File photo Under the Recreation Park Master Plan proposal preferred by the Grand Marais Park Board, the northeast corner of the municipal campground, the location most requested by guests, will continue to have campsites.
Approximately 40 people gathered in the Grand Marais tourist park recreation hall Tuesday, July 28, 2009 to hear the park board’s presentation of its long-term Master Plan and to offer some last-minute feedback with the hope of changing that plan.
Board chair Lindsay Mielke opened the meeting with an explanation of why consultant Bob Bruce was not there. “We have asked Bob to stop working on the Master Plan project,” she said. “Our selection of Bob as consultant was based on his experience with public processes. We never felt like Bob provided the facilitation that his experience indicated. In the end, the focus should be on the plan and the input that led to it and not on the relationship with our consultant.” Ironically, the opponents of the final plan who spoke up later in the meeting endorsed the site plan Bruce had recommended at the park board’s June 23 work session.
Mielke continued, “Each one of us has respectfully taken into consideration the written and public comments, emails, conversations from the community as well as the campground users and have come up with a park plan that we believed will benefit the most people and will still remain a great sustainable asset for the city. Tonight we will present to you the final draft of our plan and tell the story of the process that led us to this point.”
Park Manager Dave Tersteeg said the process of planning for the future of the park began in response to the aging of the park and changes in the community. A Minnesota Trust for Public Land conservation easement already protects the natural area around the harbor, Tersteeg indicated, but a plan was needed to address facilities needs.
While numerous site plans have been presented at public meetings, the Master Plan’s goals and policies are “really the framework, the script that the plan should answer to,” Tersteeg said. They will be used to evaluate all potential projects and improvements in the future.
The site plan retains most of the campsites currently in the northeast corner of the park, includes a new office and expanded marina facilities, replaces the ball field (if the county relocates it) with RV sites, installs a boardwalk around the shoreline, replaces the pool with a parking lot (if and when the pool is relocated), continues use of the DNR boat launch in the southeast corner of the park, and leaves room for an events building near the current city garages.
“We have, hopefully, something for everyone in this plan,” Tersteeg said.
Each park board member made a statement regarding the plan. A top priority, Mielke said, is to continue generating revenue for the city, and that is why the northeast corner – the location most requested by guests – will continue to have campsites. “Taking away the whole east end of the campground would be devastating,” Mielke said. “Why would you kill the goose that laid the golden egg?” Adding full-service RV sites where the ball field is now would enable the park to accommodate visitors who are now turned away when the existing RV sites are full.
Park board member and city councilor Bill Lenz said that while he doesn’t like everything in the new plan, he supports it and believes it represents a good compromise.
Park board member Todd Miller said they have worked to create a “very fair and effective compromise” that invites public use of the park. Theyhave listened to many opinions and have preserved the character of the park, he said.
Park board member Walt Mianowski said he has talked to about 50 people in the community who all support the plan. That day he had received six emails in favor of it and two against.
Park board member Paul Anderson said the people he had been hearing from support the plan six or seven to one.
This is the first park board she knows of that has considered wetland delineation as this park board is doing, park board member Carol Backlund said. She believes wetland preservation is important, but she does not want to increase the wetlands in the park. One hundred sixty-two thousand of Cook County’s one million acres are wetland, Backlund said. “Not all of us wanted everything where it is,” she said of the plan, “but we’re not all going to get what we want.”
George Wilkes thanked the board for its hard work but said he disagrees with the finished product because it favors the campground over public space. “I think you’ve missed an opportunity to find a compromise between those two uses,” he said.
Wilkes pointed out that the plan does not replace current public spaces like the ball field and the pool with other public spaces. An open park in the northeast area might be used in the same way the library’s front lawn is used, he said. Wilkes contended that the park board is committed to the campground but its Master Plan does not reflect the diversity of opinion in the community. He said he believes the committee should have represented a more diverse range of perspectives.
Denny Fitzpatrick of Grand Marais thanked the board for its service to the community but said he was disappointed in the result and felt the board did not compromise. He said he believes there are “green geese” as well as “golden geese” and solutions that could be acceptable to all.
Aaron Mielke of Grand Marais said he does not want to see his taxes go up because the park is not bringing in as much revenue. He believes the plan retains the park’s integrity and maintains plenty of green space.
Park guest Al Brodie stated that if the city did not have the campground, it would not have a pool or a golf course. Thepark is also necessary for people who can’t afford to stay in a hotel when they come to town. He said he travels to many RV parks throughout the country and would not stay in this one if he had to park in the ball field area without a view of the lake.
Tom Crosby, owner of the mini golf course on the west side of Grand Marais, said, “Tourism is the heartbeat of this community. …Almost all other industries are gone up here.”
Harley Toftey, president of the 60-member Grand Marais Business Council, said they have been discussing the Master Plan at every meeting and have surveyed a lot of people. He believes the plan represents the best option and said the Business Council endorses it as well.
“The only thing we have to offer is tourism,” said Superior RV owner Harriet Quarles. “We have no industry. …We need campers.” Seventyseven thousand people stayed in the campground last year, she said. She talked about the difficulty of making a living in Cook County and
” joked that those who don’t have a job with the city, the county, or the hospital might need to win the lottery before moving up here.
Molly Hoffman of Harbor Friends advocated for restoration of the former wetlands, saying that what is left is damaged and nothing but “a remnant.” Restoring three of the former four acres would not affect any campsites, she said. “Coastal wetlands are rare,” she said, and if restored, the park’s wetlands would draw more birders to the community.
Hoffman maintained that the board has ignored the Harbor Friends’ ideas. “There was no give and take in this,” she said.
“We have not ignored you,” replied Todd Miller. “We just don’t agree.”
The park board’s next step will be to present their plan to the city council. The Master Plan can be found online at www.grandmaraisrvparkandcampground. com/plan. html.
The Rec. Park Master Plan goals:
»»Support the city’s Comprehensive
Plan
»»Help Grand Marais retain a
unique and positive identity
»»Attract use by both residents
and visitors
»»Optimize use in all seasons »»Support a variety of activities »»Generate revenue »»Facilitate sharing of expenses
»»Respect natural and historic
resources
»»Facilitate the health of Lake
Superior
»»Anticipate future harbor
development
»»Adhere to the conservation
easement
»»Prioritize use of the lake.
Leave a Reply