Deephaven Boat Committee

1
City of DeephavenComprehensive Marina Plan
Submitted byThe Deephaven Boat
Committee02-16-2006
Deephaven Boat Committee
2
(No Transcript)
3
History of the Deephaven Marina Resources
Established in early years of the village.

• To provide lake access for those who did not
• own lake shore.
• To fully utilize a public resource.

Public Consensus
Maintaining the docks for public use is a good
thing for Deephaven
Historical Issues

• Community wants a fair system.
• As a publicly owned resource it must be
  maintained and improved if possible.
• Due to constraints imposed by LMCD Deephaven
  cannot substantially increase marina resources.

Competing Interests

• Original date of origin is unknown, but it
  appears that marina was rebuilt after the tornado
  of 1965.
• The resources provided by Deephaven have remained
  fairly constant over the past fifty years.
• Until the mid-90s demand was close to supply.

Lake shore Owners
Non lake shore owners wanting access
Accepted Process
No Interest in Marina Resources
The current approach to allocation, though not
without objection is the preferred system of
choice at this time.
4
(No Transcript)
5
Current Statistics on Wait Time for Resources

• Marina Resources Available for Community Access
• 1. Docks for large power Boats
• Number Available 80
• Number on Waiting List 403
• Date of Next on List 5/15/87
• 2. Buoys for Sailboats
• Number Available 53
• Number on Waiting List 123
• Date of Next on List 8/15/97
• 3. Shore Stations for large
• powerboats
• Number Available 12
• Number on Waiting List 201
• Date of Next on List 3/26/87

• 4. Slides for smaller boats not exceeding 16
  Street ends
• Number Available 125
• Number on Waiting List 110
• Date of Next on List 11/15/98
• 5. Canoe racks for canoes and small portable
  boats
• Number Available 3
• Number on Waiting List 33
• Date of Next on List 5/20/02

6
Key Details to the Comprehensive Marina Plan

• The Plan
• Substantially improves the current infrastructure
  of docks and slides.
• Enable a transition from smaller boats to
  providing an infrastructure that will match the
  current demand for larger boats.
• Eliminates unsightly shore stations.
• Potentially expands Deephaven beach.

• The Demand
• Larger power boats in docks.
• A safer infrastructure.
• Removal of unsightly shore stations.
• Larger boats on slides.
• Reduced demand for sail boats.
• Replacement of deteriorating dock system.

• Simply maintaining
• the current
• infrastructure
• is not an acceptable
• alternative to meet the
• changing demand of
• Deephaven residents.

7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
Historical and Current Marina Issues

• Self-Sustaining Fees
• Revenue rental has exceeded annual
  maintenance expenses.
• Increased rates have significantly increased
  reserves.

• Marina resources, though maintained annually have
  continued to degrade. Docks are now in critical
  need for overhaul and replacement.

Buoy cables and weights need replacement

• 1. Current Annual Maintenance Costs of Marina
  Resources
• 10,000.00
• 2. Current Annual Overall Costs of Marina.
• 76,892

Overall reconfiguration of marina resources is
essential
Slides are being damaged by boats that are too
large to sustain them

• Reserves
• 108,273 in Feb. 2006
• 170,000 ca. in Nov. 2006

11
(No Transcript)
12
Issues Yet to be Resolved

• St. Louis Bay
• North property line in St. Louis bay
• Board Walk Definition (To be worked through with
  Park Committee. A presentation to the park board
  is necessary)
• Definition of the Swimming Deck over the steel
  breakwater
• Designation and location of two types of slides
  (Sslide)
• S.1 (Current slide configuration without
  winches)
• S.2 (Large boats requiring winch with ramp
  using one of two winch systems recommended by the
  Boat Committee)
• Carson Bay
• Actual number of docks is subject to change.
• Buoy cables and weight replacement for sales
  boats
• General Issues
• 100 foot red line on schematics for Carson and
• Cash reserves in relation to construction costs
• Projected life of new docks
• Final Drawings from Bolton-Mink incorporating the
  last issues
• Actual measurements of Excelsior docks to be used
  to determine fin
• al dock size in plan.
• Cost estimates based on actual costs of docks in
  Excelsior, Wayzata, and Mound

13
(No Transcript)
14
Promoting Desired Outcomes Plan Description
Outcomes
Improves upon current infrastructure
Attributes of a well designed plan
Addresses immediate shortfalls of current
resources Provides added benefit to the park
resources Considers the input of all parties
with vest interests.
Considers the needs of the larger community
Increased demand
Long term vision
Increased
Remains flexible to new input
Increased knowledge base
The plan addresses some of the most significant
issues currently facing marina resources,
without changing the current allocation.
15
(No Transcript)
16
Target Dates Toward Implementation

• Implementation Process
• 5. Develop Plan Specifications
• August 2006
• 6. Submit Plans for bid
• 7. October 2006
• 8. Issue Bond/Payment Plan
• November 2006

1. Council Review of Comprehensive Plan February
2006
Issues Resolution
2. City Council Initial Approval March 2006 3.
Public Hearing End of April 2006 4. Council
Approval May 2006

• 9. Announce timeline for
• construction completion
• December 2006
• 10. Award Bids
• December 2006
• 11. Construction Begins
• January-February 2007
• Arrange for rescheduling of
• slide and dock allocations
• January-April, 2007

Issues Resolution
Presentation Preparation For LMCD
LMCD Meetings June-July 2006
Issues Resolution