Serving Gogebic, Iron and Ontonagon Counties
Serving Gogebic, Iron and Ontonagon Counties
By RICHARD JENKINS
Hurley — The Iron County Board of Supervisors discussed possible options for the design of Saxon Harbor, but took no formal action Tuesday on the direction the rebuilding effort would take.
The consensus among the board members was they needed to review the information Iron County Forestry and Parks Administrator Eric Peterson presented before any action was taken, especially as there isn’t a need for a decision before the next board meeting later this month.
“Let’s do it once and do it right,” County Board Chair Joe Pinardi said regarding the decision. “We don’t have to hurry up and make hasty decisions.”
Peterson said there were two basic questions the board needed to provide input on that would guide all the future decisions — does the county change the basic layout of the marina and does it move the campground to a new location.
If the county decides not to change either part, the rebuilding process becomes simpler as the harbor will be rebuilt to the way it was prior to the July 11 storm, when heavy rains caused flooding that destroyed the harbor.
If the county does decide to change either of those parts, additional decisions will need to be made — including whether to reroute Oronto Creek so it follows its natural course, whether the marina should still have two basins or only one and whether the campground should be moved to elevated county land east of the harbor or located somewhere else entirely.
Complicating matters, Peterson told the county board, was the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s policy of only issuing funds to return disaster-hit areas to the state they were in the day prior to the disaster.
He explained this means that while the county will be reimbursed for 87.5 percent of the actual costs of rebuilding the harbor — 75 percent from FEMA and another 12.5 percent from Wisconsin Emergency Management — the county will be on the hook for any additional costs that result from significant changes to the existing design.
Further, changes to any of the remaining three categories the rebuilding project has been broken down into — campground, marina and dredging — would designate that category an “improved project.”
“With an improved project, funding is capped. The total cost of the project is unknown at this time. So what they do is, FEMA caps the project and FEMA will give us 75 percent of the estimated cost,” Peterson said. “If the project costs the county $4 million, these are our two reimbursements and the rest is ours. So if we decide to move (Oronto Creek), we will bear that cost entirely.”
Peterson said changing the number of basins in the marina or rerouting Oronto Creek so it’s allowed to follow its natural flow would designate the marina an improved project.
“The big thing for us down here, quite honestly, is Oronto Creek. We either put it back where it was, or we do something different with it. And if we do something different with that river, it’s an improved project.”
As the campground project is still being negotiated, it is unknown what would constitute an “improved project.” The county may be able to raise the elevation of the current campground beyond the flood plain — state law prohibits constructing campgrounds in a flood plain if 72 hours warning of a flood isn’t possible. The county could also move the campground east of the harbor. However, this would require the purchase of 114 acres of private land to obtain access to the county land from Erickson Road. If neither of these plans are feasible, the campground could also be relocated to somewhere else in the county as Peterson said the county may be receiving reimbursement funds for a campground regardless of whether it is located at the harbor.
The estimated assistance the county can expect from FEMA and the state for the dredging and marina projects is approximately $2,198,178, with the amount for the campground being unknown until negotiations are complete.
While Peterson said the county would likely be able to get grants to help with any improved projects, most grants still require local matching funds.
Peterson then showed several drawings of what the harbor could look like as a single-basin marina with Oronto Creek in its natural path and returned to its path from before the storm, as well as a picture of Saxon Harbor before the storm.
He made clear he didn’t have a preference and would follow the county board’s decision.
“I’ll build you the best facility whatever decision you guys make,” Peterson said. “I don’t care if it goes back to the original. I don’t care if it’s totally different. My job is to bring you the options, give you (the information) to make the decision, and then build it in the best place I can build it.”
Several board members and members of the audience expressed support for returning the harbor to its prior state, arguing not only did it work but it would decrease the possibility of the county being stuck with an costly bill unexpectedly.
“I think we’re all in (agreement), what Iron County had ... was a beautiful harbor. It was a unique harbor — it functioned well — it had certain amenities in its layout that no other harbor has. It worked for elderly people,” said Neil Gilbertson. “What we had, it was a great harbor ... and you know exactly where you stand.”
One of the benefits of the old design that was mentioned at the meeting was that the two basins allowed parking at each boat slip. This not only benefits the senior citizen users and owners carrying things to their boats, but also allows fire and emergency vehicles access every boat.
