ROOM USE ONLY

saws «w

 

J‘m 9:: 19
v” v‘ _ -..

 

ABSTRACT
INLAND LAKE WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT

A Case Study of Hess Lake, Newaygo County, Michigan

by Gerald H. Matthews

The shorelines of Michigan's inland lakes are rapidly
being consumed by uncontrolled residential, commercial and
other forms of deve10pment; Much of this shoreline must be
preserved for use by the general.public, thus the careful
planning and utilization of waterfront property is essential.

.As the American public becomes more recreation conscious
it tends to effect their living habits. Factors of more
spendable income and leisure time combined with rapidly im-
proving transportation facilities have enabled more people
to enjoy water-oriented recreation. An increasing number
of them, both young families and retiring couples have elec-
ted to take up permanent residence on or near lakes in order
to enjoy the water on more than a weekend basis. This in-
flux of people moving to lakes has turned once resort orient—
ed lakes into small social communities of mixed permanent
and summer residents.

The relatively rapid residential development of lake-
front property has created numerous problems of overcrowded
land and water, undesirable patterns of mixed land uses, ir-
regular street sizes and patterns, lack of public access to
water and sanitation. The basis for many of these problems

is lack of laws or enforcement of them at the local government

Gerald ‘ H. Matthews

level due to the rural environment of many lakes. Compounding
this is a confusing complex of "water rights" in Michigan
which generally leaves the legal relationship of land to wa-‘
ter somewhat in doubt.

The purpose of this thesis is twofold: first, to exam-
ine development problems characteristic of Mfichigan inland
lakes; and secondly, through an analysis of these problems
and the application of existing planning principles to for-
mulate a number of development principles to facilitate the
solution of the problems.

By conducting an investigation of existing conditions
at Hess Lake, Newaygo County, Michigan, an understanding of
specific deve10pment problems was achieved. The problems
found consisted of: excessive aquatic weed growth, water
level control, mixed land uses, inadequate street size and
design, poor utilization of lakefront and inland property,
and residential development on low organic soils poorly suit-
ed to septic tank disposal systems.

In the analysis of existing problems there was found a
general lack of local controls on residential deve10pment.

In some cases where the legal tools were available for con-
trol, they went unused. Practically all the problems could
be solved by action at the local level. Before any action
is forthcoming however, residents of lakeshore property and
local governments having lakes in their jurisdiction must be
made aware of the problems created by uncontrolled develop-

ment. Should ineffective controls be allowed to continue,

Gerald H. Matthews

the natural beauty of lakes which attract permanent and sum-
mer residents will be destroyed.

Adequate legal tools are available to enable lake resi-
dents and government officials to establish controls on res-
idential deve10pment. For those counties or townships ca-
pable of doing so, the establishment of a planning commis-
sion and adOption of zoning and subdivision controls would
be desirable. Other townships can gain some measure of con-
trol through Building and Sanitary Codes. These controls
must be drafted to fit physical development problems unique
to waterfront prOperty. They must also involve a decision
on the type of development that is desirable on a given lake.
This involves a question of public policy.

In the future more information will be needed on the
natural qualities of a lake which make it attractive, the
monetary value of lakefront development, and the maximum
number of people a lake will support. This information is
necessary to produce an intelligent decision on how a lake
should be developed. On many Michigan lakes these issues
have been resolved by overcrowded uncontrolled development,
but there are many more relatively unsettled lakes on which

more desirable decisions could be made.

INLAND LAKE WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT

A Case Study of Hess Lake, Newaygo County, Michigan

BY
Gerald H. Matthews

A THESIS

Submitted to

Michigan State university
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER IN URBAN PLANNING

School of urban Planning and
Landscape Architecture

1964

.‘L )

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Sincere thanks and appreciation are extended to Charles
W. Barr, Professor of urban Planning at Michigan State Uni-
versity. His ever present guidance and assistance were help-
ful not only in the preparation of this thesis but throughout
my entire graduate program. A sincere thanks is also extend-
ed to Ivan Alten, Assistant Professor of Urban Planning at
Michigan State University, for his guidance and suggestions
in formulating this academic effort.

The author is also indebted to the following peOple and
agencies who have contributed willingly in the gathering of
data necessary for this presentation: Mr. Kenneth R. Jansma,
Engineering and Architecture Division, Mrs. Dolly Beard, Fish
Division and Mr. John Rulison, Geological Survey Division,
Michigan Department of Conservation; Mr. Kenneth De Blake,
Sanitarian, Mr. Ralph Smith, Surveyor and Mr. Kenneth Thatcher,
Assistant treasurer, Newaygo County; and Mr. Ed Hennings, Su-
pervisor of Brooks Township. Grateful appreciation is also
extended to the numerous residents of Hess Lake who were ex-
tremely helpful during the field research phase of this study.

Special acknowledgement is extended to my wife, Gail,
for her encouragement throughout my graduate study and assis—

tance in preparing this thesis.

-ii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................... ii
LIST OF TABLES ....................................... v
LIST OF PLATES ....................................... vi
INTRODUCTION .................. ..... .................. 1
CHAPTER

I. ELEMENTS CONTRIBUTING TO RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT
DEVELOPWNT oooooooooooooooooooo coo-0000000.... 6

Pressures of urbanization on Waterfronts
Limits of Study

II. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ......... ............. ......... 15

Water Rights of Michigan
Land Laws Pertaining to water

III. A CASE STUDY OF.AN INLAND LAKE ................ 28

Basis for Selection
Geographic Location

History .

Natural Characteristics
Existing Physical DeveIOpment
Regulatory Controls

IV. AN ANALYSIS OF THE CASE STUDY . ...... .......... 54

Natural Resoruce ASpects
Existing Physical Development Aspects
Administrative

V. .ADDITIONAL WATER PROBLEMS AND DESIGN TRENDS .... 77

water Surface User Rights
Dredging and Filling
Artificial Lakes

Planned Community DeveIOpment
Current Subdivision Trends

VI. CONCLUSIONS O..0OO...’...........000......0.... 92

—iii-

APPENDIX A cocoooooooooooooooooooo. ...... 0000000000000

Excerpts from Act 273, Public Acts
of Michigan 1939

APPENDIX B ...........................................
Act 146, Public Acts of Michigan 1961

APPENDIX C a....................o.....................
Excerpts from Act 140, Public Acts of Nfichigan 1961

APPENDIX D ...........................................
Bill of Rights of Elk—Skegemog Lakes Association

BIBLIOGRAPHY 0.0.0.... ....... 000......00.000.00.000...

-iv-

Page
98

101

113

117

120

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page
1. Soil Characteristics .................. 37
2. Percentage Distribution of

Distances Traveled by
Summer Cottage Owners ................. 41

3. Disposal System ISOIation
Dietances 000000ooooooooooooooooooo00.0 59

nov-

Plate No.

I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.

VII.

VIII.

X.
XI.

LIST OF PLATES

Title
Hess - Brooks watershed ................
Hess Lake - Natural Characteristics ....
Lowland DeveIOpment on Hess Lake .......
Generalized Soils Map ..................

Distribution of Summer Cottage Owners
Within a 100 Mile Radius .........fl.....

Land Use Map 00.0.00...00.000.000.000...

Examples of Poor Platting In
waterfront DevelOpment .................

Benefits of Subdivision Control ........
Public Access . ’ O O O C O O O . O C O C O O O 0 O C O C C O O .
haffic contrOI . O O O O C C O O Q C O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Schematic Lake DeVelopment .............

Page

30
32
36
38

42
44

46
73
86
87
89

INTRODUCTION

 

The shorelines of the Uhited States are rapidly becom-
ing one of the most sought after of all existing natural re-
sources. In areas where natural shorelines are scarce, or
where they are becoming fully developed by man, artificial
lakes are created and submerged lowlands filled, simply to
provide more miles of shoreline for deve10pment.

In view of this demand on waterfront property it would
appear that carefully formulated plans and policies shaping
the development of this natural resource are desirable, as
the supply of waterfront property is not unlimited, and the
people locating on waterfronts tend to destroy the natural
resources which attracted them. The numerous interest groups
competing for waterfront land is another factor in shoreline
development problems. Cities have historically located on
‘waterfronts as water was necessary for transportation, power,
industry, public consumption, waste disposal and a multitude
of other uses. Other interests in waterfront lands, for var-
ying reasons, are agriculture, forestry, commercial fishing,
recreation, water-oriented commercial developments, residen-
tial, and wildlife and waterfowl. Some of these uses are
compatible and multiple use concepts for water can be worked
out, but once waterfront land becomes developed for any par-
ticular use, it is exceedingly difficult to change that orig-
inal use.

On a broad scale there are many different types of water-
front lands, each with different sets of problems, depending

-1-

-2-

on the character of the body of water. National coast lines
have problems of currents, tides, wind and water erosion,
salt water and destructive elements of nature such as hur-
ricanes, sharks, etc. Great Lakes shorelines also suffer
from wind and water erosion, but on a smaller scale. They
also suffer from a fluctuating water level, but are not sub-
ject to tidal action.

Rivers and smaller streams have as a major problem
changing water level; destructive flooding, inadequate flow
or dry stream beds. In recent years streams are presenting
another problem which at times is very serious, pollution.

Artificial inland lakes and reservoirs have problems of
adequate supplies of good water, fluctuating water levels to
suit various interests, construction and maintenance of dams
and access and development of newly created waterfront prop-
erty.

Natural inland lakes have many of the above problems,
on a smaller scale, but are non-the-less important to the
property owners around the lake and to the existence of the
lake itself as a contributing natural resource.

In spite of the numerous problems various types of wa-
terfront lands pose, the advantages obviously outweigh them
since the American people are flocking to the waterfronts at
a rate unsurpassed in history.

"The endless variations of shoreline hold a tre-
mendous appeal for all of us...
Shoreline means many things to many peeple.

Tb some, it is symbolized by a light house guard-

ing a lonely shore. Tb others, it means pounding
surf on a rock bound coast. Still others think '

-3-

of marshlands that shelter the elusive mal-

lard, the migrating goose, the stately her-

on. Tb most people, however, shoreline is

a combination of surf and sand often backed

up by rolling dunes and forests that create

an atmosphere of solitude -- a soul-refresh-

ing contrast to our hurried, everyday way of

life.1

The above mentioned solitude will soon vanish if steps
are not taken to regulate waterfront property, and indeed,
the surface of the water itself. This is particularly true
in areas which are essentially rural in character and have
inadequate ordinances and regulations to control development
of waterfront lands. Haphazard and uncontrolled development
of waterfront lands in rural areas create development prob-
lems for present and future generations, and consume water-
front land. These areas are basically residential in char-
acter, and it is this area which is emphasized in this study.

This thesis will examine only a small portion of the
overall waterfront land pichre, it's purpose being twofold:
first, to examine development problems characteristic of
Michigan inland lakes; and secondly, through an analysis of
these problems and the application of existing planning prin-
ciples, to formulate a number of development principles ap-
plicable to these problems. This will be done through a case
study of one Michigan inland lake.

Before any sound development principles relating speci-
fically to inland lakes can be formulated, there must of ne-
cessity, be research done on the lakes themselves. Professor
Humphrys, Department of Resource Development, Michigan State
university, has pointed out that the following data about

'Michigan's inland lakesfare unknown:

-4-

1. total number of lakes

N
a

physical characteristics of lakes that affect their
value for future development

total lineal lake frontage

dollar value of water frontage per front foot

total number of cottages and year around homes

0‘ L11 P (JO
0

the value of landscaping, utilities, docks, etc.
built upon water frontage property.2

Thus there is a large amount of work to do before any
planning principles relating specifically to inland lakes
can be formulated which could be applied on a statewide ba-
sis. For protection of one of the state's most valuable re-

sources, however, it is vital that this type of research be

initiated o

-5...

Footnotes

 

l. A. T. Edmunds, "The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey," Michi-
gan's Resources for Outdoor Recreation, Papers pFEEEfit-
ed at The MiChigan Natural Resources Council Annual
Mbeting, Lansing, Mich., (Oct. 28, 1959), p. 31.

2. C. R. Humphrys, "Michigan's Many Jewels, Trend To Artifi-
cial Lakes Grows As Demand For Shore Lots Peaks," Re-
print from MiChigan Challenge, Vol. 3, No. 31, April,
1963, p. l.

 

CHAPTER I
ELEMENTS CONTRIBUTING TO RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT

Pressures of urbanization on waterfronts

There are many land uses which occupy waterfront land,
as has been pointed out. It is the residential housing boom
however, which has, of late, engulfed hundreds of miles of
shoreline on seashore, streams and natural and artificial
lakes. The recent flight to the suburbs for housing accom-
modations has had far reaching effects, beyond the area im-
mediately surrounding incorporated cities and villages. This
residential expansion boom has extended to, and in some cases,
engulfed, waterfront areas which were formerly summer cottage
developments and resort areas. Improvements in tranSportation
facilities have made it possible for people to commute to work
as far as thirty or forty miles a day. This type of commuting
enables a person to work in the city and live in the country,
or if desired, on a waterfront, be it seashore, lake'or stream.

A report on the 1957 survey of the Great Lakes shorelines
by the National Park Service makes the following observation:

"Residential and commercial developments, though

are the principal consumers of desirable shore-

line. Real estate developments are removing the

forest cover, leveling sand dunes and utilizing

every foot of accessible frontage. Many resi-

dential communities are excluding the general

public from access to their beaches. Marshes

that once provided ideal habitat for water-

fowl and wildlife have been dredged filled and

subdivided."1

This survey was, of course, recreation oriented, but it

points up the rapid consumption of waterfront land by only

-5-

-7-

two of the many land uses which seek waterfront property.

It is not so much the fact that waterfronts are being de-'
veloped, because this is inevitable. It is the manner in
which the development takes place that creates problems.
Haphazard development without any controls does not result,
in most cases, in a desirable pattern of waterfront land use.
There are areas of shorelines which, because of physical fea-
tures, are much.more desirable for recreational uses rather
than industrial, commercial, or even residential. These a-
reas must be preserved for present and future generations.

,As stated by the National Park Service in-their report on
the.Atlantic Coastline:

"The seashore is a priceless scenic and scientific
resource for which there is no substitute. ce
subdivided and developed it is lost forever."

This is true for any waterfront, be it seashore, stream or
lake.

IncreaSing demand for waterfront property stems from
several sources; expanding population, leisure time, and
spendable income, improved transportation facilities, greater
emphasis on recreation, increased interest in boating, and a
search for open space.

The increased population of Michigan and the united
States is responsible for a good share of the increased pres-
sure for residential housing on shorelines. The 1984 Michi-
gan population is estimated to number nearly 14,000,000, al-
most twice the present figure.3

Much of the increased residential pressure on waterfronts

-8-

is a direct side effect of the ever-increasing population
seeking recreation. Evidence points to the fact that mass
production, Specialization and automation may mean more lei-
sure time for many families and individuals. To some, this
means an opportunity to acquire further income from a second
job, but to many others leisure time means recreation, and
synonomous with recreation, particularly in the summer, is
water. A sociologist views the advent of leisure time and
it's relation to recreation as:

"The increased division of labor and specialization

inevitably accompanied by the monotony of a job

which consists merely of the endless repetition of

a few tasks, are said to make a wide variety of

leisure time activities absolutely necessary...

in the machine age, with many of nature's forces

harnessed and in the service of man, with labor

highly organized and able to enforce a large share

of its demands, the amount of leisure time avail—

able to the bulk of the population has increased

tremendously."“

Other factors contributing to an increase in leisure
time are longer vacations, life-Span and earlier retirement.

Along with the increase in leisure time, the number and
percentage of families receiving higher incomes have increase-
.ed also, permitting larger expenditures for recreational pur-
poses. National expenditures on recreation in 1946 totaled
about $8 million. It is estimated that for 1964 this figure

6

will triple to approximately $24 million. Wide spread use
of credit has also aided families and individuals in securing
recreation enjoyment, particularly in the field of vacation

home purchasing. Many home builders are going into the va-

cation home market extensively, as it can be a profitable

-9-

one. The price of waterfront lots on Lido Island, Newport
Beach, California, has tripled since 1947, now selling for
up to $375 per front foot. Lots on an artificial lake near
Detroit sell for $9,500 to $11,500 on water, as opposed to
$7,500 for inland lots.7 Vacation home builders cater to
families with an eye toward recreation, and to a lesser de-
gree to couples eyeing a retirement home. However, builders
have found that in some cases up to 50% of sales are to peo-
ple buying permanent homes.8

Increased mobility is caused by increased quality and
quantity of roads, highways and automobiles. Real estate
developers in the vacation home market estimate that people
will travel from one to five hours to reach their "second
homes", with most willing to travel about two hours.9 In
addition to providing added mobility, new and improved roads
have permitted access to vacation areas here-to-fore untapped.

In some fields of recreation research the thought exists
that there is a greater need for outdoor recreation now than
there has been in the past. This recreation is beyond that
afforded by community parks and playgrounds. Whether this
be true or not, there is a definite increase in outdoor re-
creation. This increase was recognized at the Federal level
of government by the creation of the Bureau of Outdoor Re-
creation in 1962. The Connecticut Water Resources Commission
expresses the view that there is a definite need for outdoor
recreation in today's world in the following passage:

"Man can exist in cement and steel towers...but it

.- 10"

is being proven that such an existence is unbal-

anced and leads to a society that is sterile and

impoverished, physically, mentally, and spiritual-

ly. Outdoor recreation restores the balance, and

outdoor recreation in all of itsnf8rms involves a

good supply of good clean water.

Not every form of outdoor recreation requires good clean
water, but water plays an important role in fulfilling the
recreational needs of millions of Americans. The National
Park Service estimates that 75% of all outdoor recreation is
water-oriented.11

Another factor contributing to the increase in outdoor
recreation is the tremendous increase in boating. The boat-
ing boom started about 1947 with about two and a half million
pleasure craft in use.12There was an accelerated rate of
growth in the 1950's, reaching a peak in 1960, then tapering
off until 1963 when the Outboard Boating Club of America re-
ported nearly eight million recreational craft of all types
in use. The same association also estimated that over thirty-
eight million persons went boating on a more-than-casual basis
in 1963, spending a record two and one-half billion dollars
for recreational boating.131t has been estimated that by 1985
there will be twelve million pleasure boats in use on the na-
tions waterways.lu

A final factor contributing to the increased pressures
of residential construction on waterfronts is the search for
open space. Open space may mean many different things to dif-
ferent people - rural country side, golf courses, undeveloped

wooded areas, community or village parks, or grade school

playgrounds. Tb many, however, the quest for open space has

.1]_.

taken them to water, as any reasonable sized water area offers
a more or less permanent open space. A.home builder in St.
Petersburg, Florida questioned waterfront owners, both.workers
and retirees, on why they preferred living on waterfront. Al-
most 50% listed view, relief from monotony, changing scene
and restfulness.15

The above factors of increased population, leisure time,
Spendable income, mobility, recreation and the quest for open
space, all combine to create a substantial force in which wa-
ter is shaping the criteria for the location of vacation and
permanent homes.

"Preferred locations today may depend more on their

relation to recreational facilities and what people

like to do on weekends, than on what they do during

the week and where they work from Monday to Friday.

Strange as it may seem, people may accept fighting

traffic to get to work, providing they can run down

to the beach, or tennis court, or golf course, eve-

nings and week-ends."
Limits of Study

There are over 11,000 inland lakes in Michigan, the ex-
act total depending on what definition of a lake is used.
In order to accurately list Michigan's inland lakes a deci-
sion must be made as to the differences between marshes,
swamps, ponds and lakes.l7The size and character of Hess Lake
leave no doubt as to its being classed as a lake, regardless
of what the dividing line between lakes and ponds might be.
The important factor is that this study, with the exception
of the last chapter, is concerned with a natural inland lake,

as opposed to lakes created artificially. Even in discussing

problems of natural inland lakes alone the problems will vary

~12-

with different lakes in different geographic locations.
Therefore this study is limited to a Specific inland lake,
the results of which may have to be modified when applied to
other natural inland lakes in Michigan.

The factors involved which prevent the results of the
study of one inland lake from being applied to all Michigan
lakes is the character of individual lakes. Depth, bottom
type, aquatic vegetation, shoreline topography and soils,
are only a few of the characteristics that play a part in
how, and to what extent, a lake will be developed. As the
physical make up of Michigan's natural inland lakes vary con-
siderably, so also, do the developmental problems encountered
on each.

Another factor which prevents generalities from being
applied to all inland lakes in Michigan is the types of cul-
tural environment which has emerged around each lake. A lake
which is basically residential-resort in character has dif-
ferent problems than one that is residential-industrial in
character. Geographical relation of the lake to urban cen-
ters, and accessibility by road, are two more factors which
can play a role in the type of development problems which
will be encountered on an inland lake.

This is not to say that all the development problems of
one inland lake are unique to that lake alone. A poorly
drained, flood-prone soil on a lake in southern Michigan is
no more suited to residential development than the same soil

qualities on a lake in the Upper Peninsula. Thus many of the

-13-

development problems discussed in this study will be found
on numerous other Michigan Lakes. The danger lies, however,
in regarding this study and its findings as being representa-

tive of all the natural inland lakes of Michigan.

ll.

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

Footnotes

A. T. Edmunds, "The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey," Michi-
gan's Resources For Outdoor Recreation, Papers present
at .e Mishigan Natural Resources Council Annual
Meeting, Lansing, Mich., (Oct. 28, 1959), p. 37.

U. S., Department of Interior, Our vanishing Shoreline,
National Park Service, (1954), p. 7.

"water For Michigan," Michigan Conservation, March-April
1960, pp. 17-320

T. L. Smith, The Sociology of Urban Life, (New Ybrk: The
Dryden Press, 1951), pp. 555—56.

Bruce Briggs and Jon K. Rosenthal, Recreational Boating_
Facilities, Planning Advisory SerVICe Report No ‘14
American SOciety of Planning Officials, (Chicago: 1961)
pp. 1- 2.

 

"Vacation Homes: An Exploding Market Takes On A New Shape,"
House And Home, (Feb. 1964), p. 106.

"The New Boom In Houses By The water," House And Home,
(June 1963), pp. 98- 101.

"vacation Homes: An Exploding Market Takes On A New Shape,"
0p. cit., p. 107.

Ibid., p. 110.

Connecticut, water Resources Commission, water Resources
of Connecticut, Report To The General Assembly, (1957)
p.I4I}

Frances‘W. Herring, A. A. Klingebiel, and S. Kenneth Love,
"Bases For urban DevelOpment: Air, Soil, water," Plan-
ning, 1963, American Society of Planning Official_
(Chicago: 1963), p. 53.

 

Bruce Briggs and Jon K. Rosenthal, op. cit., p. 1.

The State Journal, (Lansing), March 10, 1964, p. D-l6.

Bruce Briggs and Jon K. Rosenthal, op. cit., p. 1.

"The New Boom In Houses By The water," op. cit., p. 99.

Ibid., p. 100.

C. R. Humphrys, "Michigan's Many Jewels, Trend To Artifi-
cial Lakes Grows As Demand Fbr Shore Lots Peaks," Re-

print from Michigan Challengg, vol. 3, No. 31, (April
1963), p. l.

CHAPTER II

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

water Rights of Michigan

 

The legal doctrines which apply to the use of water in
Michigan, as well as in other states, are called water rights.
A water right is simply a right to the use of water which is
based on written law, custom or court decision.

water rights vary to some extent, depending on the source
of the water; surface or ground. Surface water is classed
as (1), water courses with a definite source of supply, such
as lakes and streams and (2), diffused surface waters stand-
ing or flowing in natural depressions on the earth's sur-
face, such as melting snow or rain water.1 Ground water is
found beneath the earth's surface and is classed as (1), wa-
ter occurring in well defined subterranean channels (under-
ground streams) and (2), diffused percolating waters from
indefinite sources and not in definite channels.2

As this study is concerned primarily with natural inland
lakes, the legal emphasis will be on natural surface water
courses. It must be pointed out however, that while water
rights for surface waters are more numerous and complex than
those for ground water, the two sources cannot be treated
separately. Lake beds are nothing more than depressions
in the earth's surface that extend downward East the level

where the ground water level is intersected.

There is no basic, overall system of state laws in

-15...

-16..

Midhigan which spells out what rights and responsibilities
are involved for all parties in the use of surface water. A
body of common laws is currently the only legal tool a water-
front propfirty owner has to protect his interests in property
and water. From this body of common laws has come the ripar-
ian doctrine which is the basic legal foundation for water
rights in Michigan.

water rights under the riparian doctrine stem from the
ownership of land abutting upon a natural water course. The
chief aim of the doctrine is to protect both quality and
quantity of the water, and also to give all riparian owners
equal rights.

Because of the common law history of the riparian doc-
trine, virtually all Michigan law pertaining to inland lakes
and streams is derived from court decisions which come about
because of water use conflicts between two or more parties.
As a result of these court decisions handed down over the
years riparian rights have been modified to some extent from
the original doctrine. This modification is still taking
place as new court decisions are handed down. It is because
of this common law history of riparian rights that no gener—
alizations can be completely accurate about water rights in
Michigan since the court cases are piecemeal and do not cover
all phases.5 Despite this there are certain elements of the
riparian doctrine which have been court proven and are used
today to protect riparian owners.

Riparian rights are real property rights but these rights

-17-

are limited to use. It is not the right of ownership of the
water, as water is a moving resource as opposed to a station~
ary resource which can be possessed.6

A riparian is entitled to have a lake or stream move by
his property undiminished in quantity and unchanged in qual-
ity, except that the owneE may use water for domestic uses
such as human and animal consumption, recreation and naviga-
tion.7 As originally interpreted the riparian doctrine re-
quired that a riparian could use the water from a lake or
stream, but he could not reduce quantity or impair quality.
This is known as the Natural Flow Theory. Increased devel-
opment of waterfronts placed heavy pressures on this theory
and it had to be modified by court decisions over the years
to include the factor of reasonable use. The Reasonable Use
Theory evolved from the question of whether or not the use of
water is "reasonable", at a certain place, time and for a par-
ticular purpose. If the use is found to be usual, necessary
and convenient, court decisions will probably favor it, even
though it may impair quality or reduce the quantity of water
in question.8

One concept of the riparian doctrine important today is
that of public rights on inland lakes and streams. The prob-
lem of water being private or public is a complicated one due
to piecemeal court decisions, but is made even more difficult
by the fact that private water may become public water and

Vice versa. The classification of MiChigan's streams as pri-

vate or public is dependent on the factors of navigability,

-18-

9
floatage, public access and prescriptive rights.

In Michigan, all waters navigable in fact, are consid—
ered legally navigable and are therefore public. The test
of navigability, down through the years, has been floatage.
Streams floating to market products of the soil along the
banks were found by courts to be navigable, thus giving the
public a right of way.10

Public access is, in many cases, the real determining
factor in establishing public interest. If there is no pub-
1ic access, there is no public use.11

If the public were to establish prescriptive rights a-
gainst private water, it would change the classification of
that water from private to public. It has been established
by the courts that prescriptive rights "may be obtained by
occupation, diversion, possession, control and for use or
enjoyment."

The determination of public interest in streams is im-
portant to many inland lakes. If the lake has an outlet or
inlet watercourse which is navigable, the public has a right
of way of access to that lake.

Determination of public interest in inland lakes is also
dependent upon the above mentioned stream factors, and in ad-
dition, they have been defined by Michigan Law.

"A public inland lake is hereby defined to be any

lake which is accessible to the public via public

owned lands, water or highways contiguous thereto,

or via the bed of a navigable stream and which

may be used for navigation, fishing, hunting or

other lawful purpose and reasonably capable of

supporting a beneficial public interest, the Great
Lakes and connecting waters excepted.

-19-

Private inland lakes are hereby defined to be

any and all inland lakes other than public inland

lakes as above defined."

In general, under the riparian doctrine, a riparian owns
land to the center of the lake, thus if he owns all the land
around a lake, he would own the lake bed and it would be pri-
vate. This common law principle has been modified to some
extent so that size of lake, fish in the lake, and public
access have become important. These factors are all inter—
related and too involved to be of primary interest here. As
a rule, however, inland lakes which are in private ownership,
and possess no visible outlet or inlet connecting it with
other natural water courses, are said to be private waters
in which the public has no interest. If the same lake had
an inlet or outlet connecting to other waters so that fish
might pass into or out of the lake, there may be a pUbliI4
interest in the lake, even though it is privately owned.

varying natural characteristics of inland lakes present
a multitude of different situations, thus the decision on
whether a lake is public or private must be settled on the
merits of each case.

In addition to public interest and other riparian rights
discussed above, the following concepts have been established
by court rulings:

1. Each riparian owner must share his rights with other ri-
parians on the same water, and his water use rights are

limited by the rights of others.

2. Downstream riparian owners cannot claim water use priority

-20-

from upstream riparian owners on the basis of being there
first.

Riparian owners have no legal right to hold back the flow
of streams or use surface waters if their action brings
injury to lower riparian owners.l5

water rights are transferred with the land.

No loss of water rights are incurred by non-use.

No water may be diverted for use on property other than
the riparian property.

Any riparian owner may seek relief in court for any in-
trusions on his water rights.

Changes in water rights must operate in a legal environ-
ment of due process. No riparian owner may be deprived
of property rights in water except by due process and
with compensation if required.

There are, in addition to the riparian doctrine, basi-

cally only two legal doctrines pertaining to surface water

in the united States, and for clarification they will be

briefly defined.

1.

Appropriation Doctrine - This right originates through a
permit by statute. water rights are granted to users in
the order of appropriation, thus a person who first appro-
priates water and puts it to a beneficial use within a
reasonable length of time acquires a prior right to its
continued use, as long as the use continues to be rea-
sonable. This right relates to a definite amount of wa-

ter, at a Specific time in a particular place. As long

-21...

as there is ample water in the stream or lake to satisfy
this right in the order of its priority, it is quite de-
pendable. During periods of low water flow, the earlier
rights take precedence. It is basically a first come -
first served beneficial use policy.17

This doctrine is used primarily in the western united
States where water is often limited in supply. There are
several features of the appropriation doctrine which dif-
fer significantly from the riparian doctrine. The appro-
priation doctrine gives more protection to the rights of
the person acquiring the right, as they are specific. Un-
der this doctrine an unused right is forfeited, thus a
right cannot be obtained and held unused for future Spec-
ulation or to prevent water use by another. The appropri-
ation doctrine also affords some degree of flexibility of
water use, in that water does not have to be used on ad-
joining property, or even in the same watershed. While
it protects existing rights, it tends to "freeze" the ex-
isting pattern of uses, regardless of changing conditions
which may call for different water use priorities.
Prescription Doctrine - This is a right acquired by use
for the statutory period of adverse possession of land
under the claim of right, even though the water user did
not have a valid right to use the water in the first place.
A prescription use, however, cannot become a valid water
right if the use is permissive in the first place. A pre-

scriptive right is for a definite amount of water at a

-22 -

specific time for use at a particular place. For this
reason, in periods of water shortage, prescription rights
may take precedence over riparian rights.1
All the factors of time, amount of water uSed, and the
particular use must be proven in court before it becomes
a right, but once proven it is a very stable water use
right.20
The present framework of water rights in Michigan is a
complex one, and it is questionable whether or not it is ade-
quate to protect Michigan's inland lakes and streams.' As
changeable as common law is, possibly the present system of
water rights will change to provide a better set of tools to
protect waterfront property from being exploited. This is
doubtful, as common law changes derive from court decisions,
which are time consuming. There appears to be a need for
some type of regulation more stable than that existing, but
it must be intelligently conceived to protect both public
and private interests.
An "inland lakes and streams" bill was defeated by the
1964 Michigan Legislature. Two key features of this bill
were to control filling and dredging by requiring permits
from the Conservation Department and establishment of an or-
dinary high water mark, which would fix the riparian's title
to all land above this line, and uphold his ownership of sub-
merged lands that fall below the line.21This bill, while de-
feated, represents the efforts being made to remove some of

the question marks which exist under the riparian rights doc-

trine.

-23..

Land Laws Pertainigg to water

There are several laws in Michigan which were adopted
to cover land development, but which apply to waterfront
property. Among these are zoning, subdivision regulations,
health ordinances and state hunting and fishing laws. As
this study is concerned with inland lakes in rural areas,
only laws and ordinances applicable to these areas will be
discussed.

The use of zoning powers in controlling waterfront de-
velopment is becoming more common as additional waterfront
lands become developed. Townships now zone under authority
of a law passed in 1943. This law permits townships to pro-
vide for the establishment of zones and for the regulation
by ordinance of land use and structure use; the height, area,
size and location of buildings; adequate open space to pro-
vide light and ventilation of buildings; and density of popu—
lation.22

The power to zone arises from the police power, to pro-
tectthe health, welfare and safety of citizens. In using
zoning in this light it has been applied to waterfront prop—
erty much the same as inland property. One additional feature
however, is it's use for flood control. As the zoning or-
dinance can regulate land use, it can be used to control de-
velopment in flood prone areas.

Townships have the power to regulate subdivisions under
the Flat Act of 1929. under this act, a person desiring to

divide a parcel of land into five or more lots, plats, sites

-24-

or divisions of land for the purpose of sale or occupancy for
residential development, must submit to the township board a
plan of the proposed development for approval.23Uhder this
regulation a township can, through a design standards section,
control the location of residential'lots. If the proposed
plat includes lots on flood plains or low areas subject to
high water, the plat may be rejected and the developer recom-
mended to re-design the subdivision. Thus subdivision regu-
lations have some effect on water and waterfront development,
even though it basically applies to inland development.

State laws and administrative regulations and county
health ordinances are other forms of regulations which set
some limits on the use of waterfront land and the water itself.
The major factor here is pollution. At the state level there
are two agencies with an interest in water pollution, the wa-
ter Resources Commission and the State Health Department. At
the County level the local county health office is concerned
over pollution of inland lakes and streams. The powers and
functions of these agencies will be discussed in more detail
in Chapter IV.

Counties have responsibility for construction and main-
tenance of all county roads, thus are concerned with design
and construction of new streets. In addition to having re-
sponsibility for streets, the county also has certain powers
over the surface water within their boundaries. Under Act
146, Public Acts of 1961, as amended, counties have authority’

to have determined through court action the normal water

-25-

24
level on inland lakes. Act 140, Public Acts of 1961 gives

County Boards of Supervisors power to authorize the improve-
ment of inland lakes, allow dredging and removal of undesir-
able materials from lakes, and establish special assessments
districts to finance any improvements.25Act 156, Public Acts
of 1851 grants power to counties to permit or prohibit con-
struction of any dams or bridges over or across any navigable
streams.26

The legal framework surrounding the natural inland lakes
of Michigan is a complex one, and all indications Show that
this complexity will increase. This chapter has presented

only the major laws and ordinances in Michigan which pertain

to inland lake waterfront.

10.
ll.
12.
13.

14.

15.
16.

-26-

Footnotes

 

Russel G. Mawby, et. al., What Are Your water Rights In
Michi an?, Cooperative Extension service Report No. 20,
(Micfiigan State University, Department of Agricultural
Economics, E. Lansing: 1957), p. 2.

O. Fink and J. Foreman, Home Watersheds, Friends of the
Land, (Hidden Acres Farm, Zanesville, (Ohio: u.d.),
p. 15.

C. R. Humphrys, water Rights In Michigan, Department of
Resource DevelOpment, (Michigan State university, E.
Lansing: 1958), p. 1.

G. Taack, "water wonderland Or waterlwreckage?," Michigan
Conservation, (May-June 1961), p. 5.

Allan A. Schmid, Evolution of Michigan water Laws, Cir-
cular Bulletin 227, Department of Agricultural Eco-

nomics, (Michigan State University, E. Lansing: 1960)
p. 3. ’

O. Fink and J. Foreman, op. cit., p. 15.

Ibid.

C. R. Humphrys, Water Resggrce Analysis of Genesee County,
Department of Resource Development, (MiChigan State Uni-
versity, E. Lansing: Feb. 18, 1960), p. 15.

C. R. Humphrys, Public And Private waters, Department of
Resource Development, (Michigan State university, E.
Lansing: 1958), p. 1.

Ibid., pp. 1-2.

Ibid., p. 2.

Ibid.

Michigan, Compiled Laws of, (1948), Sect. 281.201 and
Sect. 281.202, As Amended.

R. N. Horner, "Inland Lakes - Public or Private?," Un-
published paper, Department of Resource Development,
(Michigan State university, E. Lansing: 1958), p. l.

Russel G. Mawby, et. al., op. cit., p. 2.

C. R. Humphrys, water Resource Analysis of Genesee County,
op. cit., p. I5.

10.
ll.
12.
13.

14.

15.
16.

-26-
Fbotnotes

Russel G. Mawby, et. al., What Are Your water Rights In
Michi an?, Cooperative Extension Service Report No. 20,
(Micfilgan State university, Department of Agricultural
Economics, E. Lansing: 1957), p. 2.

O. Fink and J. Foreman, Home watersheds, Friends of the
Land, (Hidden Acres Farm, ZaneSville, (Ohio: n.d.),
p. 15.

 

C. R. Humphrys, water Rights In Michigan, Department of
Resource DevelOpment, (MiEhigan State university, E.
Lansing: 1958), p. l.

G. Taack, "water wonderland Or water'wreckage?," Michigan
Conservation, (May-June 1961), p. 5.

Allan A. Schmid, Evolution of Michigan water Laws, Cir-
cular Bulletin 227, Department of AgriCultural Eco-

nomics, (Michigan State University, E. Lansing: 1960)
p. 3. ’

O. Fink and J. Foreman, op. cit., p. 15.

Ibid.

C. R. Humphrys, water Resource Analysis of Genesee County,
Department of Resource Development, (Michigan State Uni-
versity, E. Lansing: Feb. 18, 1960), p. 15.

C. R. Humphrys, Public And Private waters, Department of
Resource Development, (Michigan State University, E.
Lansing: 1958), p. 1.

Ibid." pp. 1-2.

Ibid., p. 2.

Ibid.

Michigan, Compiled Laws of, (1948), Sect. 281.201 and
Sect. 281.202, As Amended.

R. N. Horner, "Inland Lakes - Public or Private?," un-
published paper, Department of Resource Deve10pment,
(Michigan State university, E. Lansing: 1958), p. l.

Russel G. Mawby, et. al., 0p. cit., p. 2.

C. R. Humphrys, water Resource Analysis of Genesee County,
op. cit., p. 15}

17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

-27-

O. Fink and J. Foreman, op. cit., p. 15.

Russel G. Mawby, et. al., op. cit., p. 4.

O. Fink and J. Foreman, op. cit., pp. 15-16.

Ibid., p. 16.

The State Journal, (Lansing), March 15, 1964

Kenneth Verburg, A Study of the Legal Powers of_Michigan
Local Governments, Institute for Community Develop-
ment and’SerVIces, (Michigan State University, E.
Lansing: 1960), p. 20.

Charles w. Barr, Planning The CountrySide, (Michigan
State College Press:fil950), p. 61.

Michigan, State of, "Inland Lake Level Act of 1961,"
Act 146, Public Acts of 1961.

Michigan, State of, "Inland Lake Improvement Act of
1961," Act 140, Public Acts of 1961.

Michigan, State of, Act 156, Public Acts of 1851.

CHAPTER III

A CASE STUDY OF.AN INLAND LAKE

Basis For Selection

 

The selection of Hess Lake, for a case study is based
on the belief that it is typical of many Michigan inland
lakes which are rural in character and basically residential-
resort in nature, but it is located close enough to a large
metropolitan area to feel some effects from its expanding
growth. The lake has a history which is largely resort in
nature, but over the years has become a permanent place of
residence for an increasing number of people.

Geographic Location

Hess Lake is located in BrOOks and Grant Townships,
Newaygo County, Michigan. A major portion of it is in Brooks
Township, this portion also lies in the Manistee National
Forest. The closest towns are Newaygo, four miles north
with a population of about 1,500 and Grant, six miles south
of the lake with a population of 1,000.

Hess Lake is nearly one and one-half miles long in a
general east-west direction and varies in width between one-
half and three-fourths of a mile. Tbtal size of the lake is
755 acres, making it the second largest natural inland lake
in the county. It lies adjacent to, and drains into, Brooks
Lake, which is 293 acres in size.

History

The formation of Hess Lake stems from glacial action

-28-

-29-

creating an outwash plain. Within this plain large blocks of
ice were isolated and covered with debris. These blocks e-
ventually melted, causing the material above to settle, thus
creating a pit, or lake basin.1

The first cottages on Hess Lake were probably built a-
bout 1880. The lake was popular as a resort because of ac-
cessibility and sandy beaches on the north and east shore.
The first permanent residents settled there in 1922, at which
time there were about fifty to sixty cottages on the lake.
A majority of these cottagers came from Newaygo and Grand
Rapids, but approximately one-third came from Chicago and
Spent the entire summer.2 The popularity of the lake as a
resort has continued, there now being 458 permanent and tem-
porary dwellings around the lake.
Natural Characteristics

The climatic conditions of Newaygo County are recorded
at Croton Dam, six miles northeast of Hess Lake. Records for
a period of thirty-one years show the January average to be
220 F, while the July average is 70.70 F. The growing season
lasts an average of 142 days, with the last average killing
frost in the Spring occurring on May 15th, and the first in
the fall occurring on October 4th. The average annual pre—
cipitation for Newaygo County is 31.04 inches.3

The total drainage area for Hess and Brooks Lakes, shown
on Plate 1, comprises twenty-five square miles. All but two

square miles of this drains into Hess Lake. waterways within

the drainage basin feeding directly into Hess Lake are four

PLATE I
HESS - BROOKS" WATERSHEIDU

 
    
  
  
 
           

 
   

  

   
  

 
  
 
    
 

  
 
 

 
   
    

OI. IVIUI I;
Cem. It-’ I , I ‘ MAN And:
‘ | i, HAprR‘ " SChUI;0*9/'5 A“ :4 3%”:
«~"’ ¢70u
5 NI c; '9"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

V/Ll. AGE
AIRPOR 7

    
 

Pleasant 2|
Volley 'f
Sch. 4,

2

 

Base map:
Michigan Department
of Conservation

 

"' ‘- '—- ‘5’ . Gerald H. Matthews
Ia. Sch. Sf/pfé’fV/Ue

July 1964

 

-30-

-31..

small spring-fed streams, Alger drain which is two miles long,
and Wheeler drain. The latter being over five miles long, 0-
riginates from Blanch Lake at the village of Grant. Wheeler
drain flows through an area of muck farm land, and later,
through sandy soils, thus carrying into the lake deposits of
sand, silt and fertilizer. The fertilizer deposits have ag-
gravated an aquatic weed problem in the lake, while the dep-
osition of organic materials has caused the only serious case
of shoreline encroachment on the lake. In 1949 the encroach-
ing delta of Wheeler drain caused damage to about fifty lots,
the owners petitioning for, and receiving, a drain cleanout
and correction of channel alignment.

There is only one outlet from Hess Lake, the Hess-Brook
channel, flowing 300 yards into Brooks Lake.

Hess Lake is basically a shallow water lake, consisting
of 70% shoal areas (less than fifteen feet deep). There are
scattered pockets which are deeper, the deepest being just
under thirty feet, shown on Plate II. Limited information
available from the Michigan Department of Conservation show
water temperatures in shoal areas range from 69° F. to 740 F.
during late summer. '

One problem long associated with the lake is aquatic
weed control. The lake is fairly weedy in its entirety, but
an area of fifty acres is particularly bad near Wheeler drain.
As mentioned before, this weed condition is worsened by ma-
terials deposited from the drain itself. Experimental control

of weeds by chemicals was tried for three successive years

 

 

INSTITUTE FOR FISHERIES RESEARCH [II wauc 0
ll "sumo
DIVISION OF FISHERIES MICHIGAN CONSERVATION DEPT. Jl m!
LAKE INVENTORY MAP (9 / II 0
AREA 755 ACRES ’1 O
MARGINAL SURVEY AND SOUNOINGS 4/29 I. 5/233551 55 ‘
SHORE OUTLINE BASED ON U.S.OEPT.AGRIC.AER|AL PHOTO or 7/4/30
/ t

NEWAYGO COUNTY

 

         
     

  

EMINO- SPIN" BASIL
O! l OAK

um WR'.!L£V.-’O. .
/ /

PLATE II
HESS LAKE - NATURAL CHARACTERISTICS

 

   
   
   
  
 
 

 

T. I H2 NRJZ w.sec‘s.4,s.3l.32,33

 

 

LEGEND

BOTTOM

 

OUTLINE 8.. CONTOU RS
“Shoreline \N
—5’—ConIours

SHORE FEATURES
III Slope

—= Improved road

--- Unimproved road

wvw Encroachmq shore

w Breakwo’rer ,
Marsh - flood plains
Brush
Wooded
PdrHy wooded
PasIure
lnlef
lnI’ermiHen’! nteI “ - '
OuIleI I
--I- Bridge

‘
L

 

 

Bsoo+

 

«I

r:
.4
A

 

Base map: Michigan Department
of Conservation

9 400’ 000’ I200’ Iooo’ Gerald B. Matthews
scams July 196“

 

 

 

-33-

6
beginning in l9h2, but results were not satisfactory.

Hess Lake has a long history of water level problems,
with attempts at setting a legal satisfactory level dating
back to 1934, with no success. Under normal conditions the
water level fluctuates about one foot, enough to cause dam-
'age to some properties along the south-west end of the lake.
Refer to Plate II for flood areas which would experience prob-
lems from excessive high water levels. Factors contributing
to high water levels are the inadequate characteristics in
the outlet dam and ensuing channel, plus high water levels
on Brooks Lake.

In the early 1930's County Boards of Supervisors had
authority to set inland lake levels without Court proceedings.
The Newaygo County Board of Supervisors did so on Hess Lake
in l93h, but it's ambiguous wording referring to water levels
at the dam now means that the only way to determine the level
that Board had in mind;would be to know the history of dam
modifications since 1934.

Since 1934 there have been two periods of time when high
water caused property damage. The first period was spring of
l9h6, the second was from fall of 1961 through spring of 1962.
Cause of the latter period can be traced to a temporary dam
at the lake outlet, put in by the Hess Lake Improvement Asso-
ciation during the summer of 1961.7 I

Over a period of time the original 1934 dam came into

disrepair and did not control the lake level as it was intended

-31.]...

to. During this time numerous shoreline lots were sold, im-
proved upon, and cottages or homes built. Thus, when the
temporary wood-slab dam was put up in the summer of 1961,
without an adequate engineering study to determine the effects
of the dam, a number of lots in low areas experienced high wa-
ter problems. Since July of 1961 the Michigan Department of
Conservation has received numerous letters from residents of
Hess Lake citing damage to property, trees, shorelines, and
septic tank disposal systems.8

Following the many requests for aid, the Michigan Con-
servation Department representatives met with interested res-
idents and officials of the Hess Lake Improvement Association
and some effort was made to lower the dam, thus easing, but
not solving, the water level problem. Since the original re-
quest for aid in l9hl, the Conservation Department has been
recommending that a legal level be established for Hess Lake,
which was possible under Act 194, Public Acts of 1939, and
more recently, Act lh6, Public Acts of 1961. After many pre-
vious false starts by various interested parties, once again
an attempt is being made to have a legal level established
for Hess Lake.

Shoreline erosion takes place to some extent on all the
lake shoreline, more so, on the easterly end of the lake be-
cause Of prevailing west winds. This erosion does not take
place at a rapid rate but does cause loss of property over a
period of years. In some cases individuals or groups have

constructed concrete breakwaters. Encroaching shoreline is

-35-

a problem only at the delta of Wheeler drain, but does occur
at other locations. Plate II illustrates areas of encroaching
shorelines and breakwater devices.

I Lake bottom soil types in deep water areas (over fifteen
feet deep) consist of marl, muck and pulpy peat. Bottom

soils in shoal areas are either silt, fibrous peat, or sand.
There is a limited amount of beach area which is sand, thus
providing good swimming areas.

With the exception of relatively small areas, the shore-
line of the lake is composed of soils which are adaptable to
residential development. Approximately 75% of the lakefront
property and the lands behind it are composed of sands or
sandy loams. These soils for the most part are not well a-
dapted to agricultural uses, supporting certain crops only
with extensive fertilization and irrigation practices. While
not well adapted to farming, these soils, with their excel-
lent drainage qualities, are well suited to individual septic
tank disposal systems. Refer to Table l for Soil Character-
istics, to be used in conjunction with Plate IV. There are
several areas of organic soils along the south shore of the
lake which are characterized by poor drainage and contain
seasonal high water tables. DeSpite these unfavorable con-
ditions, permanent and summer homes currently occupy portions
of this area. (See photographs on Plate III). These organic
soils and others are shown on the Generalized Soils Map, Plate

IV.
TOpography of the land surrounding the lake ranges from

‘

Plate III
LOWLAND DEVELOPMENT ON HESS LAKE

I. 7.
I “h
I _, \ ‘ ‘

.' '\
L ‘ ‘c. I '..
' "I? V’s/'- e

I.‘

   

 

  
 
 

. .
I ‘9» .:
I l’ I a
., . s,

I ‘l‘":."' ‘ -
'»-‘r“¢ -
Irisn~~ -

'.

 

J

LuumwnnuIWI'
——'»qr“‘
- '321VGU‘VE‘ ..
.flh'.

\
,

O

L,_ _ 7 _, -4 - 7 _ _

High lake level on low land, south-west shore.
Note half submerged dock. April 15, 1964

 

 

 

 

 

fi
fi

,_,_____~_____,___

—’ _, ‘

Effects of high water table on low land de-
velopment, south-west shore. April 15, 1964

-36..

Table 1: Soil Characteristics

 

Soil

Symbol Soil Name Slope Drainage

Dee dr sands on plains

Fs Elainfield sand O-3% Well drained, run off slow

Psg Plainfield sand 8-15% well drained, run off slow
rolling phase

Ru Rubicon sand O-3% well drained, run off slow

to very slow

Deep dry sands on undulating to rolling lands

Rf Roselawn fine sand 8—15% Excessively to well drained

Rfu Roselawn fine sand, 4-7% Excessively to well drained
undulating phase

well drained sandy loams on rolling to hilly uplands

 

HE; ‘MbntcaIm-Rcselawn 8415% Well to moderate, run off
complex ‘ medium

MRu Mbntcalm-Roselawn 4—7% well to moderate, run off
complex, undulating rapid
phase

Poorly drained to moderately well drained sand on_plains

(Sand SEBStratum) ’

Nd' Newton loamy fine sand O-3% Poor to very poor, run off
. slow to ponded

Organic soils ~ '
p e peat 0-2% Very poor, high water

table normal

Rpw Rifle peat, shallow 0-2% very poor, high water
phase table normal
Hm Houghton muck 0-2% very poor, run off slow to

ponded, water table at or
near surface

Cm Carlisle muck O-2% very poor, high water table
7 normal

GP Greenwood peat 0-2% Very poor, high water table
normal

Source: U. 8., Department of Agriculture, National Cooperative
Soil Survey, (unpublished: n.d.)

-37-

 

 

 

 
   
    
    
  
    

         

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

‘ PLATE IV
III}:':':‘:‘:':':':':':':':':‘:':':’:'::: P8 G ENERAL'ZED SOILS MAP N
INSTITUTE OREISHERES SEARCH ' I: m... o
w w ..... om W” was s we A
”new“: . o I. . 0 mo woo
H; ‘Q ' -' scALe
menace ..... o ' ‘— 71—": ‘—‘—:‘ .——" —:_'
MARGINAL SURVEY ANOSOWss'EEEésfii’;3§3§3§§§3;_, — — :: : ”l. _—_—_-:_:
SHORE OUTLINE BASEoanyuSEOEéTEApm'CiAe'RIAt; —_"—__ —‘_—_—.:—___::_ Z:
NEWAYGO COUNTY a O _ _—___—_—-__—_
5 s :—_:‘—_:U:,/::—‘:__—_
_ W— __;‘——‘_:—

 

 

 

 

 

 

<9
\s\
O
9
Pa
O
I
II
m
0
P3
0
III
0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

c
K E Y 3 NW 0
RP
Deep dry sand on plains
Deep dry sands - undulating
Well drained sandy loams
Poorly drained sand on plains . _
Organic soils o ‘- P80 ‘

 

 

Source: U.S. De arment of Agriculture and Michigan Agri-
cultural eriment Station Soil Survey! Newagfo Base map: Michigan Department Gerald H. Matthews
9, o. , r . . of Conservation July 1961+

\_ Coungz Mich gan, Series 193

 

 

-39-

flat areas to severe slopes, rising in excess of thirty feet
above the lake to plateaus which provide building sites. It
is this higher land which was first developed, most Of the
lakefront property now vacant being low land or swamp. Plate
II indicates general areas of pronounced slope.

Lakefront and back property around the lake is well
wooded, except for the extreme east end, which is partially
pasture land. Tree types dominating the lake area are White
and Black Oak, American Elm, Sugar Maple, and White Pine.

Hess Lake is a very productive lake for warm water fish,
with the exception of walleyed Pike, for which there are no
suitable spawning grounds for reproduction. From 1943 through
1947 approximately 850 walleyed Pike were planted but they
failed to establish themselves satisfactorily and now are
rarely caught. Other game fish inhabiting the lake are Blue-
gills, Sunfish, Perch, Rockbass, Black Crappie, Largemouth
and Smallmouth Black Bass and Northern Pike. Coarse fish
present are Bullheads and Lake Chub Suckers, and obgoxious
fish include Dogfish, Longnose Gar-Pike, and Carp.

In 1949 special fish regulations for Hess Lake permitted
keeping Of panfish under the normal six inch length, and pro-
vided no closed season. These laws did not appear to adverse-
1y affect the panfish population and in general, fishing has
1mProved since that time. The fishing pressure on Hess Lake
is now normal for a lake of its size,llparticularly during

the winter, when ice fishing for panfiSh and NOrthern Pike

has enjoyed a marked increase.

-40-

The number of animal species which reside permanently
on the lake is rather small, consisting mainly of muskrats
and an occasional mink. These two Species are subject to
light trapping pressure in the fall.

During spring and fall annual migrating flights of wild-
fowl frequent the lake. This Spectacle is enjoyed in varying
degrees by residents of the lake, one of the aesthetic values
of living near water which cannot be measured in monetary
terms.

Existigg Physical Development

Hess Lake is located in the south-central portion of
Newaygo County, making it readily accessible from the Grand
Rapids area, thirty-five miles south, and from Muskegon, thir-
ty-five miles in a westerly direction. These are the two
largest cities relatively close to Hess Lake and they, along
with numerous towns and villages, have good access to the
lake over two main Michigan highway routes, M-37, and M446.
The lake is only one mile east of M-37, the north-south route
bisecting the west half of the state, and M-46 which traverses
the state east to west. For area location refer to Plate I.

The population of Hess Lake, as with any other lake, must
be divided into permanent residents and temporary or summer
residents. On the basis of tax records and personal inter-
views with select permanent residents of the lake, the number
of total permanent dwellings around the lake was found to be
156.12081ng a figure of 2.5 persons per dwelling, the total

permanent population of the lake would be 390.

-41-

Temporary or summer dwellings numbered 302, the distri-
bution of owners of these dwellings residing within 100 miles
of Hess Lake being shown on Plate V. Applying the 2.5 person
per dwelling figure here gives a summer cottage population of
755. This figure combined with permanent residents gives the
lake a summer population on a given weekend of about 1,150
people. Daily tourists and guests could increase this figure
to about 1,400 people. A majority of the summer residents
come from within thirty-five miles, which includes Grand
Rapids, others travel in excess of 100 miles. Table 2 shows
a percentage breakdown of distances traveled by summer cottage
owners to Hess Lake.

Table 2: Percentage Distribution of Distances Traveled By

Summer Cottage Owners

Distance from Total Per Cent
Hess Lake (miles) Number of Tbtal
0-10 24 9.7
11-20 12 4.9
21-30 150 60.7
31-40 8 3.2
41-50 6 2.4
51-100 15 6.1
100+ (Michigan) 14 5.7
100+ (Outstate) . _£§ _Z=§
Total 247 100.0

Source: Mailing addresses in tax assessment records, Newaygo
County. Information available only on 247 out of 302
total summer cottages. April 15, 1964.

PLATE v
/DISTRIBUTION OF SUMMER COTTAGE OWNERS
/ WITHIN A IOO MILE \RADIUS

HESS LAKE \

   
    

 

' Cedar Springs /

' Rockford

\ Hudsonville / / Port /
. ' /
r' ' Zeeland . / I0
'I I
s
Ssugstuck I \ - / mew-11¢

  

S.

 

    

(I 3 IO 20 so
/ / scALE III was
‘ stung-ghou- //
r . /
\ x //
‘ ‘ \ _ _ ._..-..—- / .3 NUMBER OF PROPERTY

OWNERS PER COMMUNITY

Source: Mailing addresses in tax assessment records Neway 0
County, Mic an, April 15 1.964. Information ava 1- Gerald R. Matthews
able onlv on 47 out of 30i total summer cottages. July 1964

-42-

-143...

Because of the residential-resort nature of the lake
the developed land area is limited, extending, except in
certain areas, back from the lake the depth of one lot. The
predominant land use around the lake is residential, both per—
manent and summer use, shown on the Land use Map, Plate VI.
There are three commercial properties around the lake, one
of which is vacant. In addition to the commercial properties
there are two resorts on the lake. There also are several
properties used as business establishments as well as resi-
dences. The real property assessed value of waterfront prOp—
erty is about $750,000, including vacant property. Assessed
value of developed inland property is approximately $22,000,
giving a total for the lake of over $970,000.13

The main road around the lake was largely fashioned from
plats in the early 1900's, thus with few exceptions, it's
relationship to the lakeshore is favorable to residential
development. In one case, however, it is too close to allow
any type of development. In one other case it is a consider-
able distance from the lake, requiring a series of trails to
reach the lakefront properties. DeSpite this property being
platted with a definite street layout, in reality some trails
used do not follow the original plat, resulting in dead end
, trails. The road encircling the lake is six miles long, ap-
proximately two-thirds of it paved, the remainder gravel or
sand. Refer to the Land Use Map, Plate VI for additional
information on the road network.

Virtually all of the lakefront prOperty, and some land

 

 

 

 

  
    

   

 

Ci]

 

 

 

 

 

 

IIIII‘I'I
sass-ass-
I-sssssss
assess-s-
IIIIIIOC
ssssssss-
Isa-sass-
nan-sass-

 

 

 

   

 

SOURCE:
LAKE MAP - MICHIGAN

SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT

\

RESIDENTIAL — PERMANENT

 

RESIDENTIAL - SUMMER

COMMERCIAL — RETAIL

COMMERCIAL -- RESORT

WHOLESALE

QUASI - PUBLIC

PUBLIC

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
RECORDED PLATS AND TAX RECORDS,
COUNTY, MICHIGAN, APRIL 15, I964

BROOKS TOWNSHIP

 

NEWAYGO

GRANT TOWNSHIP

 

MSH llla

.1

 

IIIIII

 

 

98 TH

 

 

 

  

Vd'I VlVO

 

 

 

 

 

GERALD H.

    
 

MATTHEWS

I964

 

-145...

without lakefront, is platted. With few exceptions this plat-
ting occurred in the early 1900's. Two main problems arose
from this early platting; very small lots and no lake access
' for back lot development. A major portion of the east end of
the lake was platted into twenty foot lots, creating building
location problems unsettled today. In cases where inland
property was platted, little or no access was provided to the
water. This has created a condition of back lot owners need-
ing to buy narrow strips of land from lakefront property owners
to gain access to the lake. These access strips are seldom
over ten feet wide. While they do permit access to the lake,
it leaves no room for beach and water activities and these
overflow on adjacent private properties. A lakefront owner
selling his neighbor a right-of-way to the lake may be opening
the door to a large number of people who will use his beach
and dock facilities and may even make him liable for damages
incurred, Plate VII shows examples of poor platting and land
use practices found at Hess Lake.

water supply for domestic use around the lake comes from
fairly shallow wells. There have been no cases of polluted
well water reported to the County Health Department despite
exclusive use of privies and septic tank systems for sewage
disposal, ofmn on small lots and with.no installation regula-
tions. There has been one case of septic tank effluent causing
some pollution in the lake, but this was corrected after being
reported to the County Health Department. One common problem .

with septic tank systems is installation of a small system

PLATE vn
EXAMPLES OF POOR PLATTING

IN, WATER FR ONT DEVELOPMENT

 

0 400 800
h—-fi=fi
Scale in Feet N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lots too small :°.°.- '° ,' IL...— ’4:
for development : [a IJH- .3
Private narrow“; ”as ' g ' I. ' ,_”H
access strip for? ‘9 I ' "' ., Changing
inland lot ' - 7_‘_;L//(treet
?‘--"-'-'-r 'widths

O
." “0,.

Long narrow lots resultihg in
"Dead land" or lot splitting

Source: Plat maps from Brooks Township,
Newaygo County, Michigan, 1920

Gerald H. Matthews
July 1964

-46..

-47-

because the cottage is used during the summer only. In many
cases the summer cottage is becoming a permanent home, the
original septic tank and drain field is no longer adequate,
the usual solution being a completely new system. There are
about eighty privies still in use around the lake, virtually
all by summer cottagers.

There is only one State public fishing site on the lake,
on the north-west corner. ‘It is one and four-tenths acres in
size and has 194 feet of lake frontage. It has a boat launch-
ing area, parking, and sanitary facilities. In addition there
are several dedicated streets under County control which end
at the lakefront serving as public access to the lake. These
are narrow, twenty or forty feet, thus allowing access, but
very limited parking. These areas are overcrowded and cause
problems of privacy to adjoining private properties. There
also are two private resorts, one on the north shore and one
on the south. These offer swimming and boating, plus boat
launching areas for private boats.

Public services around the lake are at present limited
to telephone, electricity and private garbage pick up. In
due time natural gas will be piped around the lake. It is
currently available along M-37 between Grant and Newaygo.

Both elementary and high school Students are tranSported
via bus to schools in Newaygo.

Regulatory Controls
One Federal law affecting Hess Lake residents is the

Federal Boating Act of 1958. Under this Act the Coast Guard

-48...

was empowered to assign identification numbers to vessels
Operathmgon all navigable waters in the united States which
were powered by more than ten horsepower. The States have
the option of assuming this function by enactment of a suit-
able law and zpproval of its numbering system by the U. S.
Coast Guard. Michigan did this with enactment of Act 240,
Public Acts of 1962. The only other Federal regulations di-
rectly concerning Hess Lake are the wildlife regulations of
seasons and bag limits on migratory waterfowl.

At the state level the State Plat Act requires submission
of plats when land is divided into five or more lots. The wa-
ter Resources Commission is concerned with lake pollution
while the State Health Department has an interest in safe wells
and adequate septic tank disposal systems. There exists a
state plumbing code, but township adoption is voluntary, and
neither Brooks or Grant townships have done so. In townships
where the code has not been adopted, the state offers inspec-
tion service to individual homeowners or plumbing contractors
upon their request, through the application for a plumbing
permit.

State laws relating to boating come under Act 245, Pub-
lic Acts of 1959, as amended by Act 240, Public Acts of 1962.
These laws provide for uniform registration of motorboats,
reporting of accidents and other aSpects of safety and opera-
tional controls. In addition, it provides for a system of
state control over water use regulations, but allows local

units of government to accept or reject the proposed controls.

-49-

If rejected, only the general controls afforded by the state
statute will be in effect on that lake or stream.16

The State Conservation Department is concerned with reg-
ulating fishing, trapping and non-migratory wildfowl hunting,
as well as natural characteristics of the lake such as water
levels and weeds, and must maintain the state public fishing
right on the lake.

County level regulations are more directly concerned
with development on Hess Lake, especially in the areas of
sanitation. There are no controls on individual wells in
Newaygo County. The only controls on wells is found in the
County of Newaygo Sanitary Code, which refers to Public water
Supply Standards of the Michigan Department of Health. These
standards apply to water systems in public and semi-public
places of assembly, and includes trailer coach parks, motels,
resorts, and convalescent homes. Following sections of this
Act are pertinent:

"3.11 All wells shall be located at least 75' from

any source of possible contamination; such as sink

drains, seepage pits, cesspools, outhouses, septic

tanks disposal fields and any sewage or liquid
wastes draining into the soil...

"wells shall not be located in areas subject to
flooding unless protected as prescribed in writ-
ing by the health officer."]-7
The county of Newaygo Sanitary Code also contains the
only controls on sewage diSposal in the county, and these re-

fer primarily to public and semi-public places of assembly.

The Sanitary Code requires that all parts of a public disposal

-50-

system be at least seventy-five feet from the nearest well.
It also requires that sewage disposal systems comply with
the construction standards set up and issued in Engineering
Bulletin #2, Michigan Department of Health. .These standards
require all parts of the system to be at least twenty-five
feet from any lake or stream, and further states that the
septic tank should be placed at such a depth that the soil
absorption system can be covered with one foot of earth and
still be at least two feet above the maximum ground water
level. In addition, they shall not be located in areas sub-
ject to flooding.18

The only reference in the Sanitary Code relating to pri-
vate disposal systems are the following:

"K. Private Sewage DiSposal. Any premise, dwelling

or other private residence shall not dispose of

sewage of any kind into a lake, stream, water-

course, open ditch, or county drain, nor on the

ground surface within 200 yards of a public road,
public park, public premise, or a private residence.

T. An Privy constructed on or after the effec-

tive date of these rules and regulations shall

comply with provisions of Act 273 of the Public

Acts of 1939..."19

The Newaygo County Building Ordinance provides that sew-
age disposal systems for every dwelling be erected and main-
tained in accordance with the standards recommended by the
County Health Department or the Michigan Departmggt of Health.
Enforcement however, is township responsibility. Thus far

only one township in the County has adopted these standards.

The County also provides the usual county services of

-51-

police protection, road construction and maintenance, and
administration.

'At the township level the only controls in Grant and
Brooks wanships are building ordinances, and in Brooks wan-
ship only, a Junk Yard Ordinance. The Grant Township Build-
ing Ordinance, adopted in May 1956, in addition to building
construction qualifications, requires a thirty-three foot
setback from the closest highway right-of-way for a dwelling,
and a minimum of thirty feet between dwellings. It also en-
forces the county in stating that septic tanks shall be at
least fifty feet from a well.

The Brooks Township Building Ordinance, adopted in 1955,
contains no reference to septic tank regulations. It sets a
minimum lot width for dwelling construction at eighty feet,
and a building set-back of sixty-three feet from the center
of the highway. Minimum side yard requirements are eight
feet.2

The Hess Lake Improvement Association was formed about
1918 to solve the lake level problem, which at that time was
low. The Association was instrumental in bringing electricity
to the lake, and also in constructing the concrete dam in the
mid-1930's. The Association also has worked on the aquatic
weed problem and other features to improve the lake environ-
ment, such as installation of road signs. Some mis-management
in the past and lack of support from reSidents of the lake has
caused the Association to be largely ineffective at present.
Only about ten to fifteen percent of the total dwellings around

23
the lake are represented in the organization.

11.
12.

13.

14.

15.

Fbotnotes

Irving D. Scott, Inland Lakes of Michigan, Michigan Geolog-
1cal and Biologlcal Survey, Publication 30, (Geological.
Series 25, 1920), p. 32.

Interview with Mr. and Mrs. William Faust, First permanent
res1dents of Hess Lake, June 1, 1964.

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Climate and Man, (Year-
book of Agriculture 1941, Washington, D.C{:“Uhited
States Government Printing Office, 1941), p. 916.

 

Michigan, Department of Conservation, Brooks Lake Level
Control, Newaygo County, Preliminary Engineering In-
vest1gation, by Richard G. Foster, (1950), p. 3.

 

Hess Lake File, Michigan Department Of Conservation,
Engineering and Architecture Division, March 23, 1964.

Michigan, Department of Conservation, Aqgatic Plant Con-
trol At Hess Lake, Newaygo County, By Norman 0. Levardsen
DivisiOn of Fisheries, Report No. 1306, (Nov. 16, 1951;
pp. 5-6-

 

Hess Lake File, op. cit.
Ibid.
Ibid.

Hess Lake File, Michigan, Department of Conservation,
Fish Division, Aug. 21, 1953.

Ibid.

A dwelling was considered permanent if occupied six months
or more of one year.

Derived from property tax records at the Newaygo County
Treasurer's Office, White Cloud, Michigan, May 15,
1964. Structures not in platted subdivisions and new
structures not yet assessed were assigned a value of
$2,000, thus the total figure for the lake is probably
low. .

U. 8., Coast Guard, Pleasure Craft, Treasury Department,
CG-290, (June 1, 1962), p. 1.

Kenneth Verburg, A Stud Of The ngal Powers Of Michigan
Local Governments, (Institute For Community Development
andfiServices Michigan State university, East Lans1ng,
Mich., 1960), p. 37.

l6.

l7.

l8.

19.

20.
21.
22.
23.

-53..

Gerald E. Eddy, "Boating - Boon or Bust?," Michigan Con-
servation, (July-August 1963), pp. 6-7.

 

Michigan, Department of Health, Regulations For Certain
water Supplies In Michigan, (I957), pp. 243.

 

Michigan, Department of Health and Michigan State Univer-
sity Cooperative Extension Service, ggestions And An-
swers About Home Sewage Disposal, by W. . S ep ar ,
George Amundson, and walter Sheldon, (1963), p. 4.

 

County of Newaygo, Sanitary Code, (Oct. 26, 1961). Also
see Appendix A for pertinent excerpts from Act 273,
Public Acts of 1939.

County of Newaygo, Building Ordinance, (July 5, 1962).

Township of Grant, Building Ordinance, (April 12, 1956).-

Township of Brooks, Building Ordinance, (Aug. 25, 1955).

Interview with Mr. Philipp Bevelacqua, President, Hess
Lake Improvement Association, JUne 1, 1964.

CHAPTER IV

 

AN ANALYSIS OF THE CASE STUDY

Natural Resource Aspects

The most pressing problem confronting Hess Lake resi-
dents at present is water level control. The long unsettled
history of this problem has made it more complex and increas-
ed hard feelings. The dwellings along the south shore, in
the low areas, built during a period when water levels on the
lake were low, are in a position of suffering the most damage
from high water, and desire low lake levels. The remainder
of the lakefront does not experience great harm from high wa-,
ter except possibly some shoreline erosion, which can be con-
trolled on an individual or group basis. A low water level
may be disagreeable to these people as it may adversely effect
their beach area.

The solution to the problem lies in having a legal level
for the lake established, with provision for maintaining this
'level in the future. Establishment of a legal level will not
satisfy all parties involved. Some may be required to re-
locate septic tank disposal systems or wells, or fill a foot
or more to raise ground levels. A legal level should benefit
the majority, thus the establishment of the level must involve
participation of Hess Lake residents. This can most effective-
ly be done through the Hess Lake Improvement Association. All
the legal tools are available, and have been for years, to

have a legal level established. (See Act 146, Public Acts of

-54..

-55-

1961 in Appendix B.). Fbr the Residents of Hess Lake to post-
pone the decision longer only invites more problems in the fu-
ture. There is still lake frontage to be developed and most
of it is low, subject to seasonal standing surface water.
This land is similar to that occurring in areas along the
south shore currently holding structures, shown on Plate III,
and creating a majority of the current water problems. Should
the established legal level flood some low land, it has been
determined by court action that the use of governmental power
of eminent domain allows the selection of the level most ad-
vantageous to the majority, with compensation for those who
may suffer damage.1

A further case for establishment of a legal level can be
made by combining a study of Hess and Brooks Lake water levels
to insure that residents of both lakes settle the problem
once and for all. A legal level was established for Brooks
Lake in 1947. At that time the Michigan Department of Conser-
vation suggested the possibility of a single water level for
both lakes. Whether or not this is possible cannot be known
without a survey under existing conditions. It is feasible
that a level set on Hess Lake may adversely effect a desired
level on Brooks Lake, and it is a known fact that the reverse
is true. High water levels on Brooks affect the tailwaters
at the Hess Lake outlet, thus reducing the volume of flow.
While the two lakes are separate physical entities, they are
linked together by nature and they form a small social commu-

nity which is slowly growing together. A little COOperation

-56..

in the early stages of this growth will make the latter stages
more fruitful. l

A second problem confronting Hess Lake residents is the
heavy growth of aquatic vegetation. There have been some ef—
forts in past years to control it by chemicals. These efforts,
by the Conservation Department, were not satisfactory, either
requiring too much chemical to be effective or being too ex-
pensive. At the conclusion of the treatments the Hess lake
Improvement Association did not seem interested in solving the
weed problem through chemicals. The Association has at times
experimented with a weed cutting machine, but this is only a
temporary solution at best. Results were unsatisfactory and
the project dropped. It would appear that if any relief from
the weed problem is to be had, it must be through chemicals.
There are several of these used by the Conservation Department
which afford control for the duration of one summer. They
are costly, and the cost must be borne by lake property owners.
It is possible, to reduce costs and still gain some relief,
by treating only selected areas. At best, weed control, in
any form, is temporary. To eliminate all weeds, lake bottom
soils would have to be drastically changed, and this could
mean an end to all fish life. The legal tool to carry out a
program of this type is Act 140, Public Acts of 1961. This
Act is to:

"provide for the improvement of certain inland lakes;

to authorize dredging and removal of undesirable ma-

terials from lakes,....to authorize the raising of

money by taxation and spegial assessments for the

purposes of this act;..."

Fbr further information on this Act see Appendix C.

-57..

The solution to the weed problem will, as in the water
level situation, require the support of all the permanent
and summer residents of the lake, and because it is a local
problem, could best be handled through the Hess Lake Improve-
ment Association.

Existing Physical Development Aspects

The problem of individual water supply and waste dis-
posal systems is closely related to soil types and ground
water levels. There are several small areas, shown on Plate
IV, of low areas containing soils primarily composed of peats
and muck. These soils possess very poor drainage qualities
and seasonal high ground water tables. It is these low areas
which comprise the limited flood plain areas of the lake.
Some of this land has already been built upon, without any
fill material being added. This land is not suitable for
installation of septic tank disposal systems and it probably
does not meet Newaygo County's installation recommendations.
In Spite of this, low land development continues. A majority
of the dwellings being built in these low areas are summer
cottages, a few are permanent homes. As these summer homes
are converted into permanent homes, poorly functioning dis-
posal systems will increase. When septic tank systems over-
flow and seep to the ground surface, the easiest thing to do
is drain it off. On lakefront property this usually means
draining it into the lake. Here it goes unnoticed until
neighbors complain. Thus far Hess Lake has been quite free

of this type pollution. The Hess Lake Improvement Association,

-58..

on an informal basis, has done a good job of policing new
disposal system installation.

To insure the future sanitation of lakefront properties
however, local codes or ordinances are superior to informal
local supervision. In the past, residential construction
has been fairly evenly spaced and not difficult to supervise.
With the present demand for waterfront property however, pres-
sures on local administrative personnel to be more lax in
building restrictions will increase. This is when a local
ordinance is necessary.

The most common method of establishing and implementing
waste disposal controls is through subdivision regulations.
The other possiblility, that of a group sewage disposal system'
is impractical at present. Mere information is needed on
operating procedures and costs:4 The presence of only 156
permanent dwellings around the lake, and their geographical
distribution, financially prohibits such a system. It thus
appears that individual disposal systems are the answer, at
least for the present, for Hess and many other Michigan lakes.

The main standard for controlling septic tank installa-
tion is through lot size. This can be either fixed or vary
with soil conditions. Where it is based on soil conditions
the lot requirements, of necessity, are larger in the poorer
drainage 80118. This method permits a more flexible use of
the land. This type of standard would be very useful around
Hess Lake, where large areas of well drained soils are present.

The well drained soils could accomodate more waste disposal

-59-

5
systems per acre than the muck and peat soils. This system

is more complicated to administer, and rural areas newly en-
tering the field of subdivision and waste disposal control
may find it simpler to adopt a minimum lot size for the en-
tire area. Recommended minimum lot sizes for septic tank
systems on the same lot as the well, run from one-half an
acre on up. One-half acre represents a lot about 100' x 200',
or 20,000 square feet. A major portion of the lots around
Hess Lake do not begin to approach 20,000 sq. ft., thus it
would appear that a smaller minimum lot size, perhaps 10,000
to 15,000 sq. ft. with option to require larger lots where
soil conditions require it, would be more realistic.

In addition to minimum lot sizes it is important to set
forth minimum distances between the septic tank with drain
field and other physical features. This is particularly true
in waterfront areas in order to protect the water from pol-
lution. washtenaw County, in addition to strict soil inter-
pretation for septic tank usage, sets forth the following min-
imum distances:

Table 3: Disposal System Isolation Distances

 

Isolation from “Septic tank Diaposal field
Property line 10' 10' "
Building foundation 5' 10'

(No basement)

Basement wall 10' 15'

water supply well 50'* 100'*

(25' or more deep)

Shallow well 75'* 150'*

'(Under 25' deep)

Lake or stream 25' 50'

 

=T§olation distancesfishall be increased as required from wells
serving other than individual dwellings.
Source: washtenaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission, A
Subdivision Guide, (Ann Arbor, Michigan, April 19637,
pJTSO.

-60..

The control of septic tank disposal systems in resort
areas such as Hess Lake is imperative if the present attrac-
tiveness of these areas is to be preserved. The existing
pattern of small lots and individual disposal systems has
not yet caused many serious problems, but as the area con-
tinues to expand and densities increase, danger of hazards
to well water supplies and malfunctioning disposal systems
increases tremendously. Septic tank disposal systems were
designed for isolated residences. When a large number of
them are in use in a small area they tend to saturate the
soil and function improperly. Thus some type of control is
desirable to prevent this. Much of the shoreline around Hess
Lake is composed of large areas of well drained sands in which
septic tanks function very well. There are, however, areas
of poorly drained soil which are not suited for septic tank
systems. It is the responsibility of the people residing in
the townships, or the county, to adopt regulations to protect
their environment.

The street pattern around a lake plays an important role
in the land use pattern which will develop. This is particu-
larly true of the main road which normally encircles a lake.
Land between the road and lake will develop first, and the
type of development which takes place depends largely on the
size and shape of the parcels Of land created by road and
lakeshore. A.main road too close to the lake means homes and
cottages on very shallow lots, often with the road as the

back yard. A main road over 100 feet from the lakeshore, on

“'61..-

rural resort lakes, usually means a series of dirt trails

forming no particular pattern, just providing access to the
waterfront lots. In this latter case large parcels of land
between road and water can be well designed and optimum use
made of the land. unfortunately this doesn't always occur.

Secondary roads in the vicinity of Hess Lake are sand
trails, but for the most part follow the routes designated
by twenty foot wide streets on the original subdivision plats
of the lake. These trails tend to be narrow, thus not han-
dling traffic effectively, which fails to promote sound resi-
dential growth. In addition winter maintenance is difficult.
These trails are passable for the number and type of existing
dwellings. When these subdivisions become fully developed
however, poor traffic circulation will be a continuous prob—
lem. Through subdivision regulation this type of road devel-
opment can be averted in the future.

The 156 permanent dwellings and 302 summer cottages mean
that the primary land use on the lake is for dwellings. As
this is the primary basis for the existence of the social
community, any other land uses should necessarily be compatible
with this residential-resort environment. In addition to dwell-
ings, Hess Lake has three combined food and sporting goods
stores, one of which is currently vacant. There are also two
resorts providing swimming, boating, and snacks, with the
South Side Park featuring roller skating and the North Side
Resort, dancing. On the east end of the lake is a plumbing

warehouse, run in conjunction with the owner's residence.

-62..

This particular use is the only one around the lake which is
not compatible with a resort area.

The American Society of Planning Officials lists the
following land uses which must be reconciled to each other
in rural resort areas:

Summer cottages or residences

Year-around residences

Summer resorts (hotels, motels, cabins, boarding houses)

Hunting, fishing, gun, and riding clubs (in wilderness
areas)

Combination resorts and hunting camps

Boy' and Girls' camps

Golf courses

Beaches (private, public, and commercial)

Marinas, boat liveries, and boat launching ramps
Recreation clubs (yacht, boat beach, golf, country)
Amusement parks

Tent colonies and auto trailer parks

Institutiogally owned facilities (unions, churches,
fraternal)

As Hess Lake is already fairly well established as a res-
idential-resort lake, it should remain in that category in e-
valuating compatible land uses. The two resorts on the lake
are both flanked by private development, thus there is no
room for expansion. Neither is there room for any type of
buffer planting to provide some privacy for the adjacent res-
idential properties. This would be highly desirable, as both

resorts are very popular on weekends, and the adjoining private

-63..

residences are located close to the resort structures. An
additional problem with the South Side Resort is parking,
which is very limited, thus parking on road shoulders and
private property occurs, and traffic congestion follows.

The two food stores in operation also serve as gas sta-
tions. These are located on the road encircling the lake, on
non-waterfront property. waterfront is not necessarily de-
sirable since they do not require it to conduct their business.

Newaygo County operates a youth camp accommodating fifty
to sixty children at the lake, on inland prOperty with access
to the lake. It is well isolated from already established
residential areas and from the road, thus not being a disturb-
ing element to the residents. When water-oriented aetivities
are enjoyed however, it is necessary for children to walk on
the main road to reach an access point to the lake. This is
not a desirable feature for a children's camp.

In any future commercial ventures desiring to establish
on the lake, it is desirable that waterfront property be re-
served as much as possible for activities requiring it, such
as beaches, marinas, and sport and boat centers. These uses
must have sufficient frontage so that ensuing activities do
not overflow in front of adjacent private property. Other
commercial ventures can still be successful but do not need a
waterfront location. These include restaurants, gas stations,
food stores, gift shops and drive-in snack bars.

As stated above, most of the undeveloped waterfront prop-

erty is swamp or low, poorly drained areas. These areas are

.64...

better suited to some land use other than private dwellings.
If the area is extremely swampy, such as that existing along
the channel into Brooks Lake from Hess, it may be best pre-
served in its natural state and developed as a wildlife prod-
ucing area to both Hess and Brooks Lake.

The low ground along the south shore of Hess Lake could
possibly be filled and developed as a township or county park.
This would provide a much needed boat launching and picnic
area that was large enough to accommodate adequate parking in
addition to launching boats. If this were done some, or all,
of the very small county access points could be reserved for
local residents needing access to the lake. These access
points could be reserved for local residents needing access
to the lake. These access points are too narrow to be suitable
for boat launching and subsequent car and trailer parking.

The only larger public access point on the lake is the public
fishing site on the north-west corner. with 194 feet of front-
age it is not large, and is flanked by private dwellings.

This site is the property of, and is maintained by, the Michi-
gan Department of Conservation. The Department is limited
financially in the amount of waterfront property they can
purchase. They are desirous of acquiring sites large enough
to be adequate for the use intended and still allow a buffer
zone on each side. At present they consider 200 feet a mini-
mum frontage on lakes, but 400 feet would be preferable.8

People using Hess Lake are fortunate in having one large

public fishing site, but more public access could be used,

I?

II

.\
gnaw-4'7.“

-65..

particularly in areas where inland property is being devel-
oped.

Public access also makes inland prOperty more valuable
for homesites and business supporting water recreation. In-
land properties would reflect this value by experiencing a
sound residential development and thus greater tax return to
the township or county. Lakes which are completely ringed
*with private development have virtually shut Off any poten-
tial inland development, as the water has appeal only to those
who can use it. Different ways public access can aid inland
development will be shown in Chapter V.

The methods open to the township or county for securing
1and for public use are zoning, subdivision regulations, tax
deferment, outright purchase or a gift. In the case of Hess
Lake and many others like it, local governments are in no po-
sition financially to-acquire, develop, and maintain water-
front lands for the public. What they can do, through plan-
ning, is to study and support new design concepts, such as
those presented in Chapter V.

Administrative

There are not enough Federal Administration regulations
on most Michigan inland lakes to consider discussion here.
The agencies of the Federal government concerned with water
become involved more with larger bodies of water which cross
state lines.

At present state regulations concerning residents of

Nflchigan's inland lakes are primarily involved in preserving

17.-

 

-66..

lake and stream environment through pollution control. The
state may become more involved in future years if local gov-
ernments fail to respond in enacting some form of control on
lakefront property. The lack of local efforts in regulating
waterfront development has caused nationwide cOncern. It

has been suggested in Wisconsin that the state manage all
navigable waters and also undertake a land use planning and
zoning program in areas bordering these waters. An interstate
subcommittee studying New YOrk's Lake Champlain urged the
state legislature to enact laws providing for guidance and
financial assistance to local governments to initiate planning
and zoning in resort areas.10

To be completely successful, planning done through local
participation is more desirable than a state controlled pro-
gram. Lack of local interest in the problem however, tends
to bring the state into the picture, as a majority of the
lakes are public waters.

It is at the local levels of government that more effec-
tive action can be taken to protect inland lakes. It is typ-
ical of local governments not to take action until it is too
late. Newaygo County's Sheridan Township, surrounding Fremont
Lake, finally adopted a simplified zoning ordinance, but only
after pollution became so bad in the lake that something had
to be done. It is difficult for people to accept public reg-
ulations, particularly in rural areas where for years none
were necessary. It would be too great a step to expect Newaygo

County or one of its townships to suddenly adopt and carry out

1
I

-67..

a planning program with zoning and subdivision regulations.
The start must be made with strengthening and enforcing the
limited codes and ordinances now in effect. There is very
little control now on single dwelling septic tank installation.
Initial remedial action here could be a stronger sanitary and
building code by the county, expressly prohibiting septic
installation in undesirable locations. The standards used
could be those recommended by the Michigan Department of
Health, or a variation of these more suitable to conditions
in Newaygo County. Stronger codes at the county level would
not only benefit all lakefront in the county, but may stimu-
late action by townships to add to, strengthen, and enforce
their codes. The adoption of a Junk Yard Ordinance by Brooks
Township indicates a growing awareness on the part of town-
ship residents that they cannot exist forever on simply a
.building ordinance and still live in a desirable environment.‘
The Hess Lake Improvement Association has a long history,
with periods of high and low activity. It is through this
organization that the residents of the lake have a voice in
‘local matters. The existing problems of weeds and water lev-
el should be handled through this Association. To be effec-
tive and representative, an association must receive the whole-
hearted support of those it serves. The members must work to-
gether and support the programs agreed upon. It appears that
of late the Hess Lake Association has been bogged down either
by member apathy or official decisions without member support.

A little effort on the part of key residents of the lake could

-53-

coordinate organization activities with property owners' de-
sires. The biggest single factor which would eliminate ill
feelings among lake residents would be the solution of the
lake level problem.

It is advantageous to lake residents to have an effec-
tive organization working for them. It is their voice in all
matters which concern them as riparian or non-riparian owners
with an interest in a particular lake. An Association is es—
pecially important if the residents are concerned with state
invasion of private property rights on water. Such a fear
has prompted the residents of two lakes in Northern Michigan
to work together on a statement of their beliefs in their
rights as riparian owners. Article 7 of this Association's
“Bill of Rights" states that:

"present laws are available to protect waterfront

owners from over-zealous develOpers. Michigan

will benefit most by encouraging investment in

the physical nature of our lakes and streams it

is extremely doubtful if state-wide laws would

prove equitable."

The complete list of proposed rights appears in Appendix D.

The voice of lake residents shall become stronger through
the newly created Association of Midhigan Lakes and Streams
Associations. This non-profit organization was formed in
1963 for the purpose of promoting:

"an understanding and appreciation of all the prop-

erty rights included in riparian lands; to assist

riparian owners with a solution of common problems;

... to actas a clearing house for all problems and

information relevant to Michiganii natural resources

and the use of surface water;...

Through a state association, local organizations of

-69..

geographically linked lakes, such as Hess and Brooks, could
be stimulated to cooperate in solving common problems.

The way to solving deve10pment problems is found in
planning, through the use of zoning and subdivision ordinances
in conjunction with other local ordinances. These tools of
regulation are available to counties and townships.in Michi-
gan. They are not used extensively in rural areas, mainly
because of lack of understanding as to what they are and can
do. If a local government unit wishes to go into a planning
program it must start by educating the people on planning.
Local residents made to realize the need for planned develop—
‘ment, will respond favorably to the program. Because of the
rural nature of many resort areas, the,personnel and financial
situation does not at preSent warrant the formal planning pro-
gram found in highly populated areas. In resort areas, such
as Hess Lake, planned development can be achieved through
zoning, subdivision regulations and other local ordinances.

Zoning is the most practical answer in separating land
uses. For maximum effectiveness it should promote a land use
plan. It is through zoning that residential, resort, commer-
cial, industrial and other land uses are arranged in a pattern
which makes them compatible. Through zoning, flood plain a-
reas and low areas not suited for development can be pres-
erved for open-space uses. Building set backs also can be
required for each use, thus achieving, through buffer zones,

a harmonious relationship of land uses.

A feature of zoning peculiar to waterfront property is

~70-

that of zoning land under water. It is desirable to indicate
on the zoning map that the body of water is in some zone, as
opposed to leaving it unzoned. This insures that waterfront
areas are protected from inbompatible uses of water as well
as land. Establishing boundaries over water and along shore-
lines presents problems, as it is difficult to establish a
point in mid-water, and shorelines are often changing. The
following are possible means of zoning land under water:

(1) projection of zone boundaries from the land into the
water up to a point a given distance from shore.

(2) projection of boundary lines into the water.

(3) zone the water in reference to the zoning of abut-
ting land.

(4) use the shoreline as the boundary of all zones,
leaving the water unzoned unless specific districts
are determined for it.13

Zoning ordinances can be complicated, or very simplified.

An example of the latter is that of Sheridan Township in Ne-
waygo County. While simplified, it serves as a start in a
resort area badly in need of some controls to halt pollution
of Fremont Lake. A.characteristic of zoning on lakefronts is
the need to provide recreation zones. This is usually done
in conjunction with a commercial zone, thus giving a recrea—
tion—commercial zone. This zone would include commercial
uses supporting recreation, such as food stores, gas stations
and restaurants, as well as water-oriented commercial uses

requiring waterfront property. A major portion of this land

-71-

would be inland property. A residential-recreation zone would
be primarily for permanent and summer dwellings, but could
permit public beaches for recreation as a Special use. A
third zone could be special recreational. In this zone would
be permitted izch uses as youth camps, riding stables and
camp grounds. The uses permitted in each zone will vary
‘with local opinions and needs, and additional zones may be
needed. The important factor is that a zoning ordinance need
not be extremely complicated in rural resort areas.

Interest in rural zoning in MiChigan has been mainly at
the township level. Approximately 400 townships out of 1,257
have enacted zoning ordinances, or are in the process. This
indicates a fair endorsement of the concept of rural zoning
in Michigan}5

In addition to zoning, the other major tool available to
townships to help control growth is subdivision regulations.
These regulations can aid in controlling waste disposal, lake
and stream pollution, street design and construction, public
access and, low land development. This is important in resort
areas if they are to remain active. As discussed earlier,
sewage disposal is one of the pressing problems on inland
lakes. The solution to this problem lies chiefly in subdi-
vision controls, through not allowing installation in poor
drainage areas and setting minimum lot sizes and septic tank
installation standards. These standards may be coordinated

with the legal water level as done in Branch County. The

legal level on the Goldwater chain of lakes became the basis

-72..

for issuing permits for installing sewage disposal systems.
This was required by all townships on the lake chain and is
enforced by the County Health Department.16This is an excel-
lent example of coordinating natural resource factors with
planned deve10pment. Also it represents c00peration between
lake residents, townships and the county.

A.second major problem area controlled by subdivision
regulations is that of platting. Through these regulations
proper street width and design can be achieved, and closer
coordination in streets between adjacent plats is secured.
This latter point is missing in the existing plats on Hess
lake. In addition to streets, the plats can be required to
' show what property rights riparian owners have in relation to
the waters edge. This means an accurate portrayal of the
lakefront on the property. Plat control can also eliminate
the excessively deep lots occurring along some waterfront a-
reas on Hess Lake. The rear area of these lots goes undevel-
oped and is "dead land". Plate VIII depicts schematically
what subdivision regulations can do for lakefront property.

These are a few of the more important phases of zoning
and subdivision regulations applied to inland lakes. They
require time to prepare, and money. Rural townships under-
taking either program would benefit by working with a profes-
sional experienced in planning. Once ordinances are passed
they require enforcement. Whenever zoning and/or subdivision
regulations are adopted, it is wise to coordinate these ef-

forts with adjoining townships to achieve some degree of uni-

formity in standards.

PLATE VIII
BENEFITS OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL

5) ’ ' Q
9 o 0 \ Q
0 ”‘KJ Q
- Q Q
U D I: Q
0 Q7
wk v
. D

Plan A Shows typical

'QDCO

 

 

unplanned waterfront. Main (« . r V
Highway
Public
,sah- Access
0 x
fi O a. Q Q Q .---:-: 44'6‘
o a
0 6 Q Q ’5':..T'fq'::',:“:i7,':':‘l',.-.
Q . A,»DQ
Q
Q
0 ca‘b (D‘Q

 

 

Plan B Same waterfront M, I

under subdivision control.
Main

Highway(

Source: waterfronts: Planning for Resort and Residential
uses, Planning Advisory Service No. 118, American
Soc1ety of Planning Officials, Chicago: 1959, p. 27.

Gerald H. Matthews
July 196#

-73-

-74-

Public policy will be the one major factor in the future
development of Hess Lake. There are many tools available to
Michigan townships and counties with which they can shape their
future. Whether this new development is guided, or whether it
is permitted to grow "topsy-turvy", is up to the local resi-
dents. Public policy must determine if Hess Lake is to be a
better than average residential-resort area. It will be the
major determining factor in whether the water level problem
is solved, low land development is controlled, sound platting
practices are practiced, and undesirable land uses are regu-
lated. Public policy will deterine if the fishingewater sport
conflict will be settled or allowed to continue. Desirable
lakes of the future will be those which afford enjoyable wa-
ter recreation of all types in a safe manner, and in a social
and physical environment which is conducive to healthful liv-
ing. Public policy will also determine whether the residents
of Brooks and Hess Lake can discard their ill feelings and
work together to create a desirable social community. There
is a large amount of land surrounding these two lakes which
is suitable for residential-resort development. While most
of the lakefront property is developed, there is still plenty,
if used wisely, to allow subdivision of inland property and
allow access to the lakes. The decision is up to the people
of Grant and Brooks townships, they can guide progress or they
can remain quiet and hope it will pass them by.

On a higher scale, public policy plays an important role

-75...

in determining what type of development will take place on a
lake. Rmny of Michigan's inland lakes are yet undeveloped.
To what are they best suited? water is a key element in many
forms of recreation, and is indiSpensible to wildlife, which
in itself is a part of recreation. Public policy should de-
termine whattmm a body of water is best suited for, and sub-
sequent regulations controlling development should be drawn
up accordingly.‘ At present the criteria for determining the
best use of a lake is limited, but research is being done in
this area.171t will be a mistake if, when adequate criteria

are available, the people of Michigan,'in a position to use

it, fail to do so.

l.

10.
ll.
12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

’-76-
Footnotes

A..A11an Schmid, Michi an water Use and Development Prob-
lems, Circular Bu etin , Agricultural Experiment"
Station, Department of Agricultural Economics, (Michi-
gan State university, East Lansing: 1961) p. 18.

"Ybur Lake Can Have Better Fishing," Michigan Conservation,
(July-August 1961), pp. 26-27.

‘Michigan, State of, "Inland Lake Improvement Act of 1961,"
Act lHO, Public Acts of 1961.

Delaware County Planning Commission, water Su 1 And Sew-
a e D18 osal, Information Bulletin No. 9, EMBfila, Penna:
15555. pp. 13-1#.

For a detailed study of the see: William G. Kweder, "Land
Classification for Residential Development," unpublished
thesis, (Michigan State University, E. Lansing: 1962).

waterfronts: Planning For Resgrt and Residential Uses,
anning Advisory ServiCe Report No. 118, American
Society of Planning Officials, (Chicago: 1959), p. 10.
Ibid., p. 11.
Interview with Mr. Floyd Faneslow, Head of Public Fishing
Site Section, Fish Division, Michigan Department of
Conservation, March 1964.

waterfronts: Planning for Resort and Residential Uses,
Op. Cfto, p. 5.

Ibid.
E1k~Skegemog Lakes Association, ”Bill of Rights," (n.d.).

Michigan, Association of Lakes and Streams Associations,
"Constitution," Article II, (1963), p. 1.

waterfronts: Planning for Resort and Residential Uses,
op.cit., p. 19.

Ibid. ’ pp. 13-1.“.

Louis A. Wblfanger, Rural Zoningin a Nutshell, Extension
Folder F-272, COOperative Extension Service, (Michigan
State university, E. Lansing: Feb. 1963), p. 6.

A..Allan Schmid, op. cit., pp. 17-18.

CHAPTER V

ADDITIONAL WATER PROBLEMS AND DESIGN TRENDS

 

water Surface USer Rights

 

Michigan water users are experiencing a new type of
problem in recent years — a water use conflict between fish-
erman and fast motorboats with and without water skiers.
Fishing requires relatively little water area as Opposed to
motor boating. Fishing tends to be a passive sport as oppos-
ed to motor boating. Complicating the problem is the fact
that over the years fishing license fees have paid for a sub-
stantial portion of public fishing sites in Michigan. Now
the angler must wait in line just to get his boat in the wa-
ter. MOtor boats and water skiers contribute nothing finan-
cially toward developing public water fronts. In addition
many anglers disheartened by congestion on beach and lake
have given up fishing, resulting in a drOp in fishing license
funds. This is an important factor in tourist oriented Michi-
gan.l

The problem received legislative attention in 1962, and
now a State Boating Control Committee has broad powers in reg-
ulating boats and associated recreational water users. This
group meets with local citizens at their request, holds pub-
lic hearings, and makes recommendations for water control.
For these recommendations to be enforced, the local govern-
ment must adopt them in an ordinance. After the first year,
the Committee found in many cases a good job of enforcing ex-

isting state boating laws would reduce or eliminate the
-77-

...78-

problem. During this first year the Committee held thirty-
five public hearings on local boating problems, in thirty-
onezcases specific additional local controls were recommend-
ed.

Suggestions for solving the conflict come in numerous
forms: limit motor horsepower, license boat operators, pro-
hibit water skiing, limit water skiing to certain hours, and
zone the water surface for the different uses. The Michigan
Boating Control Committee has determined the fairest method
to be limiting uses to certain hours. In its first year of
operation eleven lakes officially limited water skiing to the
period between 10:00 A.M. and 6:30 P.M. The Committee also
found that on large bodies of lakes it was practical to zone
for particular uses. These zones are appropriately marked,
and are reserved for major water activities such as fishing,
water skiing, and racing.3

A question remains as to how water surface zoning for
water activities will effect a lake bottom zoned under a lo-
cal zoning ordinance. In a single family residential zone,
which uses are permitted, fishing, water skiing, or racing?
If the local government adopts two ordinances, one zoning the
bottom of the lake and one the tOp9 which ordinance has pre-
cedence?

It appears that there must be some cooperation between
local zoning authorities and the Boating Control Committee
in detething cases where both types of zoning are involved.

The water conflict problem is relatively new, and much

-79..

progress has been made toward easing the problem. Hopefully,
lakes experiencing the conflict will resort to the correct
legal channels to solve the problem, rather than take it upon
themselves to draw up a set of "water Use Rules" applicable

to their own lake, but not enforceable under any state, county
or township law.

Dredging and Filling

The increasing demand for waterfront property has made
once valueless swamp land into valuable real estate. This
is because current machinery (dredges and draglines) can e-
conomically convert low ground into homesites. Three ways
this can be done are:

(1) Build up low land around lakes.

(2) Dredge deep canals in swamp land and build up land
between canals enabling all homesites to have water-
fronts.

4

(3) Add to shoreline property of lakes by filling.

The advantage of filling is that it can create more use—
able waterfront property for homes, cottages, marinas and
other water-oriented activities. The disadvantages however,
if filling is done indiscriminately, can far outweigh the ad-
vantages. Indiscriminate filling can damage fish and wildlife
habitat (including valuable spawning grounds), interfere with
navigation, increase riparian rights controversies, increase
sanitation problems, and overcrowd lakes by providing many
homesites on a very small body of water.

The fill problem is relatively new except in Florida,

...80...

and few subdivision regulations contain standards for con—
trolling it. The main factor in allowing fill operations
to take place is to insure that the method and type of fill
is adequate for the type of development proposed. Competent
engineering is needed to aid local planners in formulating
and enforcing controls. An example of fill regulations is
shown in a subdivision ordinance for Marin County, California:
"Fillin . Where marsh or low lands are proposed for
su iVISion, the subdivider shall have a soil in-
vestigation and recommendation made by a recognized,

qualified soil mechanics engineer, and the program
for development shall be made on the basis thereof...

Required fill shall be of suitable filling material

and placed in such a manner to insure that the fin-

ished elevation of all lots and roadway areas will

be adequate to protect the subdivision from floods...

and then only where there is an adequate provision

for the passage of storm water run-off and after

settlement and compaction."

A second area of concern to local governments and plan-
ners is that of fill material which adds property to the lake-
front. If a lake is zoned by the local government and a por-
tion of the lake is made into buildable homesites by filling,
what effect does the zoning ordinance have on this land, if
any? This problem possibly could be solved by making provision
in the local zoning and subdivision regulations, but only if
local governments are aware that this circumstance may arise
in their area jurisdiction.

In the future there will be added pressure to develop
all types of waterfront lands, even those currently under

water. To maintain high standards of living local govern-

ments must review surface water resources in their area and,

-81-

if applicable, design their ordinances to include the possi-
bility of fill areas developing.

Artificial Lakes

 

A shortage of natural lakes, and nearly 100% lakefront
development of natural lakes in urbanized areas, has led to
the development of artificial lakes for residential homesites,
as well as other uses. Other uses may include recreation,
water for domestic and industrial use, flood control, and aug-
menting low flow periods to reduce pollution. At present
most artificial lakes are built solely for real estate pro-
motion, without any planning going into multi-purpose use con-
cepts.

The following problems occur in artificial lakes:

(1) no construction standards resulting in poorly con-

structed dams.

(2) maintenance responsibility of dam and lake upon com-

pletion.
7

(3) quantity and quality of water supply for lake.

(4) management of lake water level.

(5) control of pollution.

(6) selection and introduction of proper fish species.

(7) control of shoreline deve10pment, beaches, piers,

boat houses, etc.8
FUrther problems stem from questions involving riparian
rights. Aside from the problems discussed in Chapter II, the

developer may reserve certain riparian rights, such as lake

level determination and water use. Reserved rights can

-82..

adversely affect the property owner, thus his riparian rights
should be Specified in his deed.

Property owners should also be aware of areas of respon-
sibility in connection with water level maintenanee. Provid—
ing the dam breaks and the lake drains, whose responsibility
are the repairs? If the lake is supplied water by pumping
from an adjacent natural lake or stream, can the property
owner be assured that this source is dependable and not con-
tested by riparians on the natural body of water? Is per-
iodic draining of the lake for dam repairs or other reasons
to be expected? These and other problems must be answered by
legal provisions, assuring property owners and local govern-
ments that reSponsibility for the lake lies somewhere. It
may be desirable to require the developer to post a bond guar-
anteeing the performance of the dam and water supply.9

Whether the lake is private or public must be determined.
If private who is reSponsible for its maintenance? If public,
access points must be established and its relation to back
lands be determined. The riparian owner who purchased early
may find that he must share the lake with far more people
than he anticipated-if he is unaware of potential inland de-
velopment.

At present the only controls on artificial lake creation
in Michigan is in the form of dam construction permits. Uh-
der Act 156, Public Acts of 1851, County boards of Supervi-

sors have the power within their counties, "to permit or

-83..

prohibit the construction of any dam or bridge over or across
any navigable stream."lOUntil 1963 this was the only control
on dams, applicable only to navigable streams. In 1963 Act
184, Public Acts of 1963 requires a permit from the Michigan
Department of Conservation to erect dams in streams or rivers.
Section 1 states:

"No person shall construct or permit construction

of any dam on land owned by him in any stream or

river impounding more than five acres without first

obtaining from the department of conservation a 11

permit approvxng the plans for such construction."

The impact upon local governments of an artificial lake
created within their jurisdiction will vary, but few have
provisions in their ordinances controlling such a circumstance.
Subdivision regulations and zoning ordinances already dealing
with waterfront development can be adapted to artificial lakes.
Those government units having no controls over waterfront de-
velopment may find it necessary to revise their thinking, and
their ordinances. In the future subdivision and zoning con-
trols must be devised to consider the possibility of artificial

lakes.

Planned Community Development

 

The use of artificial lakes to promote real estate ven-
tures is one way to capitalize on the appeal water has for
people. On a larger scale is the planned community located
on waterfront property. Developers specializing in the sec-
ond-home market are finding that many of these people want all
the conveniences of their first home environment. Thus the

planned community on water provides housing (both permanent

-84-

and summer), recreation (water-oriented), stores, gas sta-
tions, churches and even some small industries.

An example of such a community is found on the north-
east shore of Lake Tahoe. This development offers housing
and water recreation, but also includes three shopping cen-
ters, service stations, hospital, civic center and light
service industry. Total population when completed is expect-
ed to reach 250,000, about 70% of which-will be second-home
buyers. There are only fifty lots on the lake itself, with
3,000 feet of lake frontage devoted to apartment type dwell-
ings. A large portion of the lakefront is dedicatedzas com-
munity beach, for use by citizens of the community.1

A well planned community with ample public access rep-
resents somewhat of an ideal way to utilize waterfront prop-
erty to benefit the largest number of persons seeking summer
or permanent homes near water. At the same time it raises
the question of recreational-use capacity of a lake. Can
Lake Tahoe support a community of 250,000 in addition to
other residential and resort developments around the lake and
remain unpolluted and uncrowded enough to be a desirable rec-
reation area? This same question applies to artificial lakes
and natural inland lakes. Research is needed to explore the
proper use for different type lakes, what the shoreline prop-
erty is worth, and the total number of cottages and permanent
homes on a body of water. In addition values and standards
must be established in order to determine a maximum popula-

tion a given body of water can support. This factor will be

...85...

important in policy making decisions on the proper use of
inland lakes and other bodies of water.
Current Subdivision Trends

Current subdivision design of waterfront property is
aimed at making the water available to a larger number of
peOple. The concept of dividing an entire shoreline into
individual lots is no longer acceptable. High on the list
of uses for surface water is recreation. To enjoy the water,
people must have access. This applies to inland property
owners as well as people from urban environments. In addi-
tion to providing public access for the general public, new
design criteria call for access points related to inland home-
sites. This reduces the amount of "dead land" created under
the old design patterns. waterfront subdivisions once left
inland property no access to water, and it loses its value of
being near the water. By designing inland property in con-
junction with the lakefront, this property capitalizes on its
proximity to the water. An example of how this can be done
is shown in Plate IX. This plan emphasizes the need for care-
ful planning in large tracts of land to insure maximum use of
waterfront and inland property. This plan devotes more wa-
terfront to public access than most, but it is designed for
a large number of users. Notice the pedestrian parkways
leading through the residential areas to the waterfront, a
feature reducing pedestrian traffic through private property.
Plate X shows a more typical development permitting public ac-

cess.

PLATE Ix
PUBLIC ACCESS

 

 

  

0 500 1000 1500
h======h=z===dssgzgzd

Scale in Feet

Community Property - Park

Tammi Community Property - Beach

Source: waterfronts: Planning for Resort
and Residgnfial USes,Planning
Advisory Service, No. 118, Ameri-
can Society of Planning Officials,
Chicago: 1959, p. 27.

Gerald H. Matthews
July 1964

-86..

PLATE X

TRAFFIC CIRCULATION /\

Access areas
for back lots

    
   

 

0 400 800
E222255222t========d

Scale in Feet

 

Source:
A Plan for the Development of
the State Property At Pawtuck-
away Lake, N. H. State Plan-
ning and Development Commis-
sion, 1958, Map 4.

 

Gerald H. Matthews
July 1964

-87...

-88...

Current design trends also call for improved road lay-
out in conjunction with public access points, lot size and
shape, and general circulation. A common problem discussed
earlier involves platting which permitted very deep and often
odd shapes and sizes, often with poor traffic circulation.
Plates IX and X demonstrate how a well designed road system
and lot layout allows maximum use of waterfront and inland
property.

The unique physical characteristics of a lake and its
shoreline is what makes it attractive. Typical lakefront de-
velopment tends to destroy much of the natural beauty of the
lake. A method of development which would preserve the lake
in its natural condition is proposed by C. R. Humphrys, Depart—
ment of Resource Development, Michigan State university. This
plan is shown on Plate XI. The difference here is that there
are no lakefront lots, everyone shares the lake and its beach
area on an equal basis. The cluster type residential develop-
ment offers economy in street and utility layout, possibly
being large enough to utilize a package sewage treatment plant.
It also offers a degree of assurance that the lake will remain
unpolluted by non-functioning septic tanks. While shown on a
small lake, this type of development is possible on a large
lake by allowing several housing clusters at strategic spots
around the lake.

The problems involved in the success of this plan are
several. First would be public acceptance of the fact that

there are no lakefront lots. Secondly, for the plan to be

PLATE XI
SCHEMATIC LAKE DEV ELOPMENT

I
Q
.zzthhouse
II- oved
=ch ‘Q
L

, R
*.‘f£l$‘7
\x flww
Dram“

Source: C. R. Humphrys, "Michigan's Many Jewels, Trend Tb
Artificial Lakes Grows As Demand for Shore Lots
Peaks," Reprint from Michigan Challengg, VOl. 3
No. 31, (April 1963), p. 2.

 

Gerald H. Matthews
July 1964

-89-

-90..
successful, control of the entire lake would be necessary.
This control would permit complete control of both land and
water use of the lake, but would be difficult to achieve un-
less through private ownership of the entire lake. One solu-
tion would be to purchase development rights of the lake prop-
erty, possibly allowing limited private cottages along the
lakeshore. A plan of this type raises the question of whether
it makes the highest and best use of the land around the lake.
The pressures for development of waterfront lands continually
increase, with most of it directed to lakefront lots. As
more lakes are rendered undesirable by current development
patterns however, a cluster type development on lakes may be-

come popular.

10.

ll.

12.

-91...

Footnotes

 

Gerald E. Eddy, "Boating - Boon or Bust?," Michigan Con-
servation, (July-August 1963), p. 5.

 

 

Michigan, Boating Control Committee, "First Annual Report,"
(unpublished paper; August 20, 1963), pp. 1-2.

Ibid., pp. 3"“.

"How To Get Better Land For Less And How To Use Good Land
Bettez," Reprint from House And Home, (August 1960),
p. 16 b.

A. Allen Schmid, Michigan water Use And Develgpment Prob-
lems, Circular Bulletin 230” Agricultural Experiment
SEation, Department of Agricultural Economics (Michi-
gan State university, E. Lansing: 1961), p. 19.

watgrfronts: PlanninglFor Resort and Residential Uses,
Planning AdviSory Serviceifieport No. 118, American
Society of Planning Officials, (Chicago: 1959), p. 26.
See also: James J. Truncer, "A Brief Look At Artificial
Beach Development In Michigan," Unpublished paper for
The Department of Resource DeveIOpment, (Michigan State
university, E. Lansing: March 14, 1961) and W. Turner
wallace and Associates, A Practical Method For The Con-
trol of Bayfills, (Tallahassee, Florida: n.d.7.

A. Allan Schmid, op. cit., pp. 18-19.

C. R. Humphrys, ”Artificial Lakes," Reprint from The Mich-
igan Economic Record,.Vol. 4, No. 3, (March: 1962),
Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Michigan
State University, E. Lansing, p. 2.

 

Ibid.

Michigan, State of, "Construction of Dams," Excerpts from
Act 156, Public Acts of 1851.

Michigan, State of, "Dam Construction Approval Act," Act.
184, Public Acts of 1963.

"Vacation Homes: An Exploding Market Takes On A New Shape,"
House And Home, (Feb. 1964), pp. 109-110.

 

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS

 

The heavy increase in residential and other forms of
deve10pment on inland lake shorelines has stemmed primarily
from a higher interest in water-oriented recreation and a
way of life enabling people to spend more time and money on
it. There have always been a few peOple rich enough to af-
ford a cottage on some lake, thus the concept is not new.

The differnce today lies in the large number of people, not
"rich", but who can afford a summer cottage within a few hours
drive of their home. In addition to cottage owners there are
those who desire to live on a lake within commuting distance
of a satisfactory job. Those owning cottages often enjoy it
so much they make it their permanent home. It is these var-
ious types of individuals or family groups which are invading
waterfront property, on large lakes and small. As a majority
of inland lakes are outside metropolitan areas, deve10pment
controls are partially or totally lacking. Haphazard deve10p-
ment disfigures the waterfront and creates problems of over-
crowded land and water, poor land development practices, an
undesirable pattern of mixed land uses, irregular street sizes
and patterns, sanitation, and lack of public access to water.

Development problems on waterfront property are basically
the same as for residential development occurring in non-lake-
front areas. It does involve however, some additional problems

which are unique because of the water. It has become apparent

~92-

-93...

that regulations written to control the deve10pment of land
must involve the relationship of land to water, and the re-
verse is equally true. Many current subdivision regulations
and zoning ordinances have little or no reference to water-
front property and its relation to the water. MMch of this

is due to the complex water-rights doctrine in Michigan, which
at present is not stable enough for either land owners or gov-
ernment officials to be sure of what is legal. A comprehen-
sive set of water laws for the State of Michigan is necessary
to serve as an aid in drafting subdivision regulations, zon-
ing ordinances and other local controls pertaining to water-
front property.

Any regulations on waterfront property should involve
some thought as to what the lake is best suited for. Lakes
with adequate size, good beaches and water quality are more
suited to a resort type development than private residences.
Small lakes with limited beaches and heavily weeded would be
more suited to private residential development. Additional
research is needed on waterfront development before completely
accurate decisions can be made in this area of planning.

Even without this research however, current regulations deal-
ing with waterfront property should reflect some thought as
to what the maximum usage of the lake is.

Through the analysis of development problems on Hess
Lake and further problems discussed in Chapter V it is ap-
’parent that some course ofemtion must be taken if these prob-

lems are to be remedied. Ideally a planning proposal

...9L|...

for action to insure a desirable development on an inland
lake such as Hess Lake must include action at two levels of
government; State and local.

The State has a high interest in inland lakes because a
majority of them are public and they are a definite asset as
tourist attractions. For these reasons the State should take
the following action to enable local governments to better
plan for waterfront development:

(1) Adopt state legislation firmly establishing a ri-
parian owner's rights to land above water, submerged
lands, and consumptive and non-consumptive uses Of
the water itself.

(2) Adopt legislation permitting local governments to
establish a legal sea level elevation for lake wa-
ter level, thiselevation remaining permanent in
spite of fluctuating water levels. This elevation
could be referred to in drafting local ordinances.

(3) Conduct studies on the various types of lakes in the
state and to what type of development they are best
suited.

(4) Initiate surveys on the quantity and quality of use
different types of lakes can support.

This legislation and information is necessary in order
for local governments to more effectively plan for the de-
velopment of their waterfront lands.

At the local level there are several proposals which,

by receiving immediate attention, would alleviate current and

-95-

near-future problems. These proposals are only the first

phase of a long range planning program designed to ultimate-

ly arrive at a complete planning program.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Establishment of a lega1_water level under Act 146,
Public Acts of 1961. This must be done, where pos-
sible, in conjunction with other lakes in the same
watershed where levels may affect both lakes. It
must be done by the people living around the lakes,
working with the township and county.

Township adoption of at least minimum standards set
forth in the County Sanitary Code.

Adoption of a subdivision ordinance which would in-
clude a minimum lot size with local option to in-
crease it if soil conditions warrant it, and ade-
quate subdivision design featuring the best use of
waterfront and inland property. It must also cover
the possibility of dredge and fill operations ocur-
ring.

Coordination of established legal water levels with
county and township codes and ordinances.
Consistent enforcement of above improved codes and
ordinances.

Initiation of a program educating the people of the
county on the function and purpose of a planning
program, accomplished jointly through township and
officials.

following second stage proposals would be initiated

-96...

at such time as the population around the lake and remainder
of the township could financially support an active planning
program. It would also require the cooperation of two town-
ships working together, as Hess, like many other lakes, cross-
es political boundaries.

(1) Creation of a planning commission at the township
level.

(2) [pdate subdivision regulations to include lot size
requirements depending on soil conditions.

(3) Formulation of a master plan for the development of
the township, including lakefront property. The
treatment of each lake would vary according to type
of lake and what type of use it is best suited for,
and the amount of development it can support.

(4) Adoption of a zoning ordinance to support the master
plan. Pertaining to lakes it must clearly specify
the relation and boundaries of land zoning to the
water and submerged lands. It would also refer to
the legal level of the lake in defining zones.

(5) Continuation of educational programs to promote
planning.

When these second phase proposals can be carried out will
depend on how hard local officials work to promote planning.
Before a program can be successfully initiated the people
must be ready for it. The formulation of a master plan for
the development of waterfront property, in addition to making

the township eligible for Federal funds in future community

-97..

projects, is a sound way in which a community can assure
that it's future growth will have some guidance.

It must be remembered that complete control of all de—
velopment is not needed, nor is it desirable. What is needed
is more thought and effort applied to what type of waterfront
development is desirable. Michigan's inland lakes are val-
uable to those who wish to own property there, to those who
only wish to use it occasionally, and to the State as an as-
set in it's tourist industry. The type of development which
should take place on the lands surrounding Michigan's lakes
must reflect all interests if full benefit is to be derived
from the lakes themselves. Natural inland lakes are not in-
exhaustable in supply. Their shorelines, once developed in

a haphazard manner, are lost forever.

APPENDIX A .

Excerpts from ACT 273, PUBLIC ACTS OF MICHIGAN 1939

Excerpts from A REGULATION PERTAINING To THE
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF "OUTHOUSES"
AND TO SAFEGUARD THE PUBLIC HEALTH BY PREVEN-
TING THE SPREAD OP‘DISEASE AND THE EXISTENCE
OF SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ACT NO. 273, P. A. 1939 (Michigan)

-98-

-99...

EXCERPTSFROM
ACT N0. 273, P. A. OF 1939 (Michigan)

AN ACT to protect the public health; to regulate the storage
and diaposition of sewage; to empower the state commis-
sioner of health to make rules in regard thereto; and to
prescribe penalties for the violation of the provisions
of this act and said rules.

The People of the State of Michigan enact:

Section 1. It is hereby declared to be unlawful for any
person, firm, association or corporation to maintain, or to
permit to be maintained, on premises owned or controlled by
such person any outhouse unless the same shall be kept at all
times in a sanitary condition, and constructed and maintained
in such manner as not to injure or endanger the public health.
The term "outhouse" as used herein shall be conStrued to mean
a building or other structure not connected with a sewerage
system or with.properly installed and operated sewage dispo-
sal system, and which is used for the reception, diaposition
or storage, either temporarily or permanently, of feces or
other excreta from the human body.

Cocoa-00.000.000.000

Section 4. Nothing herein contained shall apply to any
outhouse located outside the corporate limits of any city or
village, which is more than 200 yards from a residence other
than the residence the outhouse serves, or more than 200
yards of any store, restaurant or other place where food,
milk or drink is served, stored or prepared for human con-
sumption, or more than 200 yards of any building used for
public lodging or place where drinking water is offered to
the traveling public, or more than 200 yards of a public
gathering place.

~100-

EXCERPTS FROM

A REGULATION PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
OF "OUTHOUSES" AND TO SAFEGUARD THE PUBLIC HEALTH BY PREVEN-
TING THE SPREAD OF DISEASE AND THE EXISTENCE OF SOURCES OF
CONTAMINATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT NO. 273, P. A. 1939
(Michigan)

 

SECTION 1. Principles

All "outhouses", buildings or other structures
which are not connected with a sewerage system or with a
properly installed and operated sewage disposal system, and
which are used for the reception, disposition or storage,
either temporarily or permanently, of feces or other excreta
from the human body, shall be constructed and maintained in
such manner as to conform at all times to the following:

b. Location of Recgptacle. -- The receptacle shall be so
located as to prevent the pollution of private and pub-
lic water supplies, lakes or streams; the overftow of the
contents to the surrounding ground; and the flow of sur-
face water into the receptacle. The receptacle should be
convenient and accessible to use.

 

.......-00.000.000.000...

SECTION 2. Minimum standards for earth-pit "Outhouses" shall
be as follows:

a. Location. -- The pit should be located 100 feet or more
from any well or other source of ground water supply and
upon ground sloping away from the water supply, and shall
never be located less than 75 feet therefrom without spe-
cial approval of the Commissioner of the Michigan Depart-
ment of Health. Provided, however, that no pit shall be
located within 200 feet of any source of ground water used
for a municipal water supply. No pit shall be located less
than 2 feet from any lot or alley line or less than 25 feet
from any lake or stream. In areas underlaid by limestone,
or where fissured rock formations are common, or whenever
ground water is encountered in the construction of the pit,
approval of the construction and location of the pit based
upon special investigation of the conditions must be ob-
tained from the Commissioner of the Michigan Department of
Health.

APPENDIX B

ACT 1.46, PUBLIC ACTS OF MICHIGAN 1961
Inland Lake Level Act of 1961

 

Outline of Procedures under
Act 146, Public Acts of Michi-
gan 1961

~101-

l~62

-102-
INLAND LAKE LEVELS

ACT 1A6, P.A. 1961

AN ACT to provide for the determination and maintenance of the normal
height and level of the waters in inland lakes of this state, for the protection
of the public health, safety and welfare and the conservation of the natural
resources of this state; to authorize the building and maintenance of dams and
embankments to acbomplish such purposes; to authorize the acquisition of lands
and other property by gift, grant, purchase or condemnation proceedings; to
. authorize the acceptance of gifts and grants of funds for the construction and
amaintenance of such dams and embankments; to authorize the raising of money by
-taxation and by Special assessments for the purposes of this act; to prescribe
the duties and powers of boards of supervisors, the conservation department of
Michigan and county drain commissioners with reference hereto; and to repeal
certain acts and parts of acts.

The People of the State of Michigan enact:

281.61 TITLE 0? ACT.

Sec. 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the "inland lake
level act of 1961”

281.62 DEFINITIONS.

Sec. 2. As used in this act:

(a) Normal water level of any inland lake, natural or artificial, is
such a level as, considering the height above sea level, established by government
‘survsys; the high water line as disclosed by old surveys; testimony of old in-
habitants; the extent to which drainage and other artificial causes have decreased
the natural ground water table of the areas; the extent to which natural causes
have either decreased or increased the natural ground water table; and all other
pertinent surrounding facts and circumstances, will provide the most benefit to
the public and best protect the public health, welfare and safety and which will
best preserve the natural resources of the state, and preserve and protect the
values of prOperties deveIOped around said lake as a result of the creation of
the normal level.

(b) Dams mean dams, embankments, dikes, pumps, weirs, locks, gates,
tubes, ditches or any other devices or construction to keep and maintain the
waters in lakes at normal height and level.

(c) A public inland lake is any lake which is accessible to the public
via public owned lands, waters or highways contiguous thereto, or via the bed of
a navigable stream and which may be used for navigation, fishing, hunting or other
lawful purpose and reasonably capable of supporting a beneficial public interest,
except the Great Lakes and connecting waters.

-1-

~103-

(d) A private inland lake is any inland lake other than a public
inland lake. .

(e) Department means the county drain commissioner or the county road
commission in counties not having a drain commissioner; and if more than 1 county
is involved the combined drain commissioners or drain commissioner and road
commission in counties having no drain commissioner. -

(f) Interested person is any person who has a record interest in the
title to, right of ingress to or reversionary right to a piece or parcel of land
which would be affected by a permanent change in the natural or normal level
.of a natural or artificial public or private inland lake, and in all cases, whether
having such interest or not, the Michigan department of conservation shall be an
'interested person.

(g) Conservation department is the state conservation department.

281.63 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, BY MOTION OR BY PETITION, CAUSE DETERMINATION
OF NOW LISVHO, AND FMINTAIN BY DMS, ‘Jl-IJIJS, 0R PWAPSO_

Sec. 3. The conservation department or the board of supervisors of
any county in which the whole or any part of the waters of any inland lake is
situated, upon its own motion or by a petition to the board of 2/3 of the free-
holders owning lands abutting the lake, for the protection of the public health,
welfare and safety and the conservation of the natural resources of this state,
or to preserve prOperty values around a lake, may cause to be determined the
normal height and level of the waters in the inland lake, and construct and main-
tain sufficient dams to keep and maintain the water in the lake at its normal
height and level. The board may drill wells to supply a lake with additional
water in order to raise the level thereof or pump water from some other source,
or in case it is necessary to lower the level thereof may arrange for the pumping
of water from the lake.

"281.64 DEPOSIT FOR scammed COST.

Sec. 4. The board of supervisors, by resolution, may require a cash
deposit sufficient to cover the preliminary costs when a petition is received
from.frecholders before further proceedings are undertaken pursuant to the petition.

281.65 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO DETERMINE EXPEDIENCY, METHOD OF FINANCING; TO
DIRECT DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE NORMAL LEVEL AND ESTABLISH SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; TO DIRECT PROSECUTING ATTORNEY TO PETITION
CIRCUIT COURT. LAKE IN 2 OR MORE COUNTIES.

. Sec. 5. Whenever the board Of supervisors cf any county deems it
expedient to have determined and established the normal height and level of the

’4'

.lu-e .i

-104-

waters in any inland lake situated in the county, the board, by resolution, shall
determine the expediency of and the method of financing the initial costs and
maintenance of any project at a regular or special meeting, and direct the depart-
ment to determine the normal level of the lake and to establish a special assess-
ment district if required. '

The board shall also direct the prosecuting attorney of the cOunty to
' institute by proper petition in the circuit court of the county a proceeding for
determination. ..

When the waters of any inland lake are situated in 2 or more counties,
‘the normal height and level of the waters of such lakes may be determined in the
same manner if the boards of supervisors of all counties involved determine it
to be expedient and by resolution may direct the department and prosecuting
fttorney of 1 or more counties to institute proceedings.

$81.66 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS, LAKE LEVEL ORDERS, PROCEDURE.

. Sec. 6. The special assessment district may issue bonds or lake level
orders in anticipation of special assessments. All proceedings relating to the
making, levying and collection of Special assessments herein authorized and the
issuance of bonds or lake level orders in anticipation of the collection thereof
shall conform as near as may be to the proceedings for levying special assessments
and issuing special assessment bonds or lake level orders as set forth in Act No.
to of the Public Acts of 1956, as amended, being sections 280.1 to 280. 623 of the

Compiled Laws of 19h8.
281.67 TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES, PROCEDURE.

Sec. 7. The special assessment district may issue tax anticipation notes
subject to the provisions of Act No..202 of the Public Acts of 19h3, as amended,
being sections 131.1 to 138.2 of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

281.68 CONSERVATION COMMISSION INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS.

Sec. 8. If the conservation department deems it expedient to have the
normal height and level of any inland lake determined, the conservation commission
shall by resolution authorize the director to institut by proper petition on
behalf of the state, in the circuit court of any county in which the lake or any
part is situated, a proceeding for determination. The conservation department may
likewise join with the board of superv1sors of any counties of the state in in-
stituting proceedings for determination as set forth in this act.

281.69 DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE NORMAL LEVEL, ESTABLISH ASSESSMENT DISTRICT,
PREPARE DATA, CUNSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN PROJECT. .

Sec. 9. The department, when instructed by resolution of the board of
supervisors shall determine the normal level of any private and public inland
lakes in its county and establish a special assessment di trict including therein
all parcels of land and political subdivisions which are benefited by the
establishment of a lake level. The board of supervisors may delegate to the

-3-

-105-

department such other ministerial duties including preparation, assembling and
computation of statistical data for use by the board and the superintending,
construction and maintenance of any project under this act.

281.70 HEARING. PROSECUTOR TO PUBLISH NOTICE, COPY TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND
CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT. COURT DETERMINE LEVEL AND DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL.

Sec. 10. Upon receipt of petitions filed under this act the court shall
Afix a day of hearing, Shall direct the prosecuting attorney or the conservation
department to give notice thereof by publication in l or more newspapers of general
circulation in the county, and if the waters of the inland lake are Situated in 2
or more counties, in l or more newspapers in general circulation in each of the
counties in which the lake or any part thereof is situated. The notice shall be
published at least once each week for 6 successive weeks prior to the date fixed
for the hearing. The court shall direct that copies of the published notice of
hearing shall be served by certified mail at least 3 weeks prior to the date set
for hearing to each person whose name appears upon the latest city or township

tax assessment roll as owning lands within the Special assessment district, at the
address shown on the roll. If no address appears thereon then no notice need be
mailed to the person. The department shall make an affidavit of mailing. The
failure to receive any notice prOperly mailed Shall not constitute a jurisdictional
defect invalidating proceedings under this act. The prosecuting attorney shall
also serve notice on the conservation department.

The court shall hear proofs and allegations of all parties interested
and shall consider and review the description of lands within the special assess-
ment district. The court Shall determine the level to be established and main-
tained and may provide for departure from the normal level as may be necessary to
accomplish the purposes of this act.

281.71 BOARD ACQUIRE DAMS, SITES, RIGHTS BY GIFT, GRANT, PURCHASE, CONDEMNATION;
CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN DAM; DAM IN ADJOINING COUNTY.

Sec. 11. The board of supervisors of any county in which the whole or
any portion of the waters of any inland lake are situated may acquire in the name
of the county, by gift, grant, purchase or by condemnation proceedings any exist~
ing dam which may affect the level of the waters in the lake and any or all Sites
for dams or interests and rights in land needed or convenient in order to carry
out the purposes of this act, and may proceed to construct and maintain any dam
that may be determined by the board to be necessary for the purpose of maintaining
the normal height and level of the waters of any lake as provided in section 3.

A dam may be constructed and maintained in a county next adjoining the
county in which the lake or part thereof is located.

281.72 CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT ACQUIRE DAMS, SITES, RIGHTS DY GIFT, GRANT,
PURCHASE, CONDEMNATION; CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN DAM.

Sec. 12. The conservation department may acquire in the name of the
state by gift, grant, purchase or by condemnation proceedings any existing dam

-4;

-106-

‘which may affect the level of the waters in any inland lake, and may acquire by such
:means any or all Sites for dams and rights in land needed or convenient in order to
carry out the purpose of this act and may proceed to construct and maintain any dam
that may be determined by the commission to be necessary for the purpose of
maintaining the normal height and level of any inland lake.

281.73 NAVIGAEIE STREAMS, DAMS.

Sec. 13. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to alter, limit,
abridge or amend the proviSIOns of law applicable to the location, construction
and maintenance of dams in navigable streams or provide for the determination,
establishment or maintenance of the level of waters impounded by such dams.

281.7h CONDEMNATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.

. Sec. 14. The board of supervisors of any county in this state or the
conservation department, within the limitations of the state constitution, may
take private property for the uses or purposes specified in this act and to insti—
tute and prosecute proceedings fer that purpose.

281.75 CONDEMNATION PROCEDURE.

Sec. 15. Whenever the conservation department or the board of supervisors
of any county in the state determines by proper resolution that it is necessary to
condemn private property for the purpose of this act the condemnation proceedings
shall be commenced and conducted in accordance with the provisions of law applicable
to the taking of private property for highway purposes by the state, or chapter 20
or chapter 21 of Act No. A0 of the Public Acts of 1956, as amended, being section
280. A61 to section 280. 538, inclusive, of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

281. 76 GIFTS, GRANTS IN AID TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

Sec. 16. The board of supervisors of any county of this state in which
is situated, wholly or in part, the waters of any inland lake may receive and accept
in the name of the county, gifts or grants in aid for the purpose of carrying out
the provisions of this act, from persons and from other governmental units. If
the waters of the inland lake are situated in.2 or more counties, gifts and grants
in aid shall be apportioned to the respective counties as the facts may require
and as determined by the donor or grantor.

281.77 GIFTS, GRANTS IN AID T0 CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT.

.380. 17. The conservation department in carrying out the purposes of this
act may receive and accept, on behalf of the state, gifts and grants in aid from
persons and other governmental units.

-107-
281.78 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS BY REGISTERED ENGINEER, BIDS, WORK RELIEF PROJECT.

Sec. 18. Whenever the board of supervisors causes to be constructed and
- maintained a dam as may have been determined to be necessary, plans and speci-
. fications therefor shall be prepared by a registered engineer under the direction
of the board and bids may be advertised for the doing of the work in such manner

as the board shall direct by resolution. The contract shall be let to the lowest
' responsible bidder giving adequate security for the performance of his contract
but the board may reserve the right to reject any and all bids. The board may
erect and maintain a dam as a work relief project in accordance with the provisions
of the law applicable thereto. -

3281.79 ASSESSING-AND LEVYING PROJECT COST As GENERAL TAx ON COUNTY.

, ‘ Sec. 19. If the board of supervisors alone conducts the proceedings
under this act, the expense of determining the normal height and water level of
any public inland lake, the expense of constructing and maintaining any dam, to-
gether with the cost and expense of sequiring lands and other prOperty by con-
demnation necessary thereto, may be assessed, levied and collected upon the taxable
property of the county, the same as other general taxes are assessed, levied and
collected in such county.

281.80 DEPARTMENT TO COMPUTE PROJECT COST, ITEMS INCLUDED. -

Sec. 20. Within 10 days after the letting of contracts, or in case of
an appeal, then forthwith after the appeal has been decided the department shall
make a com taticn of the entire cost of a project under this act, which shall
include (1 all the eXpense of laying out and designating the special assessment
districts, which item of expense shall include the entire cost of the survey; (2)
the expense of locating, establishing and constructing of any dam Or embankments;
(3) the fees and expenses.o£.special commissioners; (h) the compensation to be
paid the board of review; (5) the cost of construction of bridges and culverts;
(6) the contracts for the construction of a dam, or other work to be done on the
project; (7) the estimated cost of an appeal if the apportionment made by the
department is not sustained; (8) the estimated cost of inspection; (9) the cost
of publishing all notices required; (10) all costs of the circuit court; (11)
attorney fees for legal services in connection with the project; and (12) interest
on bonds for the first year, if bonds are to be issued. The department may add not
less than 10% nor more than 15% of the gross sum to cover contingent expenses, and
the entire sum so ascertained shall be deemed to be the cost of the project to
establish a lake level.

281.81 PUBLIC LAKE, CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT MAY JOIN BOARD AND MAY INTERVENE;
MAY REQUIRE FISH LADDERS; ASSISTANCE BY CONsERVATION DEPARTMENT 1N
PREPARATION OF DATA. '

- _Sec. 21. If the lake is a public lake, the conservation department may
Join with any board of supervisors in the proceedings thereafter taken and may
intervene for the protection and conservation of the natural resources of the state.
‘Nhenever the lake is‘a public inland lake and proceedings are commenced for the
purpose of determination and maintenance of the normal height and level thereof by
' a board of supervisors of any county, the conservation department shall aid and

-5-

-108-

assist in the preparation and presentation of the information, facts and data ,
necessary under the provisions of this act. The conservation department may require
the installation of fish ladders or other devices to permit the free passage of
fish. " . .

281.82 UNAUTHORIZED CHANGE OELEVEL, PENALTY.

Sec. 22. Any unauthorized person who changes the level of any lake, the
level of which has been established under the provisions of this act, is guilty of
a misdemeanor and may be fined not to exceed 81, 000. 00 or imprisoned not to exceed
1 1 year in the county jail or both.

7: 281.83 ARTIFICIAL LAKE FOR MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY.

' Sec. 23. No normal water level shall be established under this act for
an artificial lake created for the purpose of providing a reservoir for a municipal
water supply system unless petitioned for by the governing body of the municipality.

281.8h ANNUAL INSPECTION; MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR LESS THAN $500.00.

Sec. 2h. The department of each county shall make an annual inspection
of all inland lakes within the county which have a normal level established under'
this act or any previous act governing lake levels. Whenever inspection discloses
the necessity, the department without petition may expend an amount not to exceed
$500.00 for maintenance and repair of each lake level project.; If the funds of the
department are not sufficient to meet this expenditure the department shall charge
the special assessment district therefor according to benefits received.

281.85 MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR IN EXCESS OF 8500. 00, PROCEDURE.

Sec. 25. The procedure for repairs, maintenance, reconstruction, re-
locating, enlarging or altering of lake level projects established under this act
or prior acts in excess of $500.00, shall be the same as that for the establishment
of a normal lake level as set forth in this act. .

281.86 ACTS REPEALED, CONTINUATION 0F PROCEEDINGS COMMENCED.

Sec. 26. Act No. 377 of the Public Acts of 1921, being sections 281.1
to 281.30 of the Compiled Laws of 1948, Act No. 39 of the Public Acts of 1937,
being sections 281.51 to 281.57 of the Compiled Laws of l9h8, Act No. 19A of the
Public Acts of 1939, as amended, being sections 281.101 to 231.121 of the Compiled
Laws of 1948, Act No. 319 of the Public Acts of 19Al, being sections 281.151 to
281.157 of the Compiled Laws of.l9A8 and Act No. 276 of the Public Acts of l9h5,
as amended, being sections 281.201 to 281.227 of the Compiled Laws of 1948, are
hereby repealed, except that actions and petitions to establish and maintain an
inland lake level now in process may be concluded under those acts or commenced
under this act.

~109-

ACT NO. 25
PUBLIC ACTS OF MICHIGAN 1962

An Act to amend sections 3, 5, and 9 of Act No. 186 of
the Public Acts of 1961, entitled "An act to provide for the
determination and maintenance of the normal height and level
of the waters in inland lakes of this state, for the protec-
tion of the public health, safety and welfare and the conser-
vation of the natural resources of this state; to authorize
the building and maintenance of dams and embankments to ac-
complish such purposes; to authorize the acquisition of lands
and other property by gift, grant, purchase or condemnation
proceedings; to authorize the acceptance of gifts and grants
of funds for the construction and maintenance of such dams
and embankments; to authorize the raising of money by taxa-
tion and by special assessments for the purposes of this act;
to prescribe the duties and powers of boards of supervisors,
the conservation department of Michigan and county drain com-
missioners with reference hereto; and to repeal certain acts
and parts of acts," being sections 281.63, 281.65 and 281.69
of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

The PeOple of the State of Michigan enact:

Section 1. Sections 3, 5, and 9 of Act No. 186 of the
Public Acts of 1961, being sections 281.63, 281.65 and 281.69
of the Compiled Laws of 1948, are hereby amended to read as
follows:

Sec. 3. The conservation department or the board of su-
pervisors of any county in which the whole or any part of the
waters of any inland lake is situated, may upon its own mo-
tion or shall by a petition to the board of 2/3 of the free-
holders owning lands abutting the lake, for the protection of
the public health, welfare and safety and the conservation of
the natural resources of this state, or to preserve property
values around a lake, cause to be determined the normal height
and level of the waters in the inland lake, and construct and
maintain sufficient dams to keep and maintain the water in the
lake at its normal height and level. The board may drill wells
to supply a lake with additional water in order to raise the
level thereof or pump water from some other source, or in case
it is necessary to lower the level thereof may arrange for the
pumping of water from the lake.

Sec. 5. Whenever the board of supervisors of any county
deems it expedient to have determined and established the nor-
mal height and level of the waters in any inland lake situat-
ed in the county, the board, by resolution, shall determine
the expediency of and the method of financing the initial
costs and maintenance of any project at a regular or Special
meeting, and direct the department to determine the tentative
normal level of the lake and to establish a Special assessment
district if required.

The board shall also direct the prosecuting attorney of

~110-

the county to institute by proper petition in the circuit
court of the county a proceeding for determination.

When the waters of any inland lake are situated in 2 or
more counties, the normal height and level of the waters of
such lakes may be determined in the same manner if the boards
of supervisors of all counties involved determine it to be
expedient and by resolution may direct the department and pros-
ecuting attoney of l or more counties to institute proceedings.

Sec. 9. The department, when instructed by resolution
of the board of supervisors shall determine the tentative nor-
mal level of any private and public inland lakes in its county
and establish a special assessment district including therein
all parcels of land and political subdivisions which are ben-
efited by the establishment of a lake level. The board of su-
pervisors may delegate to the department such other ministeri-
al duties including preparation, assembling and computation
of statistical data for use by the board and the superintending,
construction and maintenance of any project under this act.

-lll-

ACT NO. 203
PUBLIC ACTS OF MICHIGAN 1962

. An Act to amend Act No. 146 of the Public Acts of 1961,
ent1tled "An act to provide for the determination and main-
tenance of the normal height and level of the waters in in-
land lakes of this state, for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare and the conservation of the natural
resources of this state; to authorize the building and main-
tenance of dams and embankments to accomplish such purposes;
to authorize the acquisition of lands and other property by
glft, grant, purchase or condemnation proceedings; to author-
1ze the acceptance of gifts and grants of funds for the con-
struction and maintenance of such dams and embankments; to
authorize the raising of money by taxation and by special as-
sessments for the purposes of this act; to prescribe the du-
ties and powers of boards of supervisors, the conservation
department of Michigan and county drain commissioners with
reference hereto; and to repeal certain acts and parts of
acts," being sections 281.61 to 281.86 of the Compiled Laws
of 19MB, by adding a new section 25a.

The People of the State of Michigan Enact:

Section 1. Act No. 146 of the Public Acts of 1961, being
sections 281.61 to 281.86 of the Compiled Laws of 19h8, is
hereby amended by adding a new section 25a to read as follows:

Sec. 25a. Whenever any person desires to construct an
artificial lake of more than 5 acres or to substantially alter
any existing waterway, he shall petition the board of super—
fisors of each county in which the lake or any portion is to
be situated for a permit. The application shall be accompanied
by detailed plans and Specifications. ‘As a condition of the
permit, where a lake is created, the board shall require the
applicant to petition for the establishment of a normal lake
level under this act. The board shall request the department
to establish a special assessment district for future ma1n-
tenance expenses of such lake level. When the Special assess-
ment district has been approved by the court the department
shall record the order with the register of deeds.

This act is ordered to take immediate effect.

R.

~112.
STABILIZING INLAND LAKE LEVELS

OUTLINE OF PROCEDURES UNDER
ACT I46. PUBLIC ACTS I96I

Coordinated by

EICIIEERIIIC AIID ARCHITECTURE
mousm assumes! or CONSERVATION
LIAIIIO 20. IICHIOA'

COWENOE PROCEEDINGS

By voluntary notiul of the County Board of Supervisors or 'by petition of 2/3 of frontage owners (Sec.
3.Aat146)

' Suple petitions available upon request from Engineering and Architecture, Michigan Department of Con;

servation.

Enlist the cooperation of your local township supervisor to introduce the resolutions to the Board of

Supervisors.

In organised Lake Improvement Association can accomplish much more. than individual property owners to

. prevail on the Board of Supervisors to act or to prepare and present a petition to the Board.

IOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTIONS

Board passes multiple resolution -- 4 parts required (Sec. 5), 2 parts optional (Sec. 4 and Sec. 21).

’ Reggired:

(a) Determine the expedience of establishing a nomal lake level.

(b) Detenine the method of financing.

(c) Direct the (drain connissioner) department to determine (recs-mend) the normal level and estab-
lish an assessment district. if required.

(d) Direct the prosecuting attorney to institute a proceeding for determination (establishment of
normal lake level).

tional:

(a) Require a cash deposit to cover initial costs (Sec. 4).

(b) quuest the Department of Conservation to assist with the preliminary investigation (Sec. 21).
A request fun the drain comissioner for assistance will also be honored. Submit requests to
Engineering and Architecture, Michigan Department of Conservation.

(c) Notify Michigan Department of Conservation when Board tdces action. whether assistmce is re-
quested or not.

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION, RECOIHEND LEVELkASSESSIIENT DISTRICT

Drain (hmissioner is delegated to make an investigation to determine lake levels and set up an as-
sessment district including all properties benefited (Sec. 9, Act 146). He may engage an engineer to
assist him. Department of Conservation is authorised to aid and assist with an engineering investiga-
tim, including height above sea level, if the lake is a public lake. The Drain Cunissioner should
advise Engineering and Architecture, Michigan Department of Conservation, as to the extent of assist-
ance he needs. The County Bead Canission 1s delegated to act in counties having no Drain Co-issioner.

IEAnlne IN count, PUBLICATION AID NOTICES (arc. IQ)

(a) (h completion of preliminary investigation by the Drain Comissioner, the prosecuting uttorney
petitions the Circuit Court to set a date for hearing.

(b) Publish notice of hearing in newspaper 6 consecutive weeks.

(c) Three weeks prior to hearing, notify each owner of property in the ’assessment district.

(d) Drain Comissioner lakes affidavit of mailing notices.

(e) Prosecutor serves notice on Conservation Department. Address notice to Secretary of the
Conservation Co-ission.

1.

II-

INFOIIAL NEANINS OI SNOOP IEETINSS

 

Schedule infernal public hearings to enplain the procedures .d outline the benefits of lake level
stabilisatia to interested parties prior to the court hearing. This is not stipulated by Act 146,
but c- p'ovide all eacerued with a better understanding of the proposal before. it is e-siderud

bytkeCourt.

Suck neetings are alnost a necessity to nininise opposition to the project.

TIE CIRCUIT COUIT JUOCE IETEIIINES TIE LANE LEVEL (SEC. IO)

 

Decent. ndalytkecourt. deter-inesthelake levelorlevelsthstarutobeestfiliskud-d-in
taind after he has heard all the facts and testinooy fron interested pcties.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS NAINTAINS TIE LEVEL (SECSigjl 1 AN. l1)

(s) The Bond of Supervisors nay authorise the coustructiu necessary to naintain tb lie loveles-

tablished by Circuit Court (Sec. 3)

I

(b) The Board nay delegate ninisterial duties to the (Drain Cs—issioner) depart-ht. incldm mer-S
visia. castruction ad naiatennce of lake level control facilities (Sec. 9).

TIE DRAIN LAI’NAY NE APPLIED FOR FINANCING (SEC. 9)

The M C_issioner) depart-cot nay follow the provisions of the Drain has. Act n, Mlic Acts of
1956, a near a it applies for fin-icing lake level control projects.

COSTS IAV IE SPREAD ON COUNTY (SEC. IO)

h the wtia of the Board of Supervisors, the cost of deter-ining, establishing .d nintaining the
level of a public lake nay be assessed, levied and collected q):- the tanable property of the oo-ty.

PLANS, sun: All colTIAcT: (are. I8)

Pl-s ad specifications for cmstruction of due or other cmtrol facilities nust be prepared by a
registered civil engineer under the direction of the Board of Supervisors. Bids nd can-acts are

depudent ou resolutions by the Board of Supervisors.
CflggENVATION DEPARTMENT IAV PROCEED UNDER ACT INC

The Cuservatim Depart-ant is authorised to follow procedures sinilar to those outlined above for
local county authorities, but funds have never been nude available for financing oustructial to Iain-
tain legal nor-l levels. It has been necessary therefore for the depart-eat to nbpt a policy of not

udertaking lake level stabilisaticn projects, except in rare cases where the State is the scar of the

niority of lake fruit-gt.

1h C-nu'vatiou Depart-ant is authorised to provide the assistnce of its techical staff to local
.tboritioa .d to the court in public inlmd lake level stabilisatiu utters.

PENALTY EON CIANOINO TIE ESTABLISHED LANE LEVEL (SEC. 22)

by authorised perstn: who cbmges the established level of my lake shall be guilty of a lindelemor
.dnaybefinednottoexceedSl,000-1d/ornaybeinprisonednottoenceedlyear.

At: SIALL IoT cIAIeE AUTHORITY on NAVIOABLE STREAMS (sec. :3)

Co-ty Board of Supervisors still retains nthority over bridges ad (I. in navigable streus under

Act 156, Public Acts of 1851.
NEPEALS PIION INLAND LANE LEVEL ACTS (SEC. 33)

The following Acts were in effect prior to May 31, 1961. all were repealed by this Act: (a) Inland
Lake level Act 194. Public Acts 1939; (b) Panning later In and Out of Lib”. kt 319. Mlic AC”
1941; (c) Special Act for Counties over 100,000 and less than 1,000,0m populatia, Act 276, Public

Acts 1945.

Isl-1d lake bevel proceedings nuanced mder a prior Act nay be mleted der the provisions of that

Act or nay be co-enced under Act 146. EA. 1961.

" ‘ ‘ma. mu

Michigan Depart-ant of Conservation
Engineering and Architecture
Hathaway J. Hones, In (large
Lmsing 26, Michig-I

APPENDIX C

Excerpts from ACT IQO, PUBLIC ACTS OF MICHIGAN 1961

Inland Lake Improvement Act of 1961

 

-ll3-

~114-

EXCERPTS FROM

ACT NO. 140
PUBLIC ACTS OF MICHIGAN 1961

An Act to provide for the improvement of certain inland
lakes; to authorize dredging and the removal of undesirable
materials from lakes; to authorize the acquisition of lands and
other property by gift. grant, purchase or condemnation; to
authorize the raising of money by taxation and special assess-
ments for the purposes of this act; to provide for review and
appeal; to prescribe the duties and powers of boards of super-
visors, the conservation department of Michigan and county
drain commissioner.

The People of the State of Michigan enact:

Sec. 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the
"inland lake improvement act of 1961".

Sec. 2. As used in this act: '

(a)-"Public inland lake" means any lake which is access-
ible to the public via public owned lands, waters or highways
contiguous thereto, or via the bed of a navigable stream.and
which may be used for navigation, fishing, hunting or other
lawful purpose and reasonably capable of supporting a benefi-
cial public interest, except the Great Lakes and connecting
waters.

(b) "Private inland lake" means any inland lake other than
a public inland lake.

(c) "Department" means the county drain commissioner or
the-cOunty road commission in counties not having a drain com-
missioner, and if more than 1 county is involved, the combined
drain commissioners or drain commissioner and road commission
in counties having no drain commissioner.

(d) "Interested person" means any person who has a record
interest in the title to, right of ingress to or reversionary
right to a piece or parcel of land which would be affected by
a permanent change in the bottom land of a natural or artifi—
cial, public or private inland lake, or adjacent swampland,
and in all cases, whether having such interest or not, the
Michigan department of Conservation shall be an interested
person.

(e) "Conservation department" means the state conserva-
tion department.

Sec. 3. The conservation department or the board of su-
pervisors of any county in which the whole or any part of the
waters of any inland lake is situated, upon its own motion or
by petition of 2/3 of the freeholders owning lands abutting
the lake, for the protection of the public health, welfare
and safety and the conservation of the natural resources of
this state, or to preserve property values around a lake, may
provide for the improvement of a lake, or adjacent swampland,
and may take steps necessary to remove and properly diSpose

-115—

of undesirable accumulated materials from the bottom of the
lak: or swamp by dredging, ditching, digging or other related
wor .

Sec. 4. The board of supervisors, by resolution, may
require a cash deposit sufficient to cover the preliminary
costs when a petition is received from freeholders before
further proceedings are undertaken pursuant to the petition.

Sec. 5. Whenever the board of supervisors of any county
deems it expedient to have a lake improved, the board, by re-
solution, shall determine the expediency of and the method of
financing the initial costs and maintenance of any project to
improve a lake at a regular or Special meeting and direct the
department to establish a special assessment district.if re-
quired. ‘

When the waters of any inland lake are situated in 2 or
more counties, the improvement of such lake may be determined
in the same manner if the boards of supervisors of all counties
involved determine it to be expedient and, by resolution, may
direct the department of l or more counties to institute pro-
ceedings.

Sec. 6. If the conservation department deems it expedi-
ent to have a lake dredged or improved, it shall, by resolu-
tion, authorize the director to institute by prOper petition
to the board of supervisors on behalf of the state a proceed-
ing for an improvement of a lake. The conservation depart-
ment may likewise join with the board of supervisors of any
counties of the state in instituting proceedings for improve-
ments as set forth in this act. _

Sec. 7. The department, when instructed by resolution
of the board of supervisors, shall determine the scope of the
project and establish a special assessment district, includ-
ing therein all parcels of land and political subdivisions
which are benefited by the improvement of a lake. The board
of supervisors may delegate to the department such other min-
isterial duties including preparation, assembling and compu-
tation of statistical data for use by the board and the su-
perintending, construction and maintenance of any prOJect un-
der this act.

Sec. 8. After the establishment of the special assess-
ment district, the department Shall appoint a board of deter-
mination who shall determine the necessity of the project in
the same manner and in accordance with the procedure set forth
in section 72 of Act No. 40 of the Public Acts of 1956, as a-
mended, being section 280.72 of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

Sec. 18.. If the waters of any inland lake are public
waters, the conservation department may join with any board of
supervisors in the proceedings thereafter taken and may 1n-
tervene for the protection and conservation of the natural
resources of the state. Whenever the waters of any inland
lake are public waters and proceedings are commenced for the
purpose of dredging or otherwise improving a lake by the

~116-

board of superviSors of any county, the conservation depart-
ment shall aid and assist in the preparation and presentation
of the information, approve all plans and Specifications,
facts and data necessary under the provisions of this act,
and shall assist in the inSpection of the work to be perform-
ed. Whenever the conservation department or the board of
supervisors of any county initiate any action to improve a
lake for the protection of the public health, welfare, safety,
and the conservation of the natural resources, or to preserve
property values around a lake or provide for the improvement
of a lake or adjacent swampland, they must have the approval
of 2/3 of the freeholders in the assessment area if these
said freeholders might be or otherwise become subject to as-
sessment under this act or any other act.

This act is ordered to take immediate effect.

APPENDIX D

Bill of Rights of Elk-Skegemog Lakes Association

~117-

1.

2.

~118-

BILL OF RIGHTS
of
ELK-SKEGEMOG LAKES ASSOCIATION
We Believe That

a riparian owner is an owner of property abutting on any
lake or stream in Michigan.

the potential investment in summer residence property is

vital to the growing economy of the area. The current in-
vestment in water frontage in Michigan has never been ac-
curately computed. On Elk—Skegemog Lakes it is estimated
to be well in excess of ten million dollars in addition to
values for cottages, boats and other capital expenditures.

private water frontage prOperty owners have rights, title

and interest in

a. the upland purchased

b. bottomlands offshore

c. minerals under the surface water

d. ice

e. the use of water for drinking, cooking, washing, and
stock watering

f. trapping rights

g. use of surface water in common with other riparian ow-
ners .

h. exclusive use of beach.

Michigan has a long history of expansion of State control-
led water rights. The time is here when we should look at
and analyze the rights of the man who owns the abutting
property.

the State has no proprietary interest in surface water ex-
cept in those locations where the State owns frontage on a
lake or stream.

riparian owners should have the same right to develop their
property as upland owners. They should be perm1tted to de-
velop and use their bottom lands to full advantage.

present laws are available to protect water front owners
from over-zealous developers. Michigan will benefit most
by encouraging investment in water frontage. Because of
the wide variation in the physical nature of our lakes
and streams it is extremely doubtful if state-wide laws
would prove equitable.

the rights of private water frontage owners are being e-
roded and/or restricted gradually by piece meal legisla—
tion.

efforts to expand state water rights, especially at the
expense of the riparian owner, should be viewed w1th

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

-ll9~

growning concern. The due process clause of our State
Constitution clearly states that no property shall be ta-
ken from private owners except by due process of law.

The elements of due process include urgent need, condem-
nation, court approval, appraisal and compensation.

.water frontage owners own the surface water in Michigan's

lakes and streams.

the interest conveyed to riparian owners is amply reflec-
ted in the price he must pay for frontage as compared with
back land areas.

present laws relating to problems of natural resources
should be changed if they do not meet the needs of people
today, providing these laws are changed to accommodate
maximum economic utilization.

there is need for legislation which concerns the formal,
legal verification of rights that legally and morally be-
long to private frontage owners.

research into the problems of our natural resources is a
valuable tool and we look to the State Department of Con-
servation and other research agencies to give us expert

advice and assistance in managing Elk and Skegemog Lakes.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books

Carson, Rachel L. ‘Ehe Sea Around U8. The New American Li-
brary of world L1terature, Inc., New York: 1960.

Herring, F. W., Klingebiel, A. A., Love, S. K. "Bases for
urban Development: Air, Soil, water," Planning 1963. '
American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago: I963,
pp. 32-56.

Scott, Irving D. Inland Lakes of Michigan. 'Michigan Geolo-
gical and Biological survey, PuEIicatIOn 30, Geological
Series 25, 1920.

Smith, T. L. The Sociology of urban Life. New York: The
Dryden Press, 1951.

U. S. Department of Agriculture. Climate and Man, Yearbook
of Agriculture, 1941. washington, D. 0., United States'
Government Printing Office, 1941.

U. S. Department of Agriculture and Michigan Agricultural
Experiment Station.. Soil Survey, Newaygo County Michigan.
Series 1939, #9, April, 1951.

wallis, W; T., Adamson, A., Siegel, S. A. "Waterfront Deve-
lopment," Plannin 1960. American Society of Planning
Officials, Chicago, III., 1960, pp. 94-110.

Reports

Barr, Charles W. Planning The Countryside. Michigan State
College Press, I950.

 

Briggs, Bruce and Rosenthal, Jon K. Recreational Boatin
Facilities. Planning Advisory Serv1ce Report No. 14 ,
AmeriCan society of Planning Officials, Chicago: 1961.

 

Connecticut water Resources Commission. water Resources of
Connecticut. Report to the General Assembly, 1957.

 

Delaware County Planning Cbmmission. water Supply and Sew-
age Disposal. Information Bulletin No. 9, Media, Penna.,
1955.

 

Duke, R. D., and Nickel, P. An Annotated Bibliography_on
water Problems. Institute for Cbmmunity Development,
Michigan State university, July, 1962.

 

~120-

~121-

Edmunds, A. T. "The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey," Michi-
gan's Resources for Outdoor Recreation. Papers presen-
ted at the Michigan NaturEI Resources Council Annual
Meeting, Lansing, Mich., Oct. 28, 1959.

Fink, O. and Foreman, J. HomELWatersheds. Friend of the
Land, Hidden Acres Farm, Zanesville, Ohio, n.d.

 

Horner, Richard N. "A Proposed Recreational Classification
for the Lakes of Jackson County Michigan." Unpublished‘
Masters Thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan, 1959.

Humphrys, C. R. Public and Private waters. Department of
Resource Development, Mishigan State university, E. Lan-
Sing, 19580

. wateg_gesource Analysis of Genesee County. De-
partment of Resource DeveloPment, Michigan State Univer-
sity, E. Lansing, Fab. 18, 1960.

. water Rights In Michigan. Department of Resource
DaveIOpment, Michigan State university, E. Lansing, 1958.

. water, water Supply 1960, - wags; Demand 1980.
Personal Report to the Senate SeIect Cbmmittee on Nation-
al Water Resources, Department of Resource Deve10pment,
Michigan State University, October 29, 1959.

Mawby, Russel G. What Are YOur water Ri hts In Michi an?
COOperative Extension Service Report No. 20, {MicE1gan‘
State university, Department of Agricultural Economics,
East Lansing: 1957).

 

Michigan Department of Conservation. Aquatic Plgnt Control
gt Hess Lakgerewaygo County, By Norman 0. Levardsen,
Division of Fisheries, Report No. 1306, Nov. 16, 1951.

. Brooks Lake Level Control, Newaygo County, Pre-
1m1nary Engineering InvestigatIOn. By Richard G. Foster,
Engineering and Architecture Division, 1950.

. Public FishinggSites. Fish Division, Lansing 26,

Michigan, 1963.

Michigan Department of Health and Michigan State university
Cooperative Extension Service. Questions and Answers
About Home Sewage DiSposal. By Shephard, W. F., Amundson,
George, and Sheldon, Walter, 1963. .

North Carolina, State of, Department of Cbnservation and
DevelOpment. White Lake Development Study. Feb. 1963.

-122-

Schmid, A. Allan. Evolution of Michigan water Laws. Cir-
culation Bulletin 227, Department of Agricultural Econo-
mics, Michigan State university, E. Lansing, 1960.

. Michigan water Use and Development Problems.
Circular Bu etin , Agricu tura Experiment tation,
Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State
university, East Lansing, 1961.

Suggit, F. W., Hazard, J. L. and Adrian, C. R. Land and
water Policies for the Future. Institute for 53m unity
Development and Services, Michigan State Uhiversity, E.
Lansing: 1959.

 

Tennessee State Planning Commission. Melton Hill Reservoir,
Comprehensive Plan for Land USe Development. NaShville,
Tenn., Dec. 1960.

. Reservoir Shore Line Development In Thnnessee.
Nashville, Tenn., Aug.fil958.

U. S. Coast Guard. Pleasure Craft. Treasury Department,
CG-290, June 1, I962.

U. S. Department of Health, Education, and welfare. Urban
Fringe Sanitation, A Selected Bibliography. Public Health
Service Publication No. 583, U. S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, March 1958.

U. S. Department of Interior. Our vanishing Shoreline. Na-
tional Park Service, 1954.

. Remaining Shoreline Opportunities In - Minnesota,
Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsyl-
vaniaigNew York. ByiThe Great Lakes Shoreiine Recrea-
tion Area Survey, washington 25, D. C., 1959.

 

verburg, Kenneth. A Study of the Legal Powers of Michigan
Local Governments. Institute for‘Community DeveIOpment
and Services, Michigan State university, East Lansing,
Michigan, 1960.

 

Wallace, W. Turner and Associates. A Practical Method for
the Control of Bayfills. Tallahassee, Florida, n.d.

washtenaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission. A Sub-
division Guide. Ann Arbor, April 1963.

waterfronts: Planning for Resort and Residential USes.. Plan-
ning Advisory ServicegReport No.7118, American Soc1ety
of Planning Officials, Chicago: 1959.

~123-

water Rights Conference, Papers delivered at the, CoOperative
Extension Service, Agricultural Experiment Station, Mich-
igan State University, E. Lansing: March 29, 1960.

 

Wiggins, David C. water Supply and Sewage Disposal at Realty
Subdivisions. Reprint from the Connecticut Health Bulle—
tini70, 3 (March) 1956, Connecticut State Department of
Health.

 

wolfanger, Louis A. Rural Zoning in a Nutshell. Extension
Folder F-272, Cooperative Extension Service, Michigan
State university, Feb. 1963.

 

Periodicals

 

Eddy, Gerald E.' "Boating - Boon or Bust?," Midhigan Conser-
vation, (JulywAugust 1963), pp. 2-7.

"How To Get Better Land for Less and How To Use Good Land
Better." Reprint from House and Home, (August 1960).

Humphrys C. R. "Artificial Lakes," Reprint from The Mich-
igan Economic Record, V01. 4, No. 3, (March 1962), Bureau
of Business and Economic Research, Michigan State univer-
sity, Lansing, Michigan.

"Michigan's Many Jewels, Trend to Artificial Lakes
Grows as Demand for Shore Lots Peaks," Reprint from Mich-
igan Challenge, Vol. 3 No. 31, (April 1963)

 

"Legal Analysis on water Rights Bill Given," The State Jour-
nal, (Lansing), March 15, 1964, p, e-7,

Leonard, J. W. "The Great Lakes, Our Inland Sea," Michigan
Conservation, (July-August 1960), pp. 4-7.

 

Martini, E. R. "....And Let The Dry Land Appear," Landscape
Architecture, (Summer 1959), pp. 236-39.

 

"The New Boom in Houses by the water," House and Home, (JUne
1963), pp. 97-109.

The State Journal, (Lansing), March 10, 1964, pp. D-l6.

 

Taack, G. "water WOnderland or water‘Wreckage?," Michigan
Conservation, (May-June 1961), pp. 2-7.

 

. "Where lg the water's Edge?," Michigan Conserva-
tion, (Jan.-Feb. 1960), pp. 28-31.

"vacation Homes: An Exploding Market Takes on a New Shape,"
House and Home, (Feb. 1964), pp. 106-113.

 

-124-

"Vacation Homes: Housing Bids for the Recreation Dollar,"
House and Home, (JUne 1963), pp. 7-8.

 

"Water Conflict," Michigan Conservation, (July-August 1962).
pp. 2-7.

 

"Water For Michigan," Michigan Conservation, (March-April
1960), pp. 17-32.

 

welsh, W. D. "An Approach to Reservoir Land Use Planning,"
The Tennessee Planner, (April-June 1958), pp. 117-26.

 

"Your Lake Can Have Better Fishing," Michigan Conservation,
(July-August 1961), pp. 17-32.

Laws

Brooks, Township of. Building Ordinance, Aug. 25, 1955.
Grant, Township of. Building Ordinance, April 12, 1956.

Michigan, Compiled Laws of, 1948. Ann Arbor Press: 1955

 

Michigan Department of Health. Regulations for Certain water
Supplies in Michigan. 1957.

Michigan, State of. Construction of Dams, Excerpts from Act
156, Public Acts of 1851.

_________ "Dam.Construction Approval Act," Act 184, Public
Acts of 1963.

, "Inland Lake Improvement Act of 1961," Act 140,
Public Acts of 1961.

Newaygo, County of. Building Code. July 5, 1962.

. Sanitary Code. Oct. 26, 1961.

Unpublished Material

 

Elk - Skegemog Lakes Association. "Bill of Rights," n.d.
Farness, Sanford S. "The Problem of Coordination in Water-

shed Management." Michigan Natural Resources Council,
Paper given at the October water Conference, Oct. 22,
1958.

~125-

Horner, R. N. "Inland Lakes - Public or Private?" unpublish-
ed paper, Department of Resource Development, Michigan
State University, E. Lansing, 1958.

Kemp, William B. "Gull Lake — A Study in Natural Attractions
for Urban Development." Unpublished paper for The De-
partment of Resource Development, Michigan State Univer-
sity, E. Lansing, n.d.

Kweder, William G. "Land Classification for Residential
Development." Unpublished thesis, Michigan State Univer-
sity, E. Lansing, 1962.

Michigan, Association of Lakes and Streams Associations.
"Constitution." Article II, 1963.

Michigan Boating Control Committee. "First Annual Report."
Unpublished paper, August 20, 1963.

Michigan Department of Conservation. Hess Lake File, En-
gineering and Architecture Division, March 23, 1964.

Michigan Department of Conservation. Hess Lake File, Fish
Division, March, 1964.

Truncer, James J. "A Brief Look at Artificial Public Beach
Development in Michigan." unpublished paper for The .
Department of Resource Development, Michigan State uni-
versity, E. Lansing, March 14, 1961.

U. S. Department of Agriculture. "National Cooperative Soil
Survey." Unpublished papers, n.d.

“II III'IIIIIIIIIUIIIT