required.to react safely to incoming or turning vehicles. Shrub plantings can block views to buildings, signs, cross roads and driveways when located close to the road. Ideally, shrub planting should occur closer to buildings where their form, texture, color, etc. can be better appreciated by the pedestrian. Berming is another common landscape practice which may be utilized. Earth mounds should blend with the existing topography to appear naturalistic. Traditional berming practices found within urbanized areas help buffer views of parking areas. Berms, however, may also block views to buildings and signs, and negatively contrast with the rural character associated with U.S. 31. A better method than berming to reduce the negative aspects of parking lots is to plant large deciduous canopy trees in parking areas. The use Of Massed overstory trees will help fill in the overhead open plane common to parking lots. Massed tree planting in parking areas and along U.S. 31 will help modify climate conditions, too. Deciduous trees which bud out late and drop their leaves early in the fall provide shade during warm summer months and allow sun to filter through during the cool springs and falls associated with northern Michigan. In addition, low branching evergreen trees planted in mass along the northwest side of parking lots and walkways will buffer winter winds from vehicles and pedestrians. 118 U.S. 31 Conservation Zone Landscaping Planting in the proposed conservation zones will help reduce soil erosion from the steep slopes and enhance the desired rural character along U.S. 31. As the following section illustrates, the U.S. 31 corridor contains many areas with severe slopes. Plant materials which are adapted to drought conditions and aid in controlling soil erosion as a result of their spreading root systems should be located on steep slopes. Furthermore, native plant species which are similar in character to the existing trees, shrubs and ground covers should be used in conservation zones rather than exotic plant species. The native plant species will be better adapted to northern Michigan's fluctuating temperatures and blend in better with the existing landscape. ATTRACTIVE VIEWS CONSERVATION ZONE LAKE MICHIGAN STEEP SLOPES (LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY) Figure 13 Section of U.S. 31 119 Implementation Carrying out the recommendations suggested in this chapter will largely be the responsibility of the Resort Township Planning Commission and Township Board. Obviously, coordination will also be necessary with the County Offices as well as the Michigan Department of Transportation. Local government through zoning and capital improvements has the ongoing task of insuring compliance with this plan. Fortunately, the U.S. 31 corridor is relatively undeveloped. Therefore, implementation of these guidelines will be relatively easy as long as close cooperation and coordination with governmental bodies is insured. The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) will be directly involved with any improvements on U.S. 31. U.S. 31 is designated a federal highway with state administration. This means that the state has complete control over the operation and financing of any improvements. Improvements relating to traffic operations, driveway permits, signals, and street widening will be the responsibility of MDOT. Preliminary discussions with MDOT officials indicate that a boulevard design for U.S. 31 may be a preferred alternative. Future traffic volumes and turning movements will warrant this design. The boulevard option will also offer a generous right of way with ample room for landscaping and scenic views. In summary, implementation of these recommendations will largely be dependent upon the actions of the MDOT. However, proper site plan review and effective zoning on the part of the Township and County will also be extremely important. A summary of implementation strategies for the U.S. 31 and Coastal Area is presented in Table 21 and Table 22. 120 Table 21 Resori Township U.S. 31 Corridor Management Plan Traffic and Resource U-S. 31 Area Future Land Uses Circulation Controls Protection Strategies Development Policies Eppler Road to Blackbird Road a Conservation aConsolidate parking aEstablish generous front a Establish Township identity setbacks a Porkland aConsolidate driveways aRestrict development an aImprove entrance appearance steep slopes a Medium density residential aProvide deceleration/ aMaintain existing vegetation aEnforce sign control spacing acceleration lanes on steep slopes and size a Local business/office aWhere possible limit parking aUse indigenous plant species aImpose detailed site plan to side and rear yard areas In landscaping efforts review procedure a Highway commercial aRestrict excessive land aEstablish uniform street light groding or berming and traffic signal treatment aMaintain views of Lake a Bury utility lines where possible Michigan Blackbird Road to Townsend Rood a Conservation aConsolidate parking aEstablish generous front aEnforce sign control spacing setbacks and size o Medium density residential aConsolidate driveways aRestrict development on aImpose detailed site plan on steep slopes review procedure a Local business/office aUse secondary roadways aMaintain existing vegetation aEstablish uniform street light where possible on steep slopes and traffic signal treatment a Highway commercial aProvide deceleration/ aUse indigerKKis plant species aBury utility lines where possible acceleration lanes In landscaping efforts a Limited industrial aWhere possible limit parking aRestrict excessive land to side and rear yard areas grading or berming a Planned development aMaintain views of Lake Michigan Townserxi Road to Townline Road a Conservation aConsolidate parking aEstablish generous front aEstablish Township identity setbacks a Highway Commercial aConsolidate driveways aRestrict development an aEnforce sign control spacing on wetland soils and size a Multi-family residential aUse secondary roadways aRestrict development on aImpose detailed site plan where possible steep slopes review procedure a Planned development aProvide decelerat Ion/ aMaintain existing vegetation aEstablish uniform street light acceleration lanes in wetiond areas and an and traffic signal treatment steep slopes aWhere possible limit parking aUse indigenous plant species aBury utility lines where possible to side and rear yard areas in landscaping efforts aUtilize railroad right-of- aRestrict excessive land way for pedestrian and groding and berming bicycle use as gal am M M, Table 22 Resort Township U.S. 31 Corridor Strategies for Protection of Natural Resources Resource Location Along U.S. 31 Managerm" t Strategy Steep Slopes 0 South of U.S. 31 between 0 Avoid development in areas Eppler Rood and Lake Grove containing 18% and greater Road slopes 0 Promote conservation land use in steep slope areas 0 Site plan review 0 Stabilize slopes with vegetation Sensitive Soils 0 South of U.S. 31 between 0 Promote conservation land Blackbird Road and Lake use in areas containing Grove Rood sensitive soils 0 South and north of U.S. 31 0 Site plan review between Camp Daggett Road and Townline Rood Wetiands 0 North of U.S. 31 just east of 0 Promote conservation land Lake Grove Road and use in wetland areas between Camp Daggett Rood and Townline Rood 0 South of U.S. 31 just west of Lake Grove Road 0 Possibly in other areas along 0 Site plan review south of U.S. 31 which were not surveyed Woodlands 0 South of U.S. 31 just west of 0 Site plan review Blackbird Rood, between Camp Daggett and Townline Roads and west of Lake Grove Rood 0 North of U.S. 31 between Eppler Road and Resort Pike Road and Lake Grove Road area Views 0 Existing views of I-Mle 0 Acquire scenic overlooks for Traverse Bay between Eppler public use Road and Lake Grove Road 0 Selective clearing of wooded areas to create views to the Bay 0 Scenic easements 0 Restrict building heights in coastal area 0 Site plan review Landscaping a Development zones 0 Site plan review to control location and types of plant 0 Conservation zones material used U.S. 31 right-of-way and a C&O right-of-woy parallels 0 Promote use of abandoned abandoned C&O railroad right-of- U.S. 31 railroad right-of-way for Way pedestrian/bicycle use 122 RECREATION PLAN The following Recreation Plan outlines a ten year strategy program to meet the recreation needs of Resort Township's expanding population. Furthermore, the Recreation Plan is designed to be in compliance with partial grant requirements of the Michigan Department of Na'turul Re sources. The Plan, recreation goals and associated policies, assess short-term and long-term recreation needs for the community and considers the maintenance or improvement of existing facilities. The Plan is the result of information gathered from the Township Planning Commission, Emmet County Planning personnel, the general public and the 1988 Citizen Questionnaire which solicited public input on the need for additional waterfront parks. In addition, the Recreation Plan assesses an inventory of existing facilities to determine the adequacy of these facilities to serve the needs of the community. This inventory is presented in the Background Studies chapter of this document. Goal 0 Provide adequate parkland acreage and facilities to meet existing and future population needs. Policies � Provide waterfront parks on Walloon Lake and Little Traverse Bay. The parks should be large enough to accommodate recreation activities such as boating, swimming, picnicking, hiking, ski and nature trails. � Consider improvements to existing waterfront access sites and the acquisition of other waterfront parcels. 123 PUBLIC ACCESS - EXISTING PROPOSED PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK BAY RESORT PROPOSED A BEAC TOWNSHIP P ACQUISITION N SS EGOTIABLE PUBLfc'XCC SS PUBLIC ACCESS HORTON BAY RD. (NEGOTIABLE PARCEL) SHERIDAN RD ------- H GAN NORTHERN R.R. PROPOSED I AGREENBELT PATH OLD THIRTYONE RD. %R INCHEK RD. MANTHET RD. ING SCHOOL Pl-AJOUND EXIS POSSJSLE FUTURE EXPM 31ON z z z INTERTOWN RD. INTERTOWNI'R'D. PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK KIEBLE RD. T STLW RD. PUBLIC ACCESS - STOLT W PUBLIC ACCESS TOWNSEND FG. C5 % x 1 1, u W KALCHICK RD. Idtl I 0 SCHOOL RD. % m REYCRAFT PRESERVE TOWNSHIP PARK MORARD RD. MORF RD RD. -G-;;@OEH RD. DEPEW RD. PUBLK@,ACCESS HERRY LANE %s% %* JI WOODLAND PARTNERSHIP" % If CONSERV TION LAND LA PRESERVE im/4Z INDIAN G)DEN GRO'UP CONSERVATION L NO AROLD VERT PRESERV Cq MAP 13 ME/M/ NNENNEW/ RO RECREATION PLAN COUNTY ACCESS RESORT PIKE RD.. PROPOSED RECREATION LANDS % EXISTING PUBLIC WATERFRONT ACCESS - - - - - - - - - EXISTING LAND PRESERVES RESORT TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN Ayms, Lewis, Norris and May, Inc. Pi ...... 0 Promote efforts to establish township parks with both active and passive rec- reation areas. Parks with facilities for ball games and picnicking, for exam- ple, would serve the needs of a variety of Township residents. 0 Promote neighborhood parks where the population density warrants the investment. 0 Require overall development and maintenance plan for recently acquired parklands. 0 Provide or arrange for personnel to properly maintain and police pGrklands. 0 Consider the carrying capacity of Walloon Lake and Little Traverse Bay in terms of recreational activities such as boating and fishing. CommunitZ Recre tion Need When compared with national recreation standards, Resort Township lacks ade- quate parkland acreage. The National Recreation Park Association recommends a minimum standard of 10 acres of parkland per thousand persons in a community. Presently, Resort Township has approximately 1.1 acres of parkland adjacent to the Lake Grove Road/Morford Road public access point on Walloon Lake. In ad- dition, approximately 1.0 acre of waterfront public access points, 10 acres of school property and 291.5 acres of conservation land are found in the Township. The conservation lands, however, are preserved primarily for wildlife habitat and offer limited recreational opportunities. As identified in the 1987 Comprehensive Recreation Plan approximately 19.0 acres of parklands will be needed by the year 1990. A deficit of approximately 5.1 acres of parkland is expected for the Township in 1990. Substantially more acreage of parkland may be required to meet the needs of the Township should the proposed number of housing units be developed within the Bay Resort Properties. 125 The location of future parklands and the amount of parkland is a dual concern. Small neighborhood parks should be located within walking distance (less than 0.5 miles) of residential areas. In the future, small parks or playlots could be developed within new subdivisions especially in areas near higher density residential sections of the Township. Furthermore, pGrkland acreage located next to water is considered highly desirable, as indicated by the Township wide 1988 Citizen Questionnaire results (presented in the Background Studies chapter). A land acquisition program and negotiations with the Bay Resort developers and other private waterfront landowners should be pursued by the Township in order to provide the desired waterfront recreational opportunities to the community. The maintenance and management of existing recreation lands in addition to future parklands is an important component of the Recreation Plan and must be addressed throughout the implementation of the Plan. Management of parklands will involve providing police protection, organizing maintenance crews, providing storage facilities for equipment and arranging the necessary funds to support clean, safe and attractive recreational environments. Maintenance activities within parklands will include routine repairs and improvements to internal roads, parking lots, boat launch areas, pedestrian pathways and landscaping. The Township will have to commit the funds required to properly manage and maintain existing and future recreation facilities. The impact on the Township tax base as a result of acquiring private lands for public use should be considered by the Township when pursuing the recommended recreation improvements. The loss to the tax base, however, may be outweighed by the benefits to the Township from improved recreational opportunities. These benefits would include attracting additional tourism and creating an even higher quality living environment. 126 In summary, there is-a need to maintain existing recreation facilities, to provide additional recreational opportunities within the Township and specifically, to provide public access to waterfront areas. These recreation needs can be provided through short, medium and long-term programs. Strategies Short-Term Improvements Short-term recreation improvements would occur within the next two years and would involve primarily low cost strategies. First of all, policing of existing waterfront access points is needed. Continued cooperation between the Charlevoix County Marine Patrol and the Emmet County Sheriff's office is necessary for adequate policing of waterfront access points. Second, the Township should continue negotiations 'With the Bay Resort developers to obtain public access to waterfront areas. One option would involve G land swap of the Horton Bay 66 foot road right-of-way for land adjacent to the Townline Road waterfront access point. If successful, the Township should begin the development of a park master plan for this site. Furthermore, the Township should continue to encourage the developers to provide a recreation greenbelt, preferably by utilizing the railroad right of way, along the southern edge of their property adjacent to U.S. 3 1. The Township should also negotiate for public waterfront use within the proposed marina development. Public use activities which would be most compatible with the private development include picnicking, access to restaurants and shops, and boat launching. In addition, the Township should pursue the acquisition of two adjacent parcels west of Resort Pike Road and north of U.S. 31 and a large parcel of land bordering the west arm of Walloon Lake for development as a park. Grant monies from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Trust Fund should be sought for parkland acquisition and development. 127 Medium-Term Improvements The medium-term improvements would involve continued maintenance and policing of existing facilities and development of parklands acquired during the short-term improvements stage such as the potential roadside park west of Resort Pike Road and north of U.S. 31 and the Townline Road public access area. Furthermore, development of neighborhood parks should be encouraged in medium density residential areas. The medium-term improvements would occur during years 3 and 5. Long-Term Improvements The long-term improvements are proposed to begin in five years. In addition to continued maintenance and protection of recreation resources, the acquisition of large pacels of land for development as township parks should be pursued. Ideally, these parcels should be at least 20 acres in size, have water frontage and a variety of natural features to support a variety of recreational activities such as field sports, baseball, tennis, nature walks, swimming, boating, and picnicking. A summary of the proposed timetable of improvements follows: Short-Term Improvements Acquisition - Maintenance and policing of existing facilities - Continued negotiations with Bay Resort developers to obtain public parkland adjacent to Little Traverse Bay - Acquire land north of U.S. 31 and west of Resort Pike Road for park development 128 Acquire large parcel of land on Walloon Lake for broad-scale recreational opportunities Enlarge and/or improve existing public accesses on Walloon Lake Submit grant applications to Michigan Department of Natural Resources Land Trust Fund Program Medium-Term Improvements Develop Plans Maintenance and policing of existing facilities Prepare development plans for acquired park sites Develop proposed pGrklands Long-Term Improvements Maintenance and policing of existing facilities 129 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I vi I I Implementation- I IMPLEMENTATION The resource use management plan for Resort Township is of little value unless it can be realistically implemented. The first and foremost factor in implementing this plan will be through the actions of the Township officials in their decisions regarding future growth and development. This section of the plan. identifies and describes various projects and implementation strategies which the Planning Commission, Township Board and County Officials can utilize to manage growth and development within the Township. In total, such strategies should help maintain the rural character of Resort Township and provide an impetus towards growth management controls. Identification and Assessment of Management Strategies The first step in this process was to identify all potential management strategies which might have validity for implementation. Such strategies were originally identified in Table 17 and are highlighted within the following Table 23. This table provides a summary of various management techniques which Township and County Officials should focus upon. All strategies have a high priority in that they can operate concurrently during the planning process. These strategies are summarized (is follows: Continued Land Use Planning. The Resort Township Planning Commission is charged with the responsibility of overseeing land use planning. The Resource Use Management Plan will act as a useful tool to guide both short term and long term development. The Plan for Resort Township is viewed GS a relatively short range document because of a variety of unknown factors. For example, the exact timing and scope of development within the Bay Resort properties is unknown. Likewise, any future development of the U.S. 31 bypass is also unknown. It is likely, that within the next few years, a better concept for these projects will develop. It is recommended that the Resource Use Management Plan be revised by the Planning Commission to incorporate 130 Table 23 Resort Township implementation Strategies Implementation Potential Grant Strategies Implementation Tool Responsibilities Funding Sources Comments Continued Land Use Planning Management Plan Planning Commission - Coastal Zone Management The Planning Commission Zoning Ordinance - CDBG must periodically update the Management Plan. It is recommended that the Plan be updated In two years or upon completion of the MDOT-Bypass Study. Zoning Ordinance Planning Commission --- The zoning ordinance will remain as the most effective method of implementing land use plans. Preservation of Agriculture Management Plan Township/County Officials Reflects high priority Zoning Ordinance policies as indicated in Lot Splitting citizen response to P.A. 116 questionnaire and planning commission input. Preservation of Natural Management Plan Township/County Officials Coastal Zone Management Steep slopes, scenic views, Resources and Unique Features Conservation Zones where possible wetlands and other resources Land Use Policies must be protected. Site Plan Review Scenic Easements Conservation Easements State Legislation Management of Coastal Monagment Plan Township/County Officials - Coastal Zone Management Wherever possible, public Inland Lake Resources Conservation Zones and Lake Associations - Natural Resources Trust Fund waterfront access should be Land Use Policies insured. Protection of Site Plan Review scenic vistas as well as water Zoning Ordinance quality is required. Setbacks/Buffer Strips Waterfront Acquisition Anti-Keyholing Ordinances State and Federal Management of U.S. 31 Management Plan Township/County/MDOT - MDOT New development along U.S. Corridor Zoning Ordinance - Federal Highway must be carefully managed Site Plan Review in order to minimize traffic MDOT Coordination Impacts and to protect Sign Control natural resources. Township Administration Development of Township Township As development occurs, Ordinance Zoning Admini- the Township, Administration strator and staff must organize to manage growth and Development of Special Purpose development. Ordinances and Regulations � Private Roads � Lot Splitting � Subdivision Regulations � Enginering Standards � Anti-Keyholing development plans associated with the Bay Resort properties or U.S. 31 bypass. Zoning Ordinance. Resort Township currently operates under the Emmet County Zoning Ordinance, but has considered adopting their own zoning ordinance. This may be necessitated by development of the Bay Resort project. There are advantages and disadvantages of county and township zoning ordinances which must be carefully weighed. Township zoning will provide more control by the Township, however, the adoption of a township ordinance will require G greater commitment of staff personnel and finances to administer the zoning ordinance and zoning procedures. The Township can also contract with the County for zoning services and site plan review. In the interim, it is recommended that revisions to the County Zoning Ordinance be considered for Resort Township. More specifically a separate commercial zoning district such as the B-3 zoning ordinance currently in effect for Emmet County should be considered for the areas within the U.S. 31 corridor. By developing a new zoning district the Township could enact more stringent regulations dealing with setbacks, signs, permitted uses, and general revisions to the schedule of zoning regulations. Preservation of Agriculture. The preservation of agricultural lands was listed as a top priority within the results obtained from the citizen questionnaire. The Planning Commission has assigned top priority to retaining the rural character of Resort Township. Recommended management strategies to preserve agricultural lands include the adoption of a land use plan which outlines prime and reserve agricultural properties. The Township may also consider establishing agricultural zoning districts and adoption of a lot splitting ordinance which will help regulate development of rural lands. 132 Preservation of Natural Resources and Unique Features. Resort Township's Resource Use Management Plan emphasizes the protection of natural resources within the Township. Implementation tools of this policy include designation of unique features such as conservation zones. The Township Planning Commission and County Officials must also exercise close scrutiny of development through site plan review procedures to determine potential impacts on fragile lands. Wherever possible it is recommended that scenic easements and/or conservation easements be established to preserve important features. Management of Coastal and Inland Luke Resources. The Resource Use Management Plan recommends conservation zones for areas containing fragile lands. It is also recommended that the Township adopt a strategy of detailed development review for future projects involving waterfront development. Where possible the Township should also consider waterfront acquisition to preserve and protect important waterfront areas as well as to offer Township residents additional waterfront access. Management of U.S. 31 Corridor. Through a combination of land use management, zoning ordinance regulations and site plan review, future development along U.S. 31 can be managed. It is recommended that close cooperation with officials from the Michigan Department of Transportation regarding driveway location, permits, sign control, setbacks, and other regulations also be enforced. Township Administration. As development occurs within Resort Township, the Township and/or County may have to add staff for the review of development plans. It is conceivable that the Township would want to adopt their own zoning ordinance. The Township must realize, however, that the adoption of their own zoning ordinance will require enforcement capability and interpretation, all requiring the addition of Township personnel. The Township may also wish to adopt special purpose ordinances and regulations. These may include: 133 private road ordinance lot splitting ordinance subdivision regulations engineering standards anti-keyholing regulations Phasing. As mentioned earlier, the Resort Township Resource Use Management Plan should be viewed GS G relatively short range document to assist growth management over the next three to five years. It is likely, however, that an update will be necessary after two years. This is because of the influences associated with the Bay Resort project and also with the MDOT - U.S. 31 bypass project. Both of these developments will have a major impact upon the future land use of the Township. Other management strategies presented within this plan dealing with the preservation of agriculture, preservation of natural resources and management of the U.S. 31 corridor are relatively long range and will provide planning assistance for five to ten years. Grant Programs. This Resource Use Management Plan was in part funded by a grant offered through the Coastal Zone Management section of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. This funding source will remain as an important source for future planning efforts. Funds may also be available through this grant program for low cost construction of public waterfront access sites. Additional recreation grants for park acquisition or development are available through the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. This grant program places priorities upon projects involving waterfront access. There are a variety of other grant programs available through State and Federal resources which also maybe applicable to Resort Township's needs. These include: 134 Michigan Department of Natural Resources 0 Waterways Division Michigan Department of Transportation 0. Federal Aid to Urban Systems 0 Bicycle and Pedestrian Trails 0 Federal Highway Administration Funds Farmers Home Administration 0 Water and Wastewater Loans/Grants Michigan State Housing Development Authority � Senior Citizen Housing � Community Home Improvement Programs Conclusion The Resource Use Management Plan can only go so far by itself. The important next step must be taken by the citizens of the community. In many ways the process of developing a plan is as important as the product. Through continued community meetings and discussions a cohesive community spirit will emerge which will hopefully endure and act as G catalyst for long term management. The Resource Use Management Plan is intended to provide a guide for long term management of the Township. The recommendations of the Plan are given value through the continued efforts and commitments through the residents of the Township. It is through this commitment that a high quality living environment will be ensured for future and current residents. 135 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I v I I Appendix- m m RESORT TOWNSHIP RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN CITIZEN QUESTIONNAIRE INTRODUCTION Resort Township is currently in the process of developing a Resource Management Plan. As a part of this planning process, the Township Board and Planning Committee is keenly interested in citizen attitudes toward growth and development. Your input is most important in this planning process. We have enclosed a questionnaire which will aid Township officials in understanding your feelings and concerns on important Township issues. This questionnaire is being sent to every household within Resort Township in hopes of involving_ the residents in this planning effort. All responses will remain strictly confidential. INSTRUCTIONS We request that the head of the household complete the questionnaire and fold and insert it into the enclosed stamped envelope. Please answer the survey thoughtfully and mail it prior to March 14, 1988. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact a Township Official or the Emmet County Planning Department (616)-348-1731. Resort Township Planning Committee Part A - General Comments 1) Residents are encouraged to submit comments which will be helpful to the Planning Committee in formulating the Township's Management Plan. We are especially interested in what you like about Resort Township and what are some problems Resort Township should address. Use additional paper if necessary. Part B - Background Data 2) Number of years as a Township Resident? years 3) Age: (please check) 18 - 25 46 - 55 26 - 35 56 - 61 36 - 45 62 and over 4) Are you a year-round or seasonal resident of Resort Township? -round seasonal year 5) Do you own wa terfront property? yes no 6) How much property do you own? 0 acres (renter) 11-40 acres 1 acre or less 41 plus acres 2-10 acres (OVER) S_ S_ W W Please mark the box below the column heading which most closely describes your feelings regarding each of the following statements. cc -cc r_ 4j -W 1=0 4 1=0 C 3 0. 3 r_ .0 W 0 4) 0 1. Part C.- Housing and Land Use Preference 7) The Township should promote efforts to retain farming, and the rural character of the area..... 8) Large size lots (1 to 2 acres) for individual non-waterfront home sites should be encouraged ... 9) Development of single-family subdivisions in appropriate locations should be encouraged ....... 10) Development of apartments /townhouses/condomi ni ums in appropriate locations should be encouraged.... 11) Development of senior citizen housing should be encouraged ....................................... 12) The Township should promote efforts to retain the present scenic and rural character of the US-31 corridor ......................................... Part D - Commercial and Industrial Preference 13) The US-31 corridor should be primarily developed for residential uses ............................. 14) Some industrial development should be all owed along US-31 ...................................... 15) Some commercial development (fast food, gas station, shopping center, etc.) should be allowed along the US-31 corridor .... ............. 16) Development of neighborhood and convenience type shopping facilities should be encouraged in appropriate areas ................................ 17) Resort Township should promote efforts to attract new industry ..................................... 18) The Township should promote efforts to construct an industrial park ............................... Part E - Attitudes on Roads and Parks 19) Main roads within Resort Township are currently adequate and capable of handling existing traffic .......................................... 20) The main roads within the Township will be capable of supporting traffic demands generated by future development such as the proposed resort on the Dundee Cement site ................. 21) The Township should promote efforts to provide waterfront parks ................................. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION AND ASSISTANCE THE IMPORTANCE OF RESORT TOWNSHIPS WATER RESOURCES Groundwater Virtually every household in Resort Township relies on groundwater for domestic water supplies. Due to the well drained nature of the soils, groundwater recharge probably occurs throughout the township. This makes the groundwater resource vulnerable to pollution. It is imperative that groundwater quality be protected. Sur face Water Resort Township has approximately nine miles of shoreline on Walloon Lake. The water quality of the lake is important to the township in several ways. Most obvious are its aesthetic and recreational values for those who enjoy the views and vistas, the excellent boating, fishing, skiing, and swimming that its clean waters offer. The economic base of the township also relates to water quality. A study by the Northwest Michigan Council of Governments found that water quality was directly correlated to property value. Shoreline property around clean lakes is more valuable and therefore provides a better local tax base than does property surrounding lakes with poor water quality. Wetlands There are a number of wetland areas bordering Walloon Lake. They benefit the lake by acting as natural water filters, protecting the lake from sediments, nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen), by removing them from the water. Some wetland plants and soils also retain and/or detoxify many heavy metals, pesticides and hydrocarbons. Sediments eroded from uplands are trapped by wetlands. These eroded sediments often have nutrients and other pollutants absorbed onto their surfaces. Wetlands slow the water flow, allowing time for the deposition of the sediments, thereby keeping the particles from reaching the nearby surface water bodies. Wetlands and groundwater resources are closely related. Shoreline wetlands often serve as discharge areas where groundwater is released to the surface, providing high quality surface water. The wetland vegetation binds the soil together, strengthening the shoreline against the force of waves. Wetlands are important habitats which support populations of fish, waterfowl, fur bearers and large mammals. Some examples of wetland-dependent wildlife include ducks, geese, swans, herons, egrets, muskrats, mink, beaver, songbirds, bobcat, northern pike, walleye, and muskie. Endangered plant and animal species also inhabit wetlands. Humans rely on wetlands for recreational activities, which range from hunting, fishing and canoeing, to bird watching, nature study, and photography. Wetlands also provide educational and research opportunities'. Wetlands are areas which provide open space and aesthetic values. They add diversity and beauty to the landscape, and can increase neighboring property values. Hydrology Watersheds Resort Township is situated in parts of three watersheds. Approximately one-third-of the Township lies in the Walloon Lake Watershed, some two-thirds in the Lake Michigan Watershed, and a small portion of the Township is in the Lake Charlevoix Watershed. The elevation of Walloon Lake is about 100 feet above the level of Lake Michigan, and it drains to Lake Michigan via the Bear River. Soils and Geology The soils of Resort Township are a critical part of the local hydrology. For the most part, soils determine how much precipitation runs off the land in drainways and streams, and how much percolates through the soil to recharge groundwater. The two major associations in the Township are in Emmet and Blue Lake-Leelanau associations. The Emmet association is characterized as deep and well drained loamy soils on morains. The Blue Lake-Leelanau association consists of deep, well drained, nearly level to very steep sand soils on morains. The permeability ranges from a moderately fast rate of 2-6 inches per hour for the Emmet association to 6-20 inches per hour for the Blue Lake-Leelanau association. Small areas of three other soil associations are also found within Resort Township. The poorly drained soils of the Carbondale-Tawas-Roscommon association are present in the Schoofs Creek Wetland at the north end of Walloon Lake's North Arm. Along the Lake Michigan shoreline there are deep well drained, sandy soils of the East Lake-Blue Lake-Kalkaska association. Also present along this shoreline are soils of the Alpena, sandy variant-St. Ignace-Longrie association. They range from deep sandy, well-drained soils to shallow, moderately well-drained loamy soils. The unconsolidated material under the surface soils are highly variable, but typical for glacial morain deposits. Highly permeable beds of sand and gravel are interspersed with impermeable layers of clay. This has produced a situation in which there are a number of discontinuous water bearing strata at various depths. Underlying the glacial deposits are water bearing bedrock strata of limestone and shale. Hydrologic Cycle When precipitation reaches the land surface it follows three separate paths in the water cycle. One portion is returned directly to the atmosphere through evapotranspiration. Some of the water runs off the land into drainways and streams. The remaining water infiltrates deeply into the soil and recharges the groundwater. The groundwater generally flows down gradient and discharges into lakes and streams. In most cases the surface of a lake is simply an extension of the water table from the surrounding lands. Management Implications Groundwater The presence of large areas of highly permeable soils and limited numbers of surface drainages indicate that broad areas of Resort Township serve as groundwater recharge areas. This creates a high potential for groundwater contamination as precipitation flushes soluble materials into the groundwater. Once pollution reaches the groundwater it is extremely difficult if not impossible to remove. Therefore, caution must be exercised to ensure that the groundwaters are protected from pollution. Surface Water The water quality of Walloon Lake in Resort Township is excellent. This is due in part to the source of water feeding into the lake. According to the Project Vigilant, 75-90% of water entering the lake comes from groundwater, (Walloon Lake Water Quality Studies: Phase Two of Project Vigilant, Limno-Tech, Inc. 1987). Groundwater is typically low in nutrients which stimulate algae growth and cause water quality to decline. Surface runoff on the other hand generally contains higher nutrient concentrations. Two other factors which help protect the water quality of the lake are the chemical nature of the water and the lake volume. Walloon Lake has high alkalinity which allows marl to form. As the marl sinks, it helps remove phosphorus from the water. The large volume of the lake helps to dilute incoming nutrients. Walloon Lake's flushing rate and shoreline development factor tend to work against protecting water quality. The slow flushing rate of 6-8 years allows nutrients to concentrate within the lake. The lake also has a very long shoreline in relationship to its surface area. This increases the potential of shoreline influences to affect water quality. Project Vigilant found that as much as 40% of the phosphorus entering the lake comes from shoreline septic systems. Transport of septic effluent to the lake is easily facilitated by the high volume of groundwater discharging into the lake. The distance between the groundwater and the land surface is usually at a minimum along streams and lakeshores. Activities that impact groundwater in these areas can directly impact surface waters. Runoff from rainstorms and/or snowmelt has a direct impact on surface waters in shoreline areas. Wetlands Before Michigan was settled by Europeans it had over 11 million acres of wetlands. Since that time more than 70% have been drained or filled. Each year the Department of Natural Resources receives greater numbers of applications for dredge and fill activities in wetlands. Many Shoreline wetlands in Resort Township have already been fill or drained. This makes the remaining wetlands extremely valuable to Walloon Lake, wildlife, and people. Resort Township's remaining wetlands must be protected from unreasonable uses that destroy or diminish the benefits wetlands provide. Recommendations Groundwater Protection 1) Individual site plans must be closely reviewed to ascertain their potential to impact groundwater quality. A Groundwater Protection Plan should be submitted for review prior to the issuance of any permits. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed activity will not adversely impact groundwater. 2) Encourage the placement of fuel oil storage tanks in the basements of the homes. Tanks that are protected from the elements are less likely to leak and pollute the groundwater. Above ground tanks should be placed on a concrete pad to contain any spills. They should also be located at the end of structures rather than under the eaves. This will help prevent damage from ice and snow. A township ordinance for permitting underground storage tanks (UST) should be considered. This could require the applicant to demonstrate the need for a UST and lack of reasonable alternatives. The permitting process could be used as an opportunity to provide educational information on UST's to those who receive a permit. 3) All residents in the Township should apply fertilizers and pesticides at recommended rates. Farmers should be encouraged to develop fertilizer and pesticide management plans through the Cooperative Extension Service. Surface Water Protection 1) Discourage the use of phosphorous fertilizer within 100 feet of the lakeshore, as fertilizer can add nutrients to the lake. Improper timing of application and application of incorrect fertilizer mixtures at rates that exceed the lawn's needs are common problems. 2) Encourage the incorporation of greenbelts in all site plans. A minimum width of 35 feet is recommended. Greenbelts help filter nutrients and sediments from surface runoff. In addition, they can intercept nutrients in shallow groundwater and provide a natural appearance to the shoreline to enhance the asthetic value of the lake. 3) Any proposed commercial, industrial, residential, or institutional development should be required to submit a stormwater management plan during the site plan review process. Runoff from impermiable surfaces commonly contain oil, pestices and other toxic or hazardous materials. 4) Maintenance of natural vegetation along all drainways should be encouraged. This includes all streams designated on USGS maps and their intermittent tributaries. The placement of soluble or easily transportable material in or adjacent to these drainways should be discouraged. Developments along streams should maintain a greenbelt at least 35 feet wide. Dwellings and structures should be placed no closer than 60 feet from streams with a minimum lot frontage of 100 feet per dwelling. 5) Farmers should be encouraged to work with the Soil Conservation Service to identify and implement Best Management Practices to protect water quality and to control soil erosion and runoff. 6) Lakefront homeowners should provide periodic maintenance of septic systems to keep them operational and in sound condition. Homeowners whose septic systems are adding nutrients to the lake should be encouraged to contact the County Sanitarian to discuss alternatives for lessening or eliminating problems. 7) Encourage the installation of water conservation devices in all shoreline homes. The use of water conserving toilets and other appliances can extend the useful life of a septic system and decrease nutrient export to surface waters. Wetlands 1) Thorough local review of permit applications for activities in * shoreline wetlands should be encouraged. The County Zoning Ordinance should be amended to provide for stricter controls on shoreline wetland development in designated RR-2 districts within the Township. A minimum lot width of 200 feet should be implemented to reduce the impact of development in shoreline wetlands. 2) No plat should be approved that include lots without upland building sites. If no upland building site is included on each platted lot, the MDNR will be much more likely to issue a permit involving wetland conversion. Once lots are established that include only wetland areas, there are relatively few options for the purchaser of the lot. This situation can be avoided by ensuring that all approved platted lots contain buildable upland areas. 3) In reviewing a proposed development, special attention should be given to upland alternatives that would avoid wetland loss, including alternate site configurations and other available sites. Some proposed developments include wetland losses that are avoidable without compromising the purpose of the development. The MDNR attempts to review available alternatives for wetland development, but often has incomplete information. Local review can provide more through analysis of alternatives that may be available for specific wetla'nd developments, such as readily available upland at another location. 4) The Township should adopt a policy of no net loss of wetland area or function. Mitigation plans should be required to replace unavoidable wetland losses that occur as a result of development. The wetland resource in northern Michigan has been heavily impacted by previous activities. Long term water quality protection is vital to the economy of the region, and wetlands play an important role in protecting water'quality. No additional losses of wetland area or function should be permitted because of the long term effect on water quality. -BIKEWAY 2 LANE PLUS STREET TREE OPEN LEFT TURN DITCH LANE SHOULDER 110, 37' to, 36" to, 37, to,., 150'*ROW THREE LANE -SIDEWALK -2 LANE STREET TREE OPEN -SHOULDER DITCH ACCELI & DECELERATION LANE'l 4 ' 5'[ 3 10' 12' 24' 12' 10, 360 150' ROW U.S.-31 ROAD IMPROVEMENT FOUR LANE ALTERNATIVES STREET 4 LANE PLUS -SHOULDER SIDEWALK TREE LEFT TURN OPEN LANE DITCH 15'[ 30' [10'[ 60' 10, 30' 15t 150, ROW FIVE LANE -SIDEWALK 2 LANE -MEDIAN SHOULDER STREET REE OPEN DITCH [5'[ 26' 1100 24' 2-0. 24* 101. 26' 51L v I 1 11 .q 150' ROW AD U.S.-31 BOULEVARD ROAD IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i 111 i.III @ 101111111111 46 I