HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes1994-163
.
.
.
Sponsored by: Tones
CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
RESOLUTION NO. 94-163
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEWARD, ALASKA, APPROVING THE NASH ROAD
SMALL BOAT HARBOR MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS, on February 14, 1994, the City Council approved Resolution No. 94-
022. authorizing the execution of a development agreement for the Nash Road Small Boat
Harbor; and
WHEREAS, under the terms of the development agreement, the developer, AI
Schafer, was required to develop a boat harbor master plan; and
WHEREAS, this plan has been submitted to the city administration and, in
accordance with the development agreement, must be approved by the City Council no
later than September 15, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the master plan lacks sufficient detail in eight areas identified by the
city administration; and
WHEREAS, the administration has recommended conditional approval of the
master plan subject to satisfaction of the eight master plan requirements noted below;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEWARD, ALASKA, that:
Section 1. The Nash Road Small Boat Harbor Master Plan, a copy of which is
attached and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved subject to inclusion
of sufficient information and/or documentation to be provided by the developer to satisfy
the following eight requirements:
1. Identify existing conditions such as topographical lines and geotechnical,
tide, wave and building foundation issues;
2. Provide a more detailed project management plan including permit
requirements;
3. Expand the provided detail on the construction budget and schedule;
4. Provide higher level of general project detail by cross referencing the work
in the Corps of Engineers documents;
.
.
.
.
Nash Road Small Boat Harbor
MASTER
PLAN
Sept. 6, 1994
SUMMARY
Al Schafer has provided the City of Seward with the core of a development plan which constitutes
a preliminary conceptual plan. He has provided general schedule and budget detail sufficient to
indicate his commitment and to clarify the extent of his planning to date. That planning relates
primarily to the harbor portion of the project, not the uplands. His budget and schedule are
exclusively focused on the harbor segment of the project.
By extension Mr. Schafer's Master Plan constitutes the following elements:
1. NASH ROAD BOAT HARBOR MASTERPLAN SUPPLEMENT, the June 15,1994
document prepared for Mr. Schafer by Andy Patapoff. This two and one half page narrative
accompanied five sheets of drawings which were previously distributed to Council.
2. May 31, 1994 correspondence, AI Schafer to Tyler Jones. This two page letter outlined
the project sponsor's impressions of market demand, competitive threats, tax base expansion
potential and benefits to adjacent property holders.
3. August 17 and 18 correspondence, Al Schafer to Tyler Jones. These two letters and
attachments provide the budget and schedule detail offered by Mr. Schafer. These are
summarized below.
Other documents included as part of this packet to define project work to date includes:
1. CH2MHill Master Plan Supplement dated Aug. 12, 1994.
2. Heery Master Plan Submittal dated Aug. 15, 1994.
Considerable work performed previously by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and by consulting
engineering firms has been referenced throughout the discussion of this project but not formally
presented as part of this master plan.
? .Cr'; -/(, 3Mvw-".l... ci!z(i.;
NASH ROAD SMALL BOAT HARBOR MASTER PLAN - PAGE 2
SCHEDULE
The proposed schedule consumes 26 months as follows:
Phase # Activity
1 Breakwater development
- develop rock pit
- excavate/place armor rock
- excavate/place core material
Duration
8 months
2
Dredging basin (1.6 million cy)
12 months
3
Build/place float system
'"6 months
The schedule as presented presumes no overlap. However, float work could easily take place ashore
during the float building phase and float placement could be conducted concurrent with the dredging
phase once dredging got under way.
You will note later in this summary that broad project scheduling is recommended for the project,
including specific time allocated for fmancing, design, permitting and construction. This is a level
of detail which is addressed under the section on Project Management Analysis (below).
BUDGET
The budget provided is included in an attachment to Mr. Schafer's Aug. 18 letter. In it he projects
breakwater, basin, float plane and internal utility costs of $9.275 million. Given his self-imposed
$10 million budget for the marina portion of the harbor development, this leaves Mr. Schafer with
a $724,750 contingency (7.8 %).
This is one of the points where detailed information concerning market, demand and cost would be
most helpful. However, in the context of Mr. Schafer's vision for a phased project and a plan that
reflects that phasing, the budget and the schedule reflect acceptable master plan level of detail for
this phase. This presumes, however, that Mr. Schafer will be preparing a detailed development plan
for future phases, notably the uplands.
INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS
As you have been advised, the city contracted with utility and project management specialists to
evaluate the project and the submitted master plan materials. There is a significant gap between the
amount of detail provided by Mr. Schafer and that suggested as necessary by the consultants,
particularly the project management firm.
The utility consultants made note of some significant new information on this project. They
determined that the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation would likely not permit
,--
.
.
.
NASH ROAD SMALL BOAT HARBOR MASTER PLAN - PAGE 3
hauling of wastewater from the site even on a temporary basis and that large lot-size in the Nash
Road area probably tends not to favor hookups to a new sewer system (as opposed to residential on-
site septic). This same point may constitute a significant prospect for the project, however, in that
the consultants noted on-site septic treatment may be feasible in early phases/light use of the project.
(They projected a maximum for such a system as 12,000 gallons per day capable of handling 120
full-time residents or 600 transient users (boaters). They further suggested examination of "package
systems" for on-site wastewater treatment. This concept is estimated to cost $1.19 million as
contrasted with options with pricetags four and five times that figure.
The utility consultants also determined that the previous suggestion for a pair of 1,000 gallon per
minute wells was too stringent. Twin 100 gallon per minute wells would be sufficient, the
consultants reported.
The full report by CH2MHill, the utility consultant, is included with this summary as an attachment.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS
The review of the master plan submittals by the project management consultant detail the huge and
numerous differences between project development in the private sector as compared with the public
sector. This is the gap which city staff has repeatedly attempted to bridge. Our success, predictably,
is mixed. Mr. Schafer has submitted more detail than in the original plan yet has left a number of
questions unanswered.
Most significant among the discrepancies are the dependence by Mr. Schafer on the work done in
the 1980s by the Corps of Engin"ers and consulting engineers. To a very large extent the questions
posed by the project management consultants are answered by Mr. Schafer by extension when he
asserts he does not need to redesign the original project footprint or, for that matter, general uplands
layout. He does not, however, present the information contained in the Corps' and contractor's work
as work specifically submitted as part of his master plan. As a consequence, we have references to
historic work products which have not been officially submitted as part of the master plan. Fully
two thirds of the project management firm's concerns would be satisfied were the key elements of
the previous studies to be excerpted into the Master Plan by Mr. Schafer.
As can be noted in my Sept. 2 letter to Mr. Schafer, a two-month extension was suggested to bring
about this process oflocating and extracting the critical information from the previous reports. Mr.
Schafer declined Sept. 6 to request any extension.
The itemized project budget sheet provided in the project management firm's report was replaced
by Mr. Schafer with a page from the 1982 Corps work which provides marina/float detail. That
sheet is attached to his Aug. 18 letter. Although there is no indication of slip size, pile materiaL
lengths, etc., the raw data is sufficient for a preliminary budget for this single aspect (marina) of the
project.
NASH ROAD SMALL BOAT HARBOR MASTER PLAN - PAGE 4
Mr. Schafer's intent, on receipt of the Council's approval of the plan, is to proceed with the project
planning, notably in attempting to obtain the Conditional Use Permit from the Planning and Zoning
Commission with participation from the upland property holder(s). Once he has achieved that
objective he intends to begin construction by activating his equipment and beginning the rock work
and basin excavation. He does not intend to perform detailed planning and scheduling. He feels he
has sufficient control of the resources of his company that to attempt to predetermine what will
happen in the future only limits his options.
Al Schafer candidly says he's going to "poor boy" this project. For some that conjures up a very
negative image of slipshod work. Instead, he convincingly asserts that he means it as his
development strategy. With his proximity to the project site and consdering his equipment and
personnel, Mr. Schafer is uniquely qualified to perform a majc; portion of this project out of pocket.
He will experience next to no mobilization cost. He knows where the basin goes. He'll place the
rock around it and dig the basin at the right time. He thinks he knows where the rock he needs is.
When he is ready to secure that rock he'll propose city sites to the city and proceed. When he's ready
to begin building floats he'll check the market and the Harbor Master's office to define demand.
In terms of the broadest alternative, the project management firm is recommending an inclusive
project management strategy that satisfies every level of detail that would be required by a public
project. Alternatively, we have established a threshold of detail that falls short of the expectations
of the project management firm, believing that as a publicly supported private project, Mr. Schafer
is entitled to more leeway than if it were a wholly public project. This could be called an
incremental strategy. Mr. Schafer has instead presented what could be described as a stepwise
strategy. He is proceeding very cautiously, recognizing the risks of premature commitment and the
fickle nature of the political resf.'')nse to large projects.
FINANCING
The topic of financing for the project is a very sensitive one. Mr. Schafer feels he will satisfy this
project requirement when a lending institution loans him funds to build the project. He has not
shown either revenues or expenses for operating the harbor, although there has been general
discussion of a prospect of committing some of the slips to condominium ownership.
MASTER PLAN REQUIREMENTS
My letter of Sept. 2 to Mr. Schafer summarizes the key areas where the Master Plan could and
arguably should be expanded. That letter suggested the report be expanded to:
- Identify existing conditions such as topographical lines and geotechnical, tide, wave and
building foundation issues;
- Provide a more detailed project management plan including permit requirements;
.
.
.
NASH ROAD SMALL BOAT HARBOR MASTER PLAN - PAGE 5
- Expand the provided detail on the construction budget and schedule;
- Provide higher level of general project detail by cross referencing the work in the Corps
of Engineers documents;
- Solicit and obtain the individual property owner agreements mandated in the agreement;
- Expand on the basic harbor water and sewer utility design;
- Give more information on the utility expansion plan; and
- Detail the project marketing/financing plan, including float and slip sizes, dc.
As noted previously, on Sept. 6 Mr. Schafer declined to request an extension. He further dt;clined
to provide additional information. The information solicited and actions recommended in the Sept.
2 letter (summarized above) would greatly aid the public discussion of the project. However this
information can be extracted from the referenced reports and previous efforts and included as part
of the Master Plan, assuming Mr. Schafer is willing to treat the information so gathered as an
integral element of his master plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Seward City Council approval of Resolution 94-163 approving the Nash Road Small Boat Harbor
Master Plan contingent upon satisfaction of all eight Master Plan Requirements.
ANDREW J. PATAPOFF
P.o. BOX 2144 -H.Clt 7. I*. 4 UeriiIn PIc. SUbd. . Aooror I ..1rPl- SEWARD. ALASKA 991164
ARCHITECT
t'9071 224-8923
NASH ROAD BOAT HARBOR MASTERPlAN SUPPlEMENT:
June 15, 1994
The following describes other aspects of the total Masterplan which could not be more easily described on
the Drawings as submitted.
ZONING:
The Project Area should be rezoned to Harbor Commercial (HC) to reflect the potential land use for this
area. The "Lands of Darling" (South & West of Nash Road), "Lands of Murawsky" and "Lands of Schafer"
(South & West of Nash RoacI) should also be rezoned to HC because of their proximity and probable
future land usage as they relate to the Project Site. Because of it's proximity to this future harbor, at least
the Southern half of "Lands of AB. & 5." should be considered as being rezoned to HCelS weli. Should
the "Lands of Darling" ever get developed, a future street to the South would make the "Lands of City of
Seward" and "Lands of Bardarson" accessible and hence they also should be rezoned HC. Also. Planning
& Zoning Commisioners should consider the possibility of modifying their existing Ordinance to allOW Multi.
family residential (Condominiums & Apartments) construction with a Conditional Use Permit within the HC
zone. The potential for quality CondominiumS/Apartments in HC areas farther back from the Harbor itself
could be a real asset to all future development in this area.
COVENANTS:
All lands to be developed, zoned as HC (as noted above), should be regulated as to building appearance
(and it's ability to "blend" without absolutely matching other buildings), building proximity to other facilities
to avoid blocking views. and other aspects of .community" which affects how this entire development
appears and works together. This could be accomplished by City Council appointing a "Design Review
Committee", which reports directly to the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Seward. All parties
planning on building would be required to submit requests through this Committee and be required to
submit color/material sample "boards" indicating the exterior materials & colors intended to be used for
their individual projects, as well as types, locations and numbers (if applicable) of Landscaping, as part of
this requirement
SITE POPULATION:
It is envisioned that the projected "permanent population" (Shop Owners and their Employees) for the
land areas indicated as developed on Drawing #1 could be between 300 and 1,000 people, depending
on what facilities actually go into this development when it is full. At this time it is dificult to state a firm
number for thia until we know what lands will be leased and for what purpose. "Populations" for other HC
lands within near proximity could easily triple the estimates indicated above. It is envisioned that when fully
developed, the "user population" for this entire HC-zoned land could be as high as 4 - 10 times the
"permanent population" or more, depending on what facilities ultimately go into these developed areas.
This would impact existing roacts and streets, as well as existing utilities. to this overall future development
STREET ACCESS:
Nash RoacI should have a right-turn lane to handle the potential traffic to and from the Harbor Area This
can be accomplished by the City Council requesting the State D.O.T. fund and build this project on the
existing State R.O.W. The City of Seward Fire Department requires 2 means of access and egress from
the Harbor, in case one roacI becomes blocked their equipment still can provide fire protection to areas
within the Harbor and Uplands. Also, because of the amount of potential traffic, it is advised the City
petition the State to have the posted speed limit reduced to 35 mph on Nash Road within 1/4 mile of any
access from the HC lands to Nash Road.
.
.
.
Nash Road Boat Harbor Masterplan
Supplement Letter
6-' 5-94
Page 2
SEWAGE:
Of the 3 options presented in the CH2-M-HiII report, dated 9-7-93, it is recommended that the best
alternative for sewage disposal would be to ultimately pipe the sewage to the existing Sprtng Creek
Correctional Center sewage lagoon. In the interrim, sewage would be truck-hauled from a holding tank to
either the S.C.C.C. or City of Seward sewage lagoon. Because of the potential for future OWnership and
development of the "Naah Road to Bear Lake" landa by the City of Seward, it ia recommended that a
gravity-now sewer line be extended Northerly on Nash Road from this site to collect future sewage from
this potential area, as well as to offer sewer services to Land Owners along other lands within proximity to
this sewer. This sewage could then be disposed of along with the rest of the collected sewage from the
Project Site and other HC-zoned Iancls. This then would give the City some options for future
development as well as some income from fees charged for these sewage services. On-Site sewer lines
would terminate in manholes adjacent to the "Landa of Darting" to facilitate any future sewer line seMC"
being possibly used on those lands and connecting to these indipated sewer lines.
WATER:
Water for the Harbor and Uplands should be as shown on Drawings. Another alternative would be to
acquire permission for the KPB to construct a tank with well or wells on their land above the Project Site,
which would eliminate the need to pump water to the Site. The water could now either across the "Lands
of Darting" or along the Nash Road R.O.W., piped underground (with the permission of the respective
OWner) to this Site. Most likely, whichever location of wellltank is ultimately used, a water treatment facility
is required to be constructed to insure the quality of water is maintained. On-Site water lines would
terminate in plugged ends adjacent to the "Lands of Darting" to facilitate any future water line services
being possibly used on those lands and connecting to these indicated water lines.
STORM SEWER:
Storm sewer facilities should be as indicated on Drawings. A trap must be included in the system to
prevent rocks, dirt and debrts (as well as gasoline, oil and other possible contaminants) from being piped
directly into Resurrection Bay. On-Site storm sewer lines would terminate in manhol.. adjacent to the
"Lands of Darting" to facilitate any future storm sewer line services being possibly used on those lands and
connecting to theM indicat8d atorm MWW linea.
TELEPHONE:
GTE should provide enough telephone service Iin.. to the Site (Harbor and "Schafer Uplands") to handle
all projected and future telephone needs. All lines will be below-ground (as shown on Drawings) once
main service crosses over Nash Road. Another option is to have GTE provide underground service from
the North side of Nash Road, which would eliminate any overhead telephone lines above Nash Road. GTE
should plan on increasing trunk service linea along Nash Road to serve this and other future development
areas indicated aboVe.
ELECTRICrTY.
The City of Seward should provide enough electrical service to the Harbor & Uplands, as weil as other He-
zoned lands in the area to handle future electrical needs. The potential for the Nash Road - Bear Lake
Corridor of land should also be taken into account when determining electrical needs of the area.
Possibly, to start with, the exiating sub-atatlon @ S.M.I.C. may be adequate fOl' electrical loada, but
ultimately another sub-station might be required (possibly on future lands of the City in the Nash Road -
Bear Lake Corridor). Electric service at the Si18 (Harbor and "Schafer Uplands.) should be sized to handle
all projected and future electric needs. All service will be below-ground (as shown on Drawings) once main
service crosses over Nash Road. Another option is to provide underground service from the North side of
Nash Road, Which would eliminate any overnead electric lines aDove Nun floac:I.
Nash Road Boat Harbor Masterplan
Supplement Letter
6-15-94
Page 3
PARKING:
Required parking tor the Boat Harbor Itself Is provided on-site for standard vehicles and parking 10r
vehicles pulling boat trailers will be located on "Lands of Schafer" on the North & east side of Nash Road,
as indicated on the Drawings. Shuttle service from this lot to the Harbor will be provided by the Developer.
There also is over 1,500 parking stalls provided along the street ourbs, which do not calculate into
anybody's required parking, which indicates that there should be adequate parking on the Site tor the
Harbor & Upland.. All requirecl parking tor any leased (or owned) property developed within the uplands of
the HC-zoned lands would be required to be on the leased (or owned) property and meet all requirements
of the City of Seward Zoning Ordinance as it relatea to parking.
ANNEXAnON:
With the possibility of acquiring certain lands from the KPB from Nash Road to Bear Lake, the possibility
exists that those lands would be Isolated from other lands within the City Umits of Seward, creating a very
oostly and awkward situation in at18mpting to provide City Services to these lands. It should be considered
by the Citizens of Seward, as well as the Citizens of the areas impacted, to annex certain lands connecting
this project site along Nash Road to thelanda of the Nash Road- Bear L.ak8 Corridor. This would facilitate
providing water, sewer and electric services to these areas.
PAGE .s OF DRAW1I1A..Cl-
This sheet was included in the drawings tor the Masterplan to show that the blocks of leasable land shown
on Sheet #1 will not be all taken up with buildings, but many open areas will be provided which would
allow numerous ample views of the Harbor itself and the Bay from numerous areas of other Uplands
development, due to parking and landscaping requirements. These are just samples of what ~ be
ultimately located on these leasable uplands (with approval of Planning & Zoning Commission and Design
Review Committee) and reflect no prior arrangements tor future development
.{,'L
.. :~ .: 1'1 ' .
l'.\;'.t,
\ "'~'
~
.
.
Cd
,-
I
Lr/ /"'''',-' ,. .......,=: '-.
;-, . ~
~ /J: 1'0-:-:;
~J,---f" L 1_' ~
Afognak Logging
A DIVISION OF ~
Kodiak Lumber Limited_~i
.~'
(907) 224-3130 Box 610 Seward. Alaska 99664 ~~~
May 31, 1994
mr\ ~~ft:llrD'i~"\--:;;;~. ."
Ii I ~ j e::. H .. r ,~ i 111
I L.:. ....... - '.;' ; tr. ,! ~ '
I ~ 1~~1~1~
. '-., , ~ I '
JUN 0 1 199.t !.!.,;J
/ '/,c> r
City of Sew. d
City Man.
Mr. Tyler Jones
City Manager
City of Seward
P.O. Box 167
Seward, Ak. 99664
RE: Nash Road Boat Harbor Future
Dear Tyler,
I am as always very interested in building and owning the Nash Road
Boat Harbor fronting on property owned by me, and the Darling family
of Seward.
As discussed May 25, 1994 in your office, one of the benefits to the
City and local businesses and the Borough is the tax base that would
be developed by placing the boat harbor in Seward. I havp- made an
estimate, which could be conservative, of $100,000,000 of new tax
base on the tidelands only. Such as the boat harbor proper $20,000,000,
commercial tidelands $20,000,000 with buildings, etc., and perhaps
$60,000,000 worth of boats in the 1100 boat slips. Using the above
figures the yearly property tax bill would be in the neighborhood of
$1,100,000, $300,000 of which would go directly to the City treasury.
This does not take into consideration any sales tax generated by this
development nor the extra cash this added harbor would expose to other
local businesses. I have no way to estimate the large revenue this
development will bring to the City thru electric sales, and sewer &
water revenue.
I believe if this boat harbor doesn't go in this time it will be many
years before the opportunity comes again as Whittier is very apt to
get Corps help on Shotgun Cove if no other harbor comes first. Needless
to say if the tunnel is blacktopped and a major harbor is developed at
Shotgun Cove we may never see a need for another harbor at Seward.
I appreciate the Council and the Administrations help in this matter
the past few months and there has been great interest from financial
institutes all along. We are fairly well along on our jointly funded
"Master Plan".
From my standpoint the only way this harbor can be viable is to have
the income that the filled land will bring in as well as space or boat
stall income. The drawings from the Corps and our drawing show us
with a building footprint of 783,800 square feet plus parking and
streets. Land as drawn in Exhibit D of proposed master plan between
boat harbor and Darlings property is acceptable and workable.
any changes or lessening of the abutting filled tidelands would not
be acceptable! I do not know exactly what the neighbors need to
give this operation their blessing. If the Darlings wish to sell the
41 acres this might stop any conflicts that might arise.
If I were the Darlings I would consider all the benefits to them and
their property and either take a passive roll allowing construction
and reap the benefits after construction with no obstructions or
sell the property. It seems as a third alternative they may wish to
stop the project and leave their land natural and unobstructed.
I will list a few of the advantages to the Darlings to come from the
boat harbor construction and existence. It is obvious to most they
will receive great benefits from commercial development at the Nash
Road site. Some of which I will list below.
(1) Sewer system.
(2) Water system.
(3) They have already received free power.
(4) They will receive free fill on several acres of tideland fronting
the boat harbor, plus get fill on 2 acres of uplands that could well
be called wetlands by the Corps of Engineers.
(5) Bring growth and development to their door step upon completion
for any future development they may wish.
(6) Development will make the Darling acreage much more valuable
and desirable.
(7) Of this 41~ acres, fully 1/3 is either intertidal or wetlands
and I feel certain on their own they may never get a permit to fill
or develop the 1/3 of the 41 acres.
I wish to thank you and council members for their past support. And
also wish to thank the public for their support in Seward as well as
other parts of Alaska, especially the Anchorage boating public. And
hope this tangle can work out to benefit all.
Sincerely, . j1 ~
~~
Albert sChir
President
c.c. Council members
.-"At
. I
'1'<''';''~'
-,.
.l
.
.
Afognak Logging
A DIVISION OF ~
Kodiak Lumber Limited_~--
'''~...
(907) 224.3130 Box 610 Seward. Alaska 99664 ...~
August 18, 1994
Mr. Tyler Jones
City Manager
City of Seward
P.O. Box 167
SEward, Ak. 99664
~fE~/r:' J1\t?;C':)0i
~'-SIJ 1/ ..,j; 'I' ,
- It I. I
AUG 2 2 1994 ~Jl!)
RE: Nash Road Harbor
City of Seward
City Manager
Dear Tyler,
To further clarify construction costs as Afognak determines them for
the Nash Road Boat Harbor job. Please understand these are in house
costs and have no relation to other bids we might make on other
government contracts. Our cost format is a Corps of Engineering bid
form for this boat harbor if they had gone to bid several years ago.
This will give you the cost breakdown you ask for.
I shall class curb and gutter, blacktop, etc. under uplands development
after harbor is complete and the City has done the sewer and water from
this site to treatment plant and to the water source.
As you will note we are within our $10,000,000 budget as discussed in
my earlier letter.
As to the time frame for this project let us assume there is no
government hold up - City - Borough - State - Federal or private hold
ups. If the above is true the following schedule will be relatively
close. The first work will be to develop a rock pit and complete the
breakwater. Rock Class A armor rock 32,600 c.y., Class B armor rock
54,000 c.y., Breakwater core material 124,000 c.y. for a total of
210,000 yards of shot rock for breakwater. This first phase will take
8 months to complete.
The second phase consists of about 1,6000,000 c.y. of dredging. This
phase will take 12 months.
The third and all inclusive final phase will be the installation of the
floats and building of launching ramps. We will expect to spend 6
months on this phase. Some of this 6 month period can overlap on the
excavation.
Page 2
In other words we will be placing floats and piling as excavation
dredging progresses. We will be able to move along with the excavation.
Also we would start building floats during the early months of this
project. Probably starting in month number 2 to form and structure
our floats. At this time we intend concrete floats. This may be
subject to change however.
At any rate I would want to
to give us a little leeway.
should be on line 26 months
allow 6 months for this beyond dredging
So with no real hangups this project
after start up. ..
Please understand this is our best estimate at this time, but should
be a good ballpark figure.
j;;;J~
Albert Schafer
President
1 Enclosure
.
.
.
8441 76A252A
BIDDINC SCHEDULE
NASH ROAD HARBOR
SEWARD, . ALASKA
Item
~ 5e,cription
Elti.mated Unit
~.ntity ijnit Price
BASE' ITEMS
1. Mobilization an9 DelllObiliza-
tion.
j ~ ~ '. "
DACW2S-86-B-OO--
!atimated
;.moant...
:;;.';'
1
Job
Lump aUII ...N/A.....
2. Dredging and diapoaal of
dredged maeerial.
a. Pirat 1,231,000 c.y. 1,231,000 c.y. . 1.30
b. All .cver 1,231,000 c.y. 342,000 c.y. $ 1.30
3. cta.. "A" Armor Rock. 32,600 c.y. $ 28.00
4. Cta.. "B" Rock. 54,000 c.y. $18.00
S. Breakwater Core Material. 124,000 c.y. $ 9.00
-
6. Sandy Gravel. 5,200 c.y= i 4.00
7. Pl.atic Filter Fabric. 22,500 a.y~ $ 1.50
8. Inatall Survey Monument.. 24 ea. $
9.
N.vi~.tion Marker and
Wind Station Ba.e..
$2,600.00 $
3 e..
$ 1. 600.300.00
$ 444.600.00
$ 912.800.00
$ Q 77 non. 00
$ 1,116,000.00
$ 20,800.00
$ 33,750.00
$ 44,000.00
6,000.00
Total of Ba.e Item. 1 thru 9 $ 5,150,250.00
ABEHTIV!' ITEM
11..
Four-Lane Launch Ramp
and Two Service Floata.
1 Job
Lump 'UllI *___125,000.00
1B
FLOATS, PILING and UTILITIES
Total of Ba.e Itema 1 thru 9 and Additive Item 11. $ 5,275,250.00
1C
CONTINGENCY
TOTAL CASH OUTLAY
4,000,000.00
9,275,250.00
724,150.00
$10,000,000.00
..
.,
:, ';,t'. }.::
.....~. '"
"1'" .
. ~,".o "i~
'r
.~
Afognak Logging
A DIVISION OF
--
-,...;:: .~
Kodiak Lumber Limited_.}.$t~j
(907) 224-3130 Box 610 Seward. Alaska 99664 :..~.
August 17, 1994
Mr. Tyler Jones
City Manager
City of Seward
P.O. Box 167
Seward, Ak. 99664
.
RE: Your request for a budget and a schedule for construction
of the Nash Road Boat Harbor
Dear Tyler,
From the date of all road blocks if any being removed I would anticipate
2 years plus for harbor construction consisting of breakwater, dredging,
piling and floats as well as boat ramp, electrical, etc.
You will have more control over the sewer and water projects neede.d
for this area of the ~ash Road.
I am rather amazed at Heery Internationals 16 item cost sheet and
descriptions. I like their volumes. They are much less than the Corps
of Engineers on dredging as well as rock volumes. As I said before we
will construct for much less than they have estimated as we will do all
the work ourself. We have discussed in the past with lending institutes
the need for $10,000,000 to build this boat harbor. I see no reason at
this time to change that figure.
Hope this covers your request for info. I will enclose copy of Corps
of Engineers volume and cost sheet.
Sincerely,
Cltil-vd ~ ~
Albert Schafer
President
.
."
.
1:00 ill
August 12. 1994
NPW33448.B2
Mr. Dave Calvert
Public Worts ~
City of Sewatd
Seward., AK 99665
Dear Mr. Calvert:
Subject:
Nub Road &at Harbor Masterplan Supplement
l~ 15. 1994. Review Commenla
As requesfal by the City of Seward. CH2M Iill.L 1wI reviewed the sewage. water. and
StonD .ieWCf ICCIioM of the mastec plan supplement for ~ proposed Nash Road boat
harbor.
The scope of out work included the following tasks:
1. Evaluate the sewage. water, lIRd storm sewer sections ot the mutcrplan and pr0-
vide any reoommet'ldlltions.
2. Identify the governmental agency that will regulate design, construction lII1d opera-
tiOD of Ibese {aciUn-.
Sewage
Review 111I4 Evalllntioll of the Masurplan
In the maaterplm. piping Na5h Road boat barbae wastewater to the Seward Marine Indus-
trial Center (SMIC) lagoon has been selected as the long-term allemative. Wastewater
will be truck-hauled to either SMlC or the Lowell Point sewer system during \be cady
stages of harbor development.
Truck hauling of wastewater from the harbor during the early 5tagca of harbot- use will
not be permitted by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). To
be licensed to !IerVe the public, the project most have an ADEe-approved sewugc disposal
Ancl10lcge Offlca
DenoB TCJWtj~ N.. 2550 DencI Street. Bttl HOOf
AnctJarage. AI< 99503-2792
907271}.2501
Fax No. 907277-9736
JlN TUB lUlD
91: L8LLG.!.O\l,g.
.C:Cl .6/1:1/10
Mr. Dave Calvert
Page 2 '
August 12. 1994
NPW33448.B2
sysrem. The ADEC will only allow a holding tank when no olher lypes of sewage dis-
posal systoo1$ can Ceasibl1 be built
Connecting to the SMIC lagoon is a viable option, as discussed.in CH2M mIL's Sep-
tember 7, 1993 report. Howcva-, in the. CH2M HIIL report. the optiOQ of piping waste-
water Ul Seward's Lowell Point sewer System bad a similar cost. CH2M HIlL's report'
was a preliminary evalwUion of the issue. \Wl recommend lhese two sewer disposal alter-
natives be evalua1ied in ~ detail before tIv: point of diseharge is finally selectM.
Masterplan draWl 3 shows a 6-inch sewer force main beadina toward the SlofIe, the
notes on the drawina Slate the pipe will follow Nash Road and manhol.e8 will be spaced
600 feel on renla'. A 400-foot maximum spacing between gmvity SCwct' manholes is
typical for the size pipes cxpa:t.ed in this project
The mascerplan m:ommends an extension of the sewer colk:cd.on system along die "Nash
Road 10 Bear Lake- lands to collect sewage from this polenlial area of growth. This will
only be economical if !he lots were more concemrall:d or if a aroundwa%er or wen drink-
ing WllIl:I' CODtamina&:iOD problem 0....-.1 TypicaUy, providing sewer collection semcc to
I-acre lots in Alaab. has proven to be very expensive in comparison to serving those lots
with onaile sewcn.
The City of Sewud 1IIC& 1be Municipality ot Ancborage Standard SpecificaaioDs as a
basis for City scwa' design&. ThMe same requirements shoold apply to the new boat
harbor utilities if they are to eventually be owned and operated by the City.
A $Ow~ pumpout Ifation will be needed in the harbor area to serve boata wiIb sewa&e
ho1dinS taJlb. The ADEC baa DO written guiddines desr:tlbing the details of such a
sy81l:m.. Tho haIbclr- pump stati.on should be dBsigned and the clesi.p submiUCd to ADEC
for n:view in COfIjanctioa with the sewage c:ollcction system desip~ The Coast Guard has
no special ~ conccming the pump station design. lhey view it a..'I a Stare issue.
Onsire disposal of wastewater into a septic systml. may be ODe tempcxary option to con-
sider Cor the llIrly $tap of harbor dewlopnaent TyPicallarF commerciaJ onsite &eWei'
systems usuaBy do not acccd 12.000-gatlon per day (gpc1) capacity. A 12,OOO-gpd onaite
system can ~ sewer flow from approxi.maldy 120 f11lkimc TPJ<itfel\ts per day
or approximately 600 tranaient persons using public resb:'OO1D5 or showers. The most
logic:alIOC'.Atin'1 Coc an on.sitc sysam is in rhe uplands area of Land of Scbafel' or KPB
lands.. The oui.tc sys&cm should be located downslope of the existing waller wells or any
new welb. Soils in the mea will need to be evaluated for their capacity to accepc waate-
Wiler.
.1:00~
JNV ..IilllJWi:>
~CL8LLZ.L06A
v1:: Cl .tlL'.iU.0>'J!
.
..
.
..
Mr. Dave Calvert
Page 3
August 12. 1994
NPW33448.B2
Trcaanent of wasr.ewarer with a package wasIewatcr lreannent plant and disposing of the
treated effluent through an outfall to Re$urtec;tion Bay is one option for wasmwaler dis-
posal. As described in CH2M HILL's September 7, 1993, report, it WIll estimafed that a
6O,ooo.gaOon-per-day (gpd) ~ty plant would be needed to treat wastewater for an
equivalent peak day popuJarion of appro:muarely 450 persona in the harbor area (100 res-
taurant -ts. 18 business employees. 300 I'P.StrOOm and sl\.ower users. 300 camper ~-
dents. 200 boat residents, 100 lull-time residents. and 125 hotel v.lsi.r.om). Wastewater
would be r.marcd to . serondary level (30 mgIL BOD and 30 mlVL TSS) before discharge
to .R.-.t.......don Bay. Sludge (rom the plant would be dewatued to approxima1ely 1 ~
3 percent mUds and tIansporced by tanker llUCk to the Lowell Point lagoon for disposal.
This less expensive sludge: disposal method (in compadson to dewatering to 10 percent
solids aDd )2ndfining) is similar to what the Municipality of Anchorage does with sludge
from the Gicdwood lICICWldaJy treatment plmL The Girdwood sllldge is tn1cked to
Anchcnge for disposal at the Point Woronzof WWTP. A package treatment plant for the
Nash Road Harbor would contain the following components:
· A llelC-containcd, 6O,ooo.gpd package pImt constructed of steel. including
all pumps. IlUIltion basins and blowers. disinfection equipment. flow-mea-
suring deviJ:es. influent screening equipmenr. sludge ston.ge and pumping
facilities, c.larification basins, eleccrica1 controls. and associated piping
,
. A 1,OOO-gallon W1ter lNCk for hauliDg sludge
. A heated building. appmxima1ely 36- by S2-feet. on a concrete foundation
with labonrmy and equipment. and associated electril:al and healing and
\rentilation equipment
· An influent pump station at the tennina.tlon of the collection system
· Site improvements including grading. landscaping, and paving
The estimated cost of the wasleWllII:r r.reaanent facility is provided below:
60,000 gpd pacbge plane
BoUding
Sludge truck
Pump station
Site improvements
$720,000
350.000
60.000
45,000
15.000
$1,190.000
TOTAL .
1~
9C~6LLiiL06i
~C:Cl t6/iil;SO
Mr. Dave Calvert
Page 4
August 12, 1994
NPW33448.B2
For sewage coUcctiOD., tre.a%ment, and disposal. we IeCORllDel1d the following i~ be
addressed in srea:r detail:
1. Identify rigbt-of-way and temporary. or pel1Dancnt eagements needed
2. Identify permitS 'required for constnl.ction and operation of the new $yst.em and
modifICations needed for the existing SMIC lagoon permit.
3. Develop comtructi.on costs and implemeaiation schedule..
4. Idcmify access fOt mamtMIsnce to those facilities located off road rigbt-of-ways
5. Identify impact to die ~i~ SMIC callection and llI:lUmeDl worb and improve-
ments requited to treat die additional flow and biologicalloadin,.
6.. Develop planning period and hydraulic design flows and bioIogicalloadings.
7. Describe the type of pipe. pump SWiona and manholes proposed for the new sys-
1en1.
8. ~op a plan view shoWS the proposed alignment along Nasb Road and the
point of connecdon to the SMIC sewer sysll:m..
9. Dcw.Iop conceptual dra.wiDp showing major improvements to the SMIC lagoon
and outfall.
Regulatory A.gent:l
The ADEC Soldotna oflice will be responsible for reviewing the: design of the &Cwage
facilities.. WU(cwatel'Dispoa1 ReguIatioD& 18 AAe 72 govern how die systelU is to be
designed. COOSImc~ and operated. Engineering pmns are required and mUSt be reviewed
and approved by AllEe before constnx:tion can begiIL
Water
Re.,kw and BvallUllion of Mo..rterpltm
The mastcrpIan propoaes twO options foe WIller: (1) Use two existing wells and construct
a new 250.00Q-gallon reservoir and treatment building on Lands of Schafer; and (2) c0n-
struct new wells. WIlter resetYoir. and ....:attnent building on upland KPB Jands.
~uo III
::JNV -n III It< JI:)
9CLSLL(;LUl!,Q.
~C:Cl 'S/(;1;8U
.
.'
1.
2"
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
. 8.
900 III
Mr. Dave CalWrt
Page 5
August 12, 1994
NPW33448.B2.
CH2M HU.L'a report recommended two I,OOO-gpm wells to serve the new de~lopment
This value came from an earlier- tqlOrt completed by Svendrup. The l,ooo..gpm capacily
is too conservative; two lOO-gpID we1Js will be sufficient as JOIlI as fire flow is provided
with l'ClICI'Voir storage. as proposed in the ~rp1an. IT the groundwatt:c is found to be
under the dimct influt.n<:'.e of surface, it becOlllrA aubjec::t to the Surface Willer Treatment
Rule and disirtfior.lion conlaa time requirements will be in effect. The srorage rer&r~()i~.
can be de8i,gned to provide the needed .pcinf'l!Il!tUm contact lime.
IT the two cmting wells am to be used, it is recommended they be pump ~ foe
capacity and rested for water quality. Low quality wate.- will increase C(ln.struction lIIld
operation costs if filtration is required to treat the water.
Drilling new wells on KPB lands uphill of die existing wells will provide more head
pn:aare and move the wafCc source away trom developed areas. However. leSt wclh
should be d.ri1led at the pr:opased location before final selection. Bedrock may be $hal-
lower at die higher elevation wmt:h will reduce capacity of the aquifer and wel1.
Similar to the sewer sysaem design, the Walm" system design should follow the require-
ments of Anchorage's Standard Specifications..
We recommend the following it.e1D$ be addre$sed in further detail: .
Identify n,ht-of-way and temporary and peonanent easements.
Identify permits required for construction and operation of the new 3}'stem.
Develop con81JUCtion cosrs and all implementation scl1eduIe.
IdeD1ify access for maintenance TO those componentS located off road right-of-
wa)'L
Describe the planning period. hydraulic design flows and fire floW$.
Identify the type of pipe, type of reservoir and treatment facilities propcscd.
Develop a CQnce.pLual plan drawing of the reservoir and lreatment facility struc.
tures and yard piping.
Identify the resecvoir sUz requi1:ed to meet peak demands and fire flowa
J}lV 111H JUB:>
9CL6LL1:L06a,
~C:Cl t6/~[;gO
Mr. Dave Calvert
Page 6
August 12, 1994
NPW33448.B2
9. Confirm the aquifer is capable of meetiq the waler wpply requirements.
R.egu/Dtory Agtmcy
The ADEC Sold01na offlce will be responsible for reviewing the desiin of the warer
facilities.. Drlnkin. Walel'Regulations. 18 AAC 80. govern how the s)'ilem is to be
designed. constructed and operated. EnJiDccring plans are ~:ired and must be revlRted
and approved by ADEC before construction CU1 begin.
Storm Sewer
Rnkw and EwUui#U)n of Masterpltm
The masllcrplan w.,...,.!l....s the need for a storm sewer coUection and ttcabDcnt s)lSU:m. A
trap to prevent roc:b and dcbrls as well as gasoline, oil and o&ber coDlaminanlS (rom
entering ResurrcdiDn Bay, is proposed. The location of these components is not shown
OD the drawings.
The storm stM:l' design should follow \he sUIldard specif"acanons used in Anchorage.
Similar to tile wa1Icr and sewer design. these specifications have been 1ISCd as a &uide.1iDe
by the Uty of Seward for past projed.L
We ~mrnd the foUowinJ items be addrased in further detail:
1. JdcnIify rf.ght-of'-WIlY aud temporary and permanent ~eIUS ~
2. Identify permitS required for eOllSttuCtion and operation of the new system.
3. Develop COnsk1JCtiOll cOSU and lID implementation schedule.
4. Describe ~ routeS for rnainteJl&D<:e of the system.
5. Identify the design stOUD. hy~ design flows, and pipe sizes.
6. Desc::ribe the type of pipe and treatment f'lrili,;"c proposed.
7. Complete a conceptual plan drawing of the piping and treatment facility $U\JC:IUre$
and outfall
.1.0011"
JNV TUB lUID
9CULLZLOtlQ.
oe:el 'B/Z(;~O
.
..
\.
QOO IJl
:Mr. Dave Calvert
Page 7
August 12, 1994
NPW33448.B2
Regu/otory Agency
The ADEC Soldotna. office will be responsible for reviewing the coll$1IUCtion design of
the storm sewer facilities. Watet" Quality Standards 18 AAe 70 describe the goals the
system must meet. The State has set minimum requirements for the design of tile compo-
nents of a stOml wa1et system. Meeting water quality standards at d\e point of discharge
is the driving factor in designing the system. Engineering plans are required and must be
reviewed and approved by ADEC before construction can begiJL
If you have any questions cotl<lCming this evaluation please contact IDe. We look forward
TO continuing 10 wort with the City of Seward on the Nash Road Boat Harbor project.
Sincen:ly,
CH2M HIlL
/~S-~
Matt Slephl, P.P..
Project Manager
bjalANClOOl12FS. WPS
:)~
9C~~
9C:Cl .ij/El;ijU
August 15, 1994
~~~~\?\\7\C\ 1'\
'\ ~ \ ~ \,bl.,.;) ~ \,J ~: \ \
)7 i~
AJJG 1 5 '99~
HEERY
Mr. Tyler Jones
City Manager
City of Seward
PO. Box 167
Seward, Alaska 99664
S Nerd
City of e-" r
City MaMge
; '"~': "
'" :.":-
Re:
Subject:
Nash Road Small Boat Harbor
Final Report - Master Plan Submittal
)'~,'1~ ',',
;"J":("' "-
Dear Tyler:
.
As requested by the City of Seward, Heery International, Inc. has reviewed the Master Plan
documents for the Nash Road Small Boat Harbor Project and prepared a final report which reflects
our findings. Our report has been prepared in the context of the requirements setforth in the
Development Agreement between the City of Seward and Mognak Logging dated February 25, 1994
and the Nash Road Boat Harbor Master Plan submittal dated June 15, 1994. Concurrent with our
report, we understand that the City of Seward has also retained the services of CH2M HILL to
review the utilities component of the Master Plan and submit a separate report.
The Nash Road Small Boat Harbor project is large, somewhat complex and has potential risks which
must be addressed by a thorough and properly prepared Master Plan prior to the City confirming that
the project will produce substantial public benefit.
Our report highlights for the City what the developer must do as required by the Development
Agreement and should do to provide adequate information for the City to properly evaluate the
project.
Please advise me if you require any additional assistance or if! can answer any questions you may
have.
Sincerely,
d...
cc: Dave Calvert, City of Seward
Heery International. Inc.
A aroup01 prohtSSlonalseMC'Ilractlces
880HSlreel,SultI201.Anclloraoe,AJaska99S01
!!leptlone90J.2S8.0699 Fax901-251l-Q160
...n.ANTA BALTIMORE 80STON CHARLOTTE CLEVELAND OEIM:R HOUSTON LONDON
LOS Ar.GELES MEXICO CITY MIAMI NEW YORI( ORLANOO PHILAOElPHIA POflTLAND
SACRAMENTO SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEAmE SPOKANE VAHCOtMR WoWllHGTON DC
.
.
.
The following Reery review comments are organized in accordance with the requirements of the
Development Agreement, Article 2 - Planning Phase; Paragraphs 2.I.A through 2.1.H.
The Master Plan shall consist of maps, other graphic materials and text as necessary to depict
and address the following:
2.1.A REQUIREMENT: Existing conditions in the Project Area, including land uses,
topography, roads and other transportation facilities, utility facilities, land ownership
boundaries, and location of existing structures.
. The Developer must provide a single plan that denotes existing structures, utilities, well
locations, septic fields, roads, right-of-ways, site topography, and shoreline configuration
which may indicate pilings and piers. This plan must document all existing conditions
currently affecting the site so that the City and the Developer do not overlook potentially
critical site issues which can seriously impact cost and schedule and, therefore, the potential
viability of the project.
.
A topographic map must to be included, indicating existing contours prior to any proposed
development. This information is particularly important when trying to determine quantities
for estimating cut and fill. This information is vital to developing a preliminary cost estimate
It will also influence the general sating of the overall development, the placement of buildings
within the development, the location of parking, and the location of utilities. This information
should be obtained from a qualified land surveyor.
. Because the harbor is the principle component of the proposed development, a detailed chart
of the intertidal area of Resurrection Bay, which encompasses the project site, should be
included along with inf('rmation concerning wave and tidal action for review and analysis.
This information is important in understanding and evaluating the tidal influences being
exerted on the proposed breakwater. It is also important to understand the impact of wave
and tidal influences on the entrance to the harbor and the approach channel. This information
and analysis are critical to developing a viable development concept and preliminary cost
estimate.
. The Master Plan should include an aerial photograph of the proposed site. This would be
very illustrative in showing "visible" existing conditions currently influencing the site and
adjacent properties. An aerial photograph will frequently show structures and or conditions
not depicted in a topographic survey.
.
Geotechnical information concerning the site and adjacent properties should be included
along with any information or studies prepared by the Corps of Engineers for the site. This
information is essential in assessing the type offoundations required, for determining whether
blasting rock is required, for detennining whether the existing material has suitable structural
bearing capacity or whether material must be imported to the site. Each of these issues can
have substantial impact on the overall cost of the project and are required to develop a viable
cost estimate.
2.1.B REQUIREMENT: Location and description of all construction proposed to be undertaken
as part of the Project, including grading plans, location of all road, utility and other
improvements, proposed land uses, and proposed lot and tract boundaries.
. The Developer must submit a plan for the construction that fully describes in narrative and
plan form, the rationale and sequencing to be employed in developing the project. The plan
must specifically address those factors influencing the Project's potential viability, the
rationale for how the Project will be phased, the contracting strategy to be employed for
constructing the Project, identification and discussion of significant factors that will impact
the Project's development (i.e.: permits), and the criticality of the Project's schedule.
. The Developer should identify the sources of the armor rock used for the breakwater and the
source of the filter rock. Also, the suitability of the material dredged from the harbor,
intended for use as fill material in the uplands area should be assessed. . .. .~.
. Sufficient preliminary civil engineering design information addressing the breakwater, harbor,
the upland fill requirements, utility infrastructure and roads should be provided to support
the technical and financial feasibility of the project. Preliminary civil engineering design is
critical to developing a preliminary cost estimate. The Master Plan, as submitted, does not
indicate or make reference to any civil engineering performed to date.
2.l.C REQUIREMENT: Proposed zoning and subdivision regulations, and proposed covenants,
conditions and restrictions governing the use of lad within the Project Area.
. At this stage of the project's development, we believe that the Developer has addressed the
various zoning and regulatory requirements pertaining to this section of the Agreement.
. Further study of the zoning should be undertaken by the City of Seward Planning & Zoning
Department to confirm that the proposed zoning is consistent with the short and long term
goals and objectives of the City.
2.1.D. REQUIREMENT: Proposed construction budget, including reserves and contingencies,
with documentation that the proposed budget is sufficient to provide, with reasonable
contingencies, for all costs of constructing the Project, and roads and utility facilities
required to serve the Project.
. No budget information was submitted with the Master Plan submittal. In order to properly
assess the viability ofthe proposed development, the Developer must provide a definitive cost
estimate, prepared by a qualified cost estimator. The cost estimate must reflect each of the
major components of the Project and their estimated construction cost. Estimates are needed
for initial site demolition of existing structures and utilities, constructing the breakwater, for
dredging the harbor and entrance channel, for constructing the docks, for constructing any
land-side support facilities, for importing any off-site structural fill material for the upland
development, for constructing all roads, sidewalks, storm sewers, sewers, water, site lighting,
electrical service, attendant design and construction management fees, and appropriate
construction contingencies.
.
.
.
.
The cost estimate should be properly evaluated and endorsed by all the parties involved.
. Heery has independently engaged a civil engineer to prepare a "rough" order-of-magnitude
list of quantities for the construction component of the project. We understand that CH2M
Hill has previously prepared construction budgets for the utility component of the project.
We recommend that the City require the Developer, as a minimum requirement, to complete
the preliminary cost estimate form provided below
Item Description Quantity Unit Total
No. Cost Cost
1 Dredging 1,474,200 cy
2 Armor Rock 40,163 cy
3 Filter Material 8,052 cy
4 Select Fill 48,136 cy
5 Upland Fill 1,255,539 cy
6 Street Curb & Gutter 18,900 If
7 Street Sidewalks 20,466 sy
8 A. C. Pavement 5,300 tons
9 Crushed Base Course 10,000 tons
10 Concrete Boat Ramp 704 cy
11 Boat Ramp Float 6,000 sf
12 Fixed Concrete Dock 31,500 sf
13 Concrete Fuel Dock 8,400 sf
Subtotal
14 Mobilization Lump Sum
Subtotal
15 Engineering, CM, Administration @ 20%
Subtotal
16 20% Contingency Lump Sum
Total
2.1.E REQUIREMENT: Proposed Project schedule, providing times required for design,
permitting and construction of all items included in the proposed construction budget.
. No project schedule was submitted with the Master Plan outlining the key elements of the
project, their sequencing and their duration. The Developer must prepare a schedule which
address all major project elements including financing, planning, permitting, design, and
construction.
. The Developer should provide a schedule for the large number of permits that will be
required for a development of this type. The Developer should identify each of the permits
that will be required and the time required by each agency for review and approval. Some of
the permits that may be required are:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Section 10/404 Permit
U.S. Envirorunental Protection Agency - Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans for
compliance with NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges for both
construction and operational periods
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service - Section 7 Endangered
Species Consultation, Migratory Bird Permit, Marine Mammal Permit
State of Alaska, Division of Governmental Coordination - Alaska Coastal
Management Program Consistency Determination
Alaska Department of Envirorunental Conservation - Section 401/Water Quality
Assurance
Alaska Department ofEnvirorunental Conservation - Hazardous Materials Site Plan
Review
Alaska Department of Envirorunental Conservation - Wastewater Disposal Plan
Review and Wastewater Disposal Permit
Department of Natural Resources - State historic Preservation Office - Section 106
Finding
State Fire Marshall- Life and Safety Plan Check (via the City Building Permit)
Kenai Peninsula Borough - Consistency with Kenai Peninsula Borough Coastal
Management Plan (tied to the State's consistency review)
Kenai Peninsula Borough - Floodplain Development Permit Review
City of Seward - Rezone and replatting of property
.
.
.
City of Seward - Conditional Use Permit
City of Seward - Building Permit
City of Seward - Easement or lease of City Tidelands
2.1.F REQUIREMENT: References and level of detail differentiated as follows:
.
.
2.l.G
1. High detail relating to the Project Site and the portion of the Developer Property
for which the Developer will be obtaining a conditional use permit.
2. Second level of detail for the remainder of the Developer Property.
3. Third level of detail as to the area identifieti as "Lands of Darling" and "Lands of
Murawsky" on the attached Exhibit A.
4. Fourth level of detail as to the area identified as "Lands of Alaskan Barge and
Salvage" on the attached Exhibit A.
5. Fifth level of detail as to the remainder of the Project Area.
The Developer must provide a higher degree of detail and refinement in the area pertaining
to the conditional use permit than what is currently shown. There is no definitive information
concerning the breakwater, harbor and upland property other than its general size and layout.
A layout of the boat slips must to be provided. The entire area requiring a conditional use
permit must to be shown to the same level of detail. Presently, the Master Plan submittal
illustrates only a small p,ortion of the total development, in greater detail. This must to be
expanded to encompass the entire development. The city will more than likely require that
a certain percentage of the development be landscaped. This needs to be reflected in the
Master Plan submittal. Often times, a rendering of the proposed development is provided to
further convey the "image" of the completed development. This would be a valuable tool in
conveying the Developer's intentions concerning the development.
The Master Plan should include a cross-section through the proposed project site that
provides the reviewer with a clearer understanding of the vertical, horizontal scale and spatial
relationships as they relate to the contiguous project site.
REQUIREMENT: Any development on the Upland Property shall be directed and funded
by the individual owners of the Upland Property. At the time of the City's approval of the
Master Plan, the individual owners shall agree in writing to the master Plan insofar as
it affected their property.
The Master Plan shall contain references to potential utility expansion into the general
area and other area improvements, including the potential for resident.driven annexation
efforts.
· Discussion of the utilities will be addressed separately by CH2M Hill for the City of Seward.
2.1.H REQUIREMENT: The Master Plan shall describe plans for financing the Project. Detail
shall be provided in the form of a cost analysis and a finding of financial feasibility by the
financing entity.
· There is no financial feasibility information available for review.
. A market study/financing plan confirming demand for the harbor and the proposed real estate
development must be prepared to support financing feasibility and return on investment
calculations.
. A narrative describing the management structure and operating policies/fees for use should
be included in the financial feasibility.
2.2 Review of the Master Plan.
Although not required by the Development Agreement, it is strongly recommended that the
City request the Developer provide a view of how the entire development might look once
completed, indicating the architectural style or theme the Developer intends for the project.
.. I j i ~
ffi !up~
~ i! H i~f
I !~~!
I!I'
u.d ~ill:
.
- I
I
!
I
~
I!
\ ~ ' \
tu'~\\h \ \ \\ \ \~i
U\ 1\ "n'
~, I ~'l ~l\\!\'\ \
. \ \ ~t1U 1
l \ \ ...... ·
\ \ \ ~ .
l\\ t"\ \
\\ \\\\1
\ll . .' .
. .
\
\
~
..--.'
,
.--~/.
'lllli It 1 \ 1 1 I
1;0 lit! 'lib!
~ . 1 II ...... ·
w 1 ~ .
~ it If 1,'110 I i
11 6. I .
. . .
. .
I r
I .
ol!il
,
. \
1 1~\
, \r
. \\\\\\ \
\
-
--
-
......
.
\
".~,,,.,...~-
. "....... .......--.,...
---------...-
-
~
f\llll\\nTI
\
..~
~,
~
~
!
~
~
~
\\ \
\'
---
\
h
\\
~
~
~ '
l '
\ "
. .
, .
'6
~
It
\ \.
i :~
\ ~,-
-~ ------
-
I ' -----\ ~
I I. " \ t
III I III 1
t \ 1\ \ \
1 \ \ \ I
I 1_..-----1 I.
.. --~--
-,..-----
lit:
t
,il
%;
'-\
~ ::~~
-
.
.
CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
RESOLUTION NO. 94-163
5. Solicit and obtain the individual property owner agreements mandated in
the agreement;
etc.
6. Expand on the basic harbor water and sewer utility design;
7. Give more information on the utility expansion plan; and
8. Detail the project marketinwfinancing plan, including float and slip sizes,
Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the city of Seward, Alaska, this
12th day of September, 1994.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
A TIEST:
THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
~L().C~
Dave W. Crane, Mayor
Anderson, Bencardino, Crane, Krasnansky, O'Brien, Sieminski
None
None
Darling
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Wohlforth, Argetsinger, Johnson &
Brecht, Attorneys for the city of Seward,
Alaska
~{~
City Attorney
. (City Seal)
.
.
~ u ~ (J (.e lJVUL~~ -\-0
~{- e..< p( c<...v'---'
~ ({t(. - /03>
Afognak Logging
A DIVISION OF
Kodiak Lumber Limitedllfp
Box 610 Seward. Alaska 99664 (907) 224-3130 Fax 224-3135;., _ _
September 26, 1994
fRl~f~~n~~fD)
Tyler Jones, City Manager
City of Seward
Box 167
Seward, AK 99664
Dear Tyler:
City ~IQr1(
.."....7..
Attached is a copy of a Master Plan for the Nash Road Small Boat Harbor. I
have responded to points raised by City Council and adjacent land owners.
.'
Extensive background data has been reviewed and referenced in the attached
document. A bibliography of this information is included with the document, and
the information itself will be given to Gwynne Pilch in the Port Marketing
Department.
The Master Plan itself is organized to follow the Development Agreement signed
in February, 1994. Included are City Council concerns regarding:
. Existing conditions
· A project management plan with a work schedule including permit
requirements
. A more detailed construction budget
· Several cross references to work all ready performed
. Proposals made to Mr. Darling
· Further commitments relating to sewer and water designs in the harbor and
in the utility expansion area
· And a marketing / finance plan, including a proposed berthing plan
In response to Mr. Darling's concerns, through correspondence from Kumin and
Associates, the Master Plan includes:
· Utilities extended to the Darling property line with the free road option.
· An offer to build a road almost 1/2 mile long to give access to most of the
frontage on the Darling property, including utilities in the road. This will give
immediate access and add to the value of their property.
· More detail regarding how the Design Review Committee will operate.
· A request for proposals to settle negative impact issues using appraisals,
trades, or leases.
I look forward to the.resolutiol') of these issues and the opportunity to get on with
the project: ~. . "
Sincerely,
d'/L4 5elf
Albert Schafer
President
.'
Enclosures
..J
.
.
.
NASH ROAD SMALL BOAT HARBOR
MASTER PLAN
September 26, 1994
Article 1 - Proiect Phases
The Project Site (City owned tidelands within the construction limit boundary) will
be built in 3 phases: (i) planning, (ii) construction, 6..d (iii) operation. . .
Roads and utilities on the project site will not be able to be installed until the
tidelands are filled. Upland properties may be developed as soon as permits are
acquired.
.'
The Planning Phase will continue with the preparation of the Conditional Use
Permit. During the Planning Phase, exclusive use agreements might be
considered regarding which market segment could be reserved for one property
owner and which for another. At this time no specific building development is
planned on the Project Site with the exception of the Harbormaster Building
including showers and rest rooms.
Article 2 - Plannina Phase
2.1A Existing Conditions.
Please see Appendix B, Sheet 2 of 5 for a detailed, scale drawing of the Project
Area including topographic lines, right of ways, landowner boundaries, and
existing structures. The Environmental Assessment of the project studied in
1983 and the Environmental Impact Statement both include extremely detailed
information about the site and the effects of the proposed project. Aerial photos,
the environmental reports, and a drawing of the recent electrical line extension
in the vicinity are available in City offices.
A small trailer park on site will be removed and the septic system will be
abandoned following AI<. DEC guidelines.
.
2.18 Location and Description of Construction.
Please see Appendix B, Sheets 1 through 5 for drawings of roads, utilities, land
uses, and lot and tract boundaries. See Corp of Engineer drawings, number 3-
SEW-95-04-02, sheets 3 through 13 for details of grading plans for the project.
In response to Darling concerns, two alternative road plans are proposed by the
Developer in addition to the road plan submitted on June 15, 1994, Appendix B.
On Sheet 4 of 5 (Appendix B), the second or eastern entrance to the project
would be moved east to be centered on the property line between lands of
Schafer and Darling. This road would curve to the east where Schafer lands end
and be constructed on lands of Darling approximately 1600 feet to the last NE-
SW crossroad in the project. The design and construction of this road, including
utilities, would be the responsibility of the Developt::r. The location of manholes
and connection points for the utilities in this road may be designed by Darling.
This option would require no investment by Darling and provide utilities, access,
and road frontage along almost 1/2 mile of their property.
On Sheet 2 of 5 (Appendix B), the second or eastern entrance to the project
would be moved further east to be totally on the lands of Darling. The design
and construction of this road system would be the responsibility of the land
owner. Utility hookups would be available from the project at 5 locations.
Because two roads are required for access to the project, this road would need
to be built before the Developer portion the of project was completed.
The initial project will be built with approximately 1136 slips. The 1136 slips will
include water and electricity. The water supply system will be designed so water
will be available on the docks all year.
2.1C Zoning and Subdivision Regulations.
See Appendix A, page 1, ZONING and COVENANTS. As the Project moves
forward, it is anticipated that the City and others will become involved in the
"Design Review Committee". The Developer will work with this committee to
ensure an attractive, quality harbor atmosphere will be maintained. This
committee may be made up of the Developer and members of the community at
large. They would establish guidelines for the property owners and leaseholders
to ensure that the quality of the project is maintained.
-,
,
--
. 2.1D Budget.
Appendix C, Bidding Schedule, Items 1-9 Plus 1 A
Harbor Area Water Distribution system
Harbor Area Wastewater Collection system
Electric, Telephone, Storm water systems
Piling and Floats
Harbormaster Bldg. including Restrooms & showers
Road Grading I finish grading I paving property
$5,275,250
500,000
300,000
500,000
2,100,000
150,000
200,000
Total Direct Cost
9,025,250
974,750
10,000,000
Contingencies
Total Project Cost
Total of Base Items 1 through 9 and additive Item 1A ",= $5,275,250.
.
Most of this cost is moving materials. Dredging costs have been estimated at
$1.30 I yard, in Florida a Port Authority moved material for $0.30 I yard.
These costs do not include costs for upland development except for the
harbormaster building, roads and utilities. Costs for further upland development
will depend on and be driven by market demand.
The City of Seward will develop wells, C! water reservoir, wastewater treatment
facilities, and a marine outfall. Cost figures are estimated in Appendix E, page
9. Appendix L, a recent CH2M Hill report, on page 3 lists an option of installing
a package wastewater treatment plant. Other alternatives to be studied by the
City include:
· A small onsite wastewater treatment plant for use during construction and in
the winter,
· A larger system to be installed in the future for peak summer demand (after
requirements are better defined and funding is available),
· Financing options including grants
· A package wastewater treatment plant presently owned by Afognak
.
~
-J
2.1E Proposed Project Schedule for design, permitting, and construction.
See Appendix E, Proposed Schedule.
Note that construction has been planned to avoid salmon spawning from August
10 through November 1 and to avoid sl;llmon migration from April 15 through
June 15 each year. During these time periods, utility, float, and road
construction will be taking place on the uplands. Professional engineering
design work will be required for the utilities. Most other design work has been
completed by the Corp of Engineers, drawings are available for inspection.
Several major permits are in hand and complete, including:
U. S. Army Corp of Engineers - Section 10/404 permit 3-1-93
SOA, Ak Coastal Mngt Program (ACMP) Consistency Determination 11-30-92
Kenai Peninsula Borough Coastal Plan 11-30-92
Ak DEC Section 401/Water Quality Assurance 12.'1-92
Other permits to be obtained include the conditional use permit and building
permits from the City of Seward, rezoning of the property, and specific permits
such as a wastewater disposal permit. Survey work relating to leases and
transfer of the tidelands will be necessary for these permits.
Professional Engineering work will include design and permitting of the
wastewater and water systems.
2.1 F Level of Detail.
The Corp of Engineer drawings have construction level detail for the Project
Site. An approximate layout (Appendix F) of 1136 slips for 32' to 75' boats is
provided based on current demand. There is also room on the northwest end of
the harbor for well over 100 small boat slips near the boat ramp.
The exact layout of the uplands is not known at this time. Population sizing
estimates were made in the Sept. 7, 1993 CH2M Hill report. This relative I
equivalent population estimate assumes there will be certain numbers of
campers using the uplands, boaters living on board or visiting their boats
temporarily, people using public facilities, etc. The location of campgrounds,
retail shops, restaurants, and other facilities will be left to the land owners and
their tenants.
As the project advances, the adjacent property owners will provide details
regarding construction on their property through the normal Planning and Zoning
channels including the Design Review Committee.
'-r
..""",..' ';':'~..,... .-.
_ _ J
.
.
.
2.1G. Individual Owner Agreement.
The Developer is working to improve the value of all the property in the vicinity
of the project. By the investment of millions of dollars in the project, adjacent
landowners should enjoy an increase in the value and marketability of their land.
This master plan revision is addressing concerns and possible solutions voiced
by Darling, through Kumin and Associates. This is the type of exchange
necessary to move forward with the project and realize this plan. The
Conditional Use Permit must include the Darling property in this master plan.
Planning support from all concerned parties will be necessary for the project to
succeed.
Adjacent property owners are encouraged to propose written solutions to
possible negative property value effects which may include:
. Professional real estate appraisals before and after the project. If it is
determined that property values decreased after the project, options could
include sale of the property to the developer at the "before" price, a financial
settlement for the difference after the project is completed, or other creative
arrangements. .'
. Land trades, a specific area of upland property for a specific area of
waterfront property.
. Long term leases of waterfront property to connect the uplands property to
the waterfront
Utility Expansion Plan
It is beyond the scope of this Master Plan to anticipate future utility development
outside the project area. However, the Developer will assist and work with the
City of Seward in these areas:
. Encourage the Alaska Legislature to fund the required utility studies and
construction to serve the Nash Road area.
. Document adjoining areas where existing water and wastewater systems are
operating at or beyond capacity.
. Document failed water systems in the area and the feasibility of repair.
. Research possible grants to fund utility upgrades which may be used in
conjunction with this project.
-
-;;.
I
2.1 H. Financing / Market Study.
Orson Smith, a Coastal Engineer with the Corp of Engineers, addressed the Port
and Commerce Advisory Board in August, 1993. Referring to boat moorage
demand, he stated "demand is easy to document in Seward". He then went on
to state that "both plans (Nash Road and eastward expansion of the present
boat harbor) would probably fill up immediately". Further documentation
regarding the demand for boat moorage is available the Environmental Impact
Study and a lengthy memorandum from Chris Gates written in March, 1992.
These documents and a transcript of the PACAB meeting are available in the
City Port Marketing office.
Operating revenues and expense projections:
- Scenario # 1
Assuming a full harbor of 1136 slips, a $10 million dollar loan for 10 years at
10% interest will have debt service of $1.6 million per year.
Permanent moorage income from 700 of the slips, at $40 I ft I yr =$1,045,0001 yr
Transient moorage from 436 slips, pro rata over the ye~r, = $637,113 Iyr
Upland leases & parking income, 1.3 million sq ft, $. 701ft = $910.0001 vr
Total = $2,592,113/yr
Revenues total $2.6 Million per year. Debt service is $1.6 million per year,
leaving $1.0 million for operations, maintenance, taxes, and profit.
- Scenario #2
A different scenario would include a full harbor with 500 slips permanent
moorage, and 636 slips transient. These numbers would be:
Permanent moorage income from 500 of the slips, at $40 1 ft I yr = $750,000 I yr
Transient moorage from 636 slips, pro rata over the year, = $985,OOOlyr
Upland leases & parking income, 1.3 million sq ft, $.70{ft = $910.0001 vr
Total = $2,645,OOO/yr
Revenues total $2.6 Million per year. Debt service is $1.6 million per year,
leaving $1.0 million for operations, maintenance, taxes, and profit. This is
approximately the same result as scenario # 2, with more permanent moorage
than transient.
- Scenario # 3
Market research indicates that private and corporate boat owners are interested
in purchasing "condo" slips and banks are interested in loaning money for this
purpose. This would provide another avenue to secure construction funding.
Detailed financial analysis has not been performed. Owners would pay
principal, interest, and maintenance fees. This option will be explored further as
financing details are secured.
/
o
I
.
.
.
.
Appendices
Appendix A, June 15, 1994 Nash Road Small Boat Harbor Supplement, 3 Pages
Appendix B, June 15, 1994 Master Plan Blueprints, 5 Sheets (2 revised sheets
in packet)
Appendix C, August 18, 1994 Letter Schafer to Jones, Budget & Schedule,
3 pages
Appendix D, March 1,1993 CaE Permit, 4 pages narrative
Appendix E, September 24, 1994 Proposed Schedule
Appendix F, Proposed Berth Plan
.'
Bibliography
February, 1994 Development Agreement, Seward & Afognak,
12 pages plus 3 exhibits.
November 30, 1992 ACMP Conclusive Consistency Findings,
5 pages
December 1, 1992 Ak DEC Sec 401 Clean Water Act of 1977
and Ak Water Quality Stds - Reasonable Assurance, 4 pages
March 2, 1992 Chris Gates Memorandl)m
August 1983 Environmental Assessment, AkCOE
AAPA Advisory, Sept. 5, 1994, page 3, $O.30Iyd dredging
Orson Smith (Ak CaE) talk, August 4, 1993, PACAB Meeting
Environmental Impact Statement
August 12,1994 CH2M Hill Report
September 7, 1993 CH2M Hill Water and Sewer Cost Opinion, 13 pages
7
ANDREW J_ PATAPOFF
P.O. BOX 21.... -Hd7.bIr.......kLIPIr. c::lI_ . -,.._- SEWNm.NASU.
t
ARCHITECT
/907'1 224-497.1
NASH ROAD BOAT HARBOR MASTERPlAN SUPPlEMENT:
Jwte 15. 1914
The following ducric.. oct.' upecta of the total Mas~ which c:ould not be more easily described on
the Drawings as lubmitt8d.
ZONING:
The Project Area should be rezonecl to Hart)or Commercial (HC) to ~ the potential find 4.1.. tor this
...... The "Landa of DMIn9" (Sou1h . Wat of Nun Road), "Landa of Murawalcy" and "Lands of Sctla"'"
(South. West 0' Nuh Road) should also be ,..zoned to HC because of their proximity Ind probable
futu,.. IMd usege as lNy rwt... to the Pl"oject Si.. Because of it'1 pt'OJlimity to this future "wor, ~t reut
the Souttlem h..f of "Landa of A.B, . S: should be conliclered as being ,..zOMd to HC as well. Should
the "Landa of DMlng" .vel get dfteloped, a future Itreet to the South would m_ the "Lands of City of
Seward. and "Lands of Bw.non" accetlible and hence they ..so should be rezoned HC. Also. Planning
. Zoning CommiaioMrs ahouId consid.. the poasibility of modifying their eJdltlng Ordinance to ..low Multi-
family residentl81 (Condominiums . ~ts) conatnlctlon wiltI . Conditional Use Permit wi1tIin the HC
zone. The potential for ~ CondominiumllApllr1ments in HC .,......'-tIW b.cK from the H8ttlor itself
could be ./'HI asset to'" future dwelopment in this ....
COVENANTS:
All lands to be devIIlll~ zoned as He (u nolIId abOve), should be rwgula~ u to building appearance
(and it'1 UliJlty to "bIend" wi1tlout IbsolutIly ma1ICtling oct.' buildings), building proximity to oll'ler factlitia
to avoid bIoc:lcIng .... Ind olI'IIr upecta of "community" which ~ how this entn dewlopment
appara and wortca ...... This coulcI be ~ by City Council .aoointlna . "Design ReYiew
Commi.... which rwporta dINctIy to the PlMning . Zoning Commiaaion of the City of SiWiIG. All partin
planning on buildlnt would be rwquir-.d to IUbmit requests thr'OU9h this Commi.. and be required to
submit coIorlmatllrial sample "boIrda. indicating the ex1IIrior ma1llri.. . colen intllncled to be used for
their individuld projectl, u WIll u ~ la UllollSInd numbera (if ~lIacle) of ~ as I*t of
this requi,.",.,t.
SITE POPULA1"IOR
It il envisioned 1Mt the ~llId "1*'NU*lt population" (Shop Owners and their Employees) for the
land ...... indk..... . del. .raped on Drawing.' could be betWeen 300 and t ,000 people. depending
on what f.cill.... tctLI1IIry go into thia dewlOPIMht when it Is full. At this time it is diflcWt to Itatll a nnn
number for ~ unII..-llnowwtlatlanc:ts witl be teued and for what put1:lOI& "Populaliona" for oct.' HC
lands wiltIin ~~llityCClUld...1y triple theea1lmatlls indlcatlld Ibove.lt is enviaicned thatwhen fully
dew/oped. ........., p~p . ~~n. for lNa entn HC-zoned land could be .. h~h .. 4 - 10 tima the
"pennanent ~~"",m. or men. depelldlna on what f.cilitlu ultimatllly go into ttleae deWlloped &ria.
Thilwould i'"JMlGteciallllt roIIda and I...... .. well.. eJdlting ulilitla, lID thia owraII future del.al:pment.
STREET ACCE-
Nash ROIId should "- . right-tum ,_ to handle lI'Ie potential tratnc to and from the H__ AtU. This
can be accomplished by the City Council reql*ting lI'Ie StatlI D.O.T. fUnd and build this prcject on the6existing StatlI A.O.W. The City of s.wn FIN eep.rtment requires 2 mans of _and ..... from
the H8tbcr, in cue one reed becom.. bklcQd ltleir equipment ItiU can provide IIN protllC1lcn lID &rIas
within the Hart)or and UpIanda. Also, l:lecw JM of the amount of potllntlal tratlIc, it is 8dviMd the City
petition the StatlI to "-the pcatlld speed limit reduced to 35 mpn on Nuh Read wiltIin 114 mile of any
ICc:eU fI'om lI'Ie HC landa tD Naill "oM.
0,
c :':"u
.__"_"__~_____......J
.
.
.
.
Nash Road Boat Harbor Mas1erplan
Supplement Letl8r
8-15-94
Page 2
SEWAGE:
Of the 3 options praen*! in the CH2-M-HiII report, da*! 9-7-93. it is recommended that the best
alternauve for sewage disposal woulcl be to ultlma1ltly pipe the sewage to the existing Spring Creek
Correctional Cen_ sewage lagoon. In the intenim. -.vage woulcl be truck-hauled from a holding tank to
either the S.C.C.C. or City of Seward -.vage lagoon. Because Of the polltnUal for ruture Ownership and
development of the "Nuh ROIId to B.. lAM" IMda by the City of Seward, it ~ recommended that a
gravity-flow sewer line be ~ Norther1y on NUh Road from this si. to collect ruture sewage from
this potIIntial .... as .... as to otrw sewer sarvica 10 UInc:l Owners along other IMda within proximity to
this MWW. This sewege coulcl then be disposed of along with the reat of the coIlec1l1d sewage from the
Project Si. and other HC-zonec:l Ianda. This then woulcl give the City some optiona for ruture
development as well as some income from ,... charged tor these sewe;e services. On-Si. sewer linea
would 1armina1a in manholes Idjacent to the "Landa of Darting" to t.cilita. MY ruture _line services
being possibly used on those landS and connecting to these indpllld sewer lines.
WATER:
Wa_ for the Harbor and Uplands shoulcl be as shown on Drawings. Another al1amatiw would be to
acquire permission tor the KPB 10 construct a tMk with .... or w.l1.f on their land above the Project Sita,
which woulcl 811m''''' the need to pump watar to the SIIlI. The wa_ coulcl now either across the "Lands
of Darling" or a/ong the Nuh ROIId R.O.W., piped underground (with the permission of the respective
owner) to this SIIlI. Moat likely, whlcl'levW location of w.llltank Is ultlrnat8ly used, a wa_ treatment facility
is required to be construcllld to insure the quality of wa_ is maintained. On-Si1a w.tar lines would
termina1a in plugged ends IIIdJecent to the "L.anda of Darling" to f8ci11tata any ruture w._ line services
being possibly used on those Ianda and connecting 10 theM indicallld watar lina.
STORM SEWER:
Storm sewer facilities shoulcl be as indlcatad on Drawings. A trap must be included in_ the system to
prevent rockS, din and debris (as well as gasoline. oil and other possible contaminants) from being piped
directly into Reaurrection Bay. On-S1ta .tDnn _ lina would tarmi".. in manholes Idjacent to the
"Landa of Darling" to f8ci11tatll1lf'/ rutIn.tonn _line services being pouibIy used on those Iancla and
connecting to thue indloatlld norm _linea.
TELEPHONE:
GTE Ihould provide enough talsp:w. MrVlce linea to the Si1a (Hart)or and"Schafw Uplands") to handle
all projec*! and rutin taIephone needs. All lines will be below-ground (as shown on Drawingsl once
main service c:roa.. aver Nuh Road. Another option is to have GTE provide underground service from
the North side of Huh Road, which would .lImin.1a any overheacl telephone lines above NUh Roact GTE
should plan on increuing trunk seMce lina along Nuh Road to serw this and other ruture development
areas indlca1lld atIcPM.
EU!CTRICI1"r.
The City of Seward should provic:Ie enough elec;trical service to the Harbor" Uplands, as ~I.. other He-
zoned lands in the .,. to handle future electrlcal needs. The po18nt181 for the Nuh ROIId - Bear l..ake
Corridor of land should alao be lakiIn inlD account when detarmining eIedricel needs of the area.
Pouibly. to .tart with, the existing aub-.tatlon . S.M.I.C. may be 1dequa1a for eIeotricaI Ioada. but
ultima1aly another sub-station might be required (possibly on ruture lands of the City in the Nuh Road -
Bear LakIt Corridor). Electric service at the Slta (Harbor and "Scha'" Uplanda1 should be sized to handle
all projectad and fUture eIKtrtc needa. All servIc:e will be bel~round (as shown on Drawlngsl once main
service crouea ovw Nuh Road. Another option Is to provide underground seMce from the North side of
NUh f'lollld. wntcn woulclellmma. MY owrr.e.cI etec;U1C lines aDO\M Nun ..<*I.
I
-I
1
Nuh Road Boat HlI/1)Of Mas_an
Supplement LetlW
15-15.94
Page 3
PARKING:
Required parking tor the Boat HlI/1)Of Itself Is provlded on-slr. tor Standard vetltcIes and parldng for
vehicles pulling boat trailera wi" be IocatIId on "Lands of Schafw" on the North " Eaat side of Nuh Road.
as indlca~ on the Drawings. Shuttle service from this lot 1D the Hatbor will be provided by the Dewloper.
There aIao is tNW 1,500 pMdng .alls provided along the .trMt curba, which do not calcula. into
anytloCly's ~r-.d putcIng, wt\Ich lnetlc.... that there should be ldequar. pMdng on the Sir. for ltIe
H.mor" Uplenc:ts. All NqUlNcl pMdng tor II'fI/ Ieuec:l (or owned) property ..loped within the uplanda of
the HC-zoned lands would be ~uInId 1D be on the Ieuec:l (or owned) property and meet III requirM\ents
of the City of SMWd Zoning Orclinance aa it ,.....1D p.nclng.
ANNEXAnON:
Wl1tI the poasibility of acquiring cerwin lands from the KPB from NUh Road 1D e.... l.ake. the pouibility
exists that those Isnda would be 1soIa~ from other landa wIttlln the City Umits of Seward. creating . very
coatly and awk.wI d aituatIon in attIImptlng 1D provide City Servicu 1D tl'Ieae Ianc:ta. It Ihould be c:onaidered
by the Clttzena of Seward. aa 'tWllaa the Citizens of the .... impactlcl, 1D annex certain Janda connecting
this project Ii. along Nuh Road 1D the landS of the Nuh Road - a.... l.ake Corridor. This would fKilitate
proyldIng watllr, ..., and eIec.1rlc senricea 1D these .....
~AftII gap DRAWI-
This Iheet was InclucMd in the cIrawInga tor the MaalllrJ)lsn 1D show that the bIocka of IeuabIe land shown
on Sheet.1 wi. not be III taMn up wIttl buildings, but many open .... wi" be provided which would
allow numerous ample vWws of the Harbor itlelf and the Bay from numerous .... of other Uplands
deVelopment, due 1D pMdng and IMdac.ping requirwnents. TheM are just urn... of wtlat ~ be
ulUma1llly located on theSe "'ul:lle upIanda (VoIItI'I approvIII of PlMnlng " ZOnIng Commission and Design
Review Commibe) and r.fIect no prior arnngements tor future c:leveIOpmMt.
t..? :~ a
-
. .
II I
A.d,
4...
\ \
-
. .
. . .
1 'I ~
011 P
\'! 1\ · t ~~I
i~~
""I' 'I \ II
-
,
Q
I
,I
I'
/
,
\
.---
-
,
.
.
.., , III I \1\ \
i \ 11 i\J' \,
~ \\ \\\\\\ '\\ \ \
~ t\l ~i \\1 ti-l '11.1
~ '\1 I \l\ 1\\', ll' I
l) I 1 l'a , .\ \ . . . .
~ I I ,l' " P
:: \\1\1t\ .da n ~ ,
~ . . . ...
\2-
jt'yJ
....' ~ .
--------.---
-------
.
.
.
~~.
":, ~.,'" -
.,!'
~,i: ".j!>
),.1 . .
noalUK LUmDer Llmltea ~~
(907) 22".3130 Box 610 Seward. Alaska 99664 ,,;.~~
August 18, 1994
Mr. Tyler Jones
City Manager
City of Seward
P.O. Box 167
SEward, Ak. 99664
~~(G ffi '/7~'" ~ -~- ~,
J ~ ~ ,1 ~ ,'" .
,...,.. '-/' \ 't'! , .. 4
-"........, ! I ..,,:.; I
- /" It.
~....,. r
- 'I j ;
. - ".
AUG 2 2Jvgi ~
RE: Nash Road Harbor
City or Sew/lrrj
CIty Manager
Dear Tyler,
To further clarify construction costs as Afognak determines .h~rn,.or
the Nash Road Boat Harbor job. Please understand these are in house
costs and have no relation to other bids we might make on other
government contracts. Our cost format is a Corps of Engineering bid
form for this boat harbor if they had gone to bid several years ago.
This will give you the cost breakdown you ask for.
I shall class curb and gutter, blacktop, etc. under uplands development
after harbor is complete and the City has done the sewer and water from
this site to treatment plant and to the water source.
As you will note we are within our $10,000,000 budget as discussed in
my earlier letter.
As to the time frame for this project let us assume there is no
government hold up - City - Borough - State - Federal or private hold
ups. If the above is true the following schedule will be relatively
close. The first work will be to develop a rock pit and complete the
breakwater. Rock Class A armor rock 32,600 c.y., Class B armor rock
54,000 c.y., Breakwater core material 124,000 c.y. for a total of
210,000 yards of shot rock for breakwater. This first phase will take
8 months to complete.
The second phase consists of about 1,6000,000 c.y. of dredging. This
phase will take 12 months.
The third and all inclusive final phase will be the installation of the
floats and building of launching ramps. We will expect to spend 6
months on this phase. Some of this 6 month period can overlap on the
excavation.
.-
.
-'
Page 2
In other words we will be placing floats and piling as excavation
dredging progresses. We will be able to move along with the excavation.
i
Also we would start building floats during the early months of this
project. Probably starting in month number 2 to form and structure
our floats. At this time we intend concrete floats. This may be
subject to change however.
At any rate I would want to
to give us a little leeway.
should be on line 26 months
allow 6 months for this beyond dredg;ng
So with no real hangups this project
after start up.
Please understand this is our best estimate at this time, but should
be a good ballpark figure.
S:ZM~
I
Albert Schafer
President
.'
1 Enclosure
4-
I
844176A25U
Itell
~ 5escriotion
1. Mobiliz.tion and Dellobi1iza-
t ion.
2. Dredging .ad di.po.al of
dredged ..t.rial.
BIDDINO SCHEDULE
NASH ROAD HARBOR
SEWAIW, . A1.ASXA
!I t illll t ed
QaaMity
BAS! . ITEMS
1
l:lnit
-
Job
Unit
Price
j ~ ~
DACWIl5-86-B-OO--
!atillllted
Amoallt.. .
:. ,
LUIII~ 'UIa ...N/A.....
.. Pint 1,231,000 c.y. 1,231,000 c.y. . 1.30
b. AU .ever 1.231.000 c.y. 342,000 c.y. $ 1.30
3.
Cla.. "A" Armor Roc\(.
4.
Cla.. "B" Roclt.
S.
BreakwaCer Core MaC.rial.
-
6.
Sandy Gravel.
7.
Pla.tic Filtar Fabric.
8.
In.tal1 Surv.y HonulIent..
9. Navi~ation Mark.r .nd
Wind St.tion B.....
lA. Four-Lane Launch laMP
and Two Service Flo.c..
32.600
54.000
124,000
S,200
22,500
c.y.
c.y.
.
c.y.
c.y~
..y~
24
a.. .
$ 28.00
$ 18.00
$ 9.00
$ 4.00
$ 1.50
$
$2,000.00 $
. 1. 600 . 300.00
* 444.600.00
$ 912 ADO. 00
$ Q7? nnn.oo
$ 1,116,000.00
$ 20,800.00
$ 33,750.00
$ 44,000.00
6,000.00
Total of B... ICall. 1 chru 9 $ 5,150,250.00
ABIHTIV!' ITEM
3 ...
1 Job
LUIII~ 'UIII $... 125,000.00
IB
Tot.l of Ba.. IC,III' 1 chru 9 and Additive learn lA $ 5.275.250.00
FLOATS, PILING and UTILITIES 4 000 000 0
. . . 0
9,275.250.00
lC
CONTINGENCY
TOTAL CASH OUTLAY
5
724,150.00
$10,000,000.00
.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
t.WDI OCtlee
C11;y of Sew&rd
2 -920287, Resurrec t1 on Ba.y 96
U. S. ArTIt1 Engineer DistMct, Alasta
-;
Pvmihee
P_t No.
NOT!: 'I'M lenIl "YOll" ucllt8 cIwl.-*!__ . -.i Ia tlUI .-nUt. _ 11M 1*11II-- ow U1 taev. cn.t_. 1"a. \arm
"tAil of&." Nf_ to tIM appropriaa. dinriet IX cItNioa offtee of tIM C4fl11 of ,"v-- baftac j1ariIdietIoD o.v till pormlltoG
KUftty or 11M appnlllliUl offtdU of tIaai om........... UlSlaarity of eM --......... om-.
You 1ft aatllodald to JIId- .... Ia III .
wltll .. __ ucl ~ I' ~"-I Wow.
Projecto-tp&ioll: Dredge approxi..tely 1,573,000 cubic yards (ey) of silt, sand, and
gravel fral approxiaately 64 sub-tidal acres of the w&ters of Resurrection Bay and
deposit these ..teMals into approxi..tely 133 subtidal and intertidal acres for the
purpose of constructing a salll boat harbor, adjacent staging area. and associated
harbor-related facilities. Dredging .ill be acc~pl1shed by hydrau1fc dredge and
subtidal disposal area will be diked prior to deposition of ..teriah. In addition,
approxi..tely 213,000 ey of ~ar'Y stone .ill be d1sdlar9ld on approxi..tely
12 sub-tidal acres in Resurrection Ba.y to fOMl 1:tle break.aters as foll ows:
1,885 feet of norttl break.ater. 1,904 feet of SOuth break.ater, 2,505 feet of east
break.ater, and 2,525 feet of west breakwater.
All wort w111 be perforwd in accordance wi1:tl the attached plans, 11 sheets dated
-July 20, 1992.
"-
\
Resurrection BI1. Section 1, Township lS., Ran91 HI., Seward Meriol.;n',
Seward, Alaska.
Project ~:
at Nash Road,
"nId'~:
2. You 11I-'...... 11M Mthlt)' ............- by dIl8 .-nUt IIlIOOcl coadlaoe ..d III _f= .- w1tlI tba - U1d eondj.
t!oaa of uu. ~ 1'011 .,." _ ~ of \Ilk ...q_1 '.1 yo.. 5o.woXlCo YM po~:c.K ~ty. &.:t.!l"~ yo.. lIUy :r.&r.O
a fOOd tal* a.-. .. . dUN ,.., Ia _,*- wI* 0-,. CoIlcmlae 4 below. lItaUlyOll wiIIl to - to lIW.lIWJO
11M ..tlI-ap"" ....... _ ..... ,.. ..... .. ."-"'-- It wttItOllt a fOOd ~ ..... ,.. ... obtala a IDOcI1ficslloo oC
dtJa ,.... ,... .. am.. .... ... ...... 1 M of" -.
a. U,.. 41L '_ ~ ..._.t.......d;r aabo_ IaiItaric or an:MoIacIcII ...... ..w. l pi...., .. ..ntty autlloriwd by
dU ....... ,.. ... . ~. T ~ ..... om. at wILd J'Oll u.. C-.a. W. .. ....... .. ,..... aDd .... coonlu..
liaa raq1Iind" f- '- It "I -...... a '_"'7 etfor\ .. it eM'" II....... f_ ~.... MUioeaI ~
of HlAorie 1'1-.
ING I'OMI 1721. --.
aOlTlo.. o~ SI~ 1% 'I oaa.oLaTa.
(.U C'R jJ6 (....ppel .)
i "
i '""1
'- -
..
. II you MIl u.. pIl'O~ ~ted 91th tlW perma, you IIlIYl ob&&ia u.. IiCUtun o( u.. ...... -. LIl tbe ~ pro.,d.d
&Ad (onrvd . cop, o( 1M .-mn 10 tail omc. 10 ntid.ac. u.. trula!er o( tlu. ..UIortsaDoa.
.6 It. coe4ltaoe.d __ quIIt7 ~-..... 11M boMa _oed (<< yoar pI'Ojeet,'ft __ -.., 91t1t u.. ~dJaoa.llMCI(\od
1II lJI. ClIn1t\cadoa . ~ ~ 10 dtla permit. Por 'OGI' ~--.., . cop, of u.. -ut'-"- II UUIdI.ed i( .1 eon
1aI11a IUCh _~.
6. You IIlwt allow ..... ..raa- ~ lIW omc. 10 u.pen tIle..dtoriMd ~fttJ at.., u.. dMlIMd ~ lO_un
thalli II ~ or .... bMa _pliIDH 1II ___ witII u.. eer.. ud - ~~ IlIII of roar "-1.
Special CoadItioM:
Special Conditions:
1. A cultural resources survey shall be conducted prior to project construction.
2. You shall install and ..intlin. at your t.nse. any safet;y l1~ts and signals
prescribed by the United States Coast Guard (Us:G). through regulat10ns or
othenf1se, on your authorized facil1ties. The Us:G MY be reacned at the following
address and telephone: Ca..ander (oan), 17th Cout Guard District, Post Office
Box 25517, June... Aluka 998)2, (907) 463-2245.
Continued on 2A
Purth.r lAlo.......doa:
1. CoII4I..1>tI=al AlldaorilMi: Y_1Yft bMa _tltadMd 10 .deru&. u.. ~.t7 dliIcribed a.bow palUUl &0:
(I) lIeetioa 10 of eM.u- ad Karbon Act of 11" (II U.J.C. .0').
.
(%) 8eetioa.04 of u.. a.. w... Act (II U.J.C. 1144).
( ) .....101 of tile.....'. L.~Y....... ..~Actof 1"1(11 U.J.C.1411).
2. LlmlII of tlu. ...r-" r...
L nail,,-I do.-aac oWa.. &1M ... &0 0.... ocMr ,-..a. ..... or .... ~ ...,.u..d Il7 law.
b. 'nUI.-mI1 do.-.... 11-*.., pra......L, riP*- 01' ........ pri~
c. 1"alI.-mI' do.- .. ..... .., ..., ... ... po r "or riPII of ocMn.
cL 'nUI.-mII........ _' . I' ..
.. .,..... or PO. . ,.... pnie&
.. LlmlII 01 ,.... r "'"~. Ja...... .... ....t. &1M ,..... a..._ ~t ... .... _ .., 1IabOlt7 (or tit. (oIIowiac:
.. l)a.;.__ '.0 u.. ~~ ~ at :_ '.l:~ . . NRlt of a~ ;:enr::t:acI<< mp...mmiOd AeII1'!W or trod! G&'unl
ea.....
b. 0...,. Co u.. ._..... 1 ,.... or _ .....f. . -at of Cllft'al or tlIll1n .ai9llMi ..Nb. Il7 or oa bell&l(
of u.. Ualted ..... .. 1M ".wie m--..
c. 0...... Co J . PO-r l,. or Co oa.. penaiu.d or upenDics.cl KtMlMi or ~~_ ca-.d bJ u.. 8C1;i.;ly
.ut.boriMct bJ tlu. .-miL
. d. D.iporcJ I'--=*lnl"'~ ~
--.._*" wttlt &1M penaiu.d wood.
2
'-,
Special Condftions Contfnued
3. No ffll shall be placed above elevatfon +16.0 feet above mean lower low
water, or fn any wetlands.
4. Materials fn excess of those necessary for proJect constMlctfon shall be
dfsposed of at an upland sfte.
Special Information:
Any condftion incorporated by reference fnto ttlfs !)emft by Special Condftion
or by General Condftion 5, rell\ifns a condition of thfs penllft unless expressly
modiffed or deleted, fn writing, by the Dfstrict Engineer or hfs authorized
representa.tive.
.2).4
, ,
,
x
.
.
.
e. D&mIC. ~ UIOei&ted wttII u" Cu'ure lDodltlcaQao. lUapea.tlall, ar rnocaUoa at uu. Pft!IU'.
4. R.Ii&.ll~ oa Applicant', D....: Th. d....rmlls.Qao at tlW a((j~ lb.e iaruaDce at uu. paMll11 iI DOl' coallVy t<l Iho ~c 0
lal.e",.l ... made UI raliuc. 120 lb. UI!ormatiOl1 yau pro~deel.
5 RHnJualiaa at Permit o.ciaioa. Thill attl~ m.a" reenJua'" jtl daciaioa oa lbill parmJt at LIl" time tlla CU'CUmJlln",
..un.al. CircumlC&Dc:. tha, cowd require. ....nJuatiaa Ulclude, tNe are DO' Ulllited 10, lba toUaWlDf:
L Yau Call 10 compl" wilb lb. Cenu ud colldiCioaa at tAla parmi&..
b. Th. IllIormadoa \ll"fnldad b7 "011 III auppon at "oar penI!le .ppIlcatlon p_ 10 be... beaa CalM, IlIcomplel.e. or
iAaccura... (s.. 4 .~).
c. Slp/ncane aew lJLtonaadoa aurt_ ..bldl tAla offlca dId oen coaaicIft la r 1010'. UIe ~ public illl.e",.e de<:lllon
Such. ......a/u.cIoa ilia" NaIIlt ill . d....rmillaCiaa thae it ia .pproprta... 10 11M lba '~II, =oditlca'ioa. and 'noeltlon
procedww coacaiaecl la U CrR 32&.7 ar eotoreemae proceelurw audl . ~ coa&aUMclla 33 CrR 328.4 LIld 3265 Th.
ref_eel eafofCI_t procedurw ~de tor lba 181uaac. at u ul"'h,lflIntl... order requlrUlC "01110 compl" ..Hb the !.em,.
aIId coadlCioDll of "our parmit ud ror lbe IlIitlaCioa or I. actIoo "en .ppropria.... Yau wtll be required 10 pa" ror LIlY
c_em =....,,. ordered b7 tbla attica, lAd If "ou Call 10 campi" with aucII dinctj.... th.Ia oftlca ilia" la cenala l.tU&ttolU
(aucb. lbc.a qleCitled la U CPR 20'.170) aeeomptlall the corNCCi... _ b7 caalnCt or otharwlM lAd bill you ror tho
con.
8. Eataul-. OeMi'll _clItioe 1 ....b1i111. . U_ limit ror lb. compltdoa of tIM .ecI.ttJ luthorlud b7 th.Ia permit L'r\l_
lb.... are cimamnaac. requirtac .idler . pnlIIlpC _pletloa of t.IIa luthoriud Mtl.ttJ or. rwnIlladoa of the public Int.o'tCt
dad801l, WI Carpi wtl1l1OrmaI1"p... faYlllrabl. colUi.,.Cioo 10 a requM& for IA uwlUioa of th.Ia Uma limit.
Yo~ ~piltura below. . permlt1ae. Iacllcatel that,,01I _pc &lid acne 10 COIIlpl" wttII WI "'nlllaad coodltlolll aC tlli. pe'mlt.
kk.. ~ /"re,,~ u;., M.., ~
(PE;;;;;;8) fa TIna'
l/' / 9 J
(DAT8)
POll
Thia penaie *- efleccn. wtMa tile r..,. offtc!al. clalipilted 10 ace for t.IIa 8acratarJ of tIM AnD", 11M lieD" belaw
c~~~~
(DISTRICT8NGlN J Colonel John W. Pierce
Georgina Akers, Chie', West Unit
Project Evaluation Slction . Souu,
Regul a tory S,.ancn
..non lb. I;"UCQIl'M or won &IICA~ b7 thIa penme.....all in UJlWDCe U the am. lba propany ia InJIaCernd, Ul. t.omu and
coadieiolla of uu. JIIHIIIlt wil_*1Ie1O be b1acllAc 011 UIe ..... OW'1Mr1I) oC UIe JII'OpeftJ. To nUda... the IrsaaCer oC thll permit
aad lb. aMOCiated UabilJCiea -oo.,f with _pIiaaca with jtl l.enlla &ad c:oadiCi_. be... UIe &rUlIf..... lip aad dal.e below
3/,/q3
. ,
(DAT.)
ITRANSF8REE)
(DAT8)
g
. u .. 00\.... . IT ~ c:JE":f 'Me - . . ~~~
Project Schedule Nash Road Small Boat Harbor Master Plan Page J
1 9 9 1t ------------1 9 9 5 ------
SONDJFMAMJJA
Final landowner agreement
Final Master Plan details
Secure Financing
Survey Work markers, boundaries
Conditional Use Permit
Form Design & Review Board
Professional Eng'r Design
Building Permits
Lease Tidelands
Develop Rock Quarry
Construct Breakwater
Construct Floats
Dredge Basin
Build Harbormaster Office
Install Piling & Floats
Complete Basin Details
Construct utilities
Grade Roads
Transfer Tideland Deed
Lease property
Pave Roads
.....
.
Project Schedule Nash Road Small Boat Harbor Master Plan Page Z.
1 9 9 5' ------------1 9 9 b -------
SONDJFMAMJJA
Final landowner agreement
Final Master Plan details
Secure Financing
Survey Work markers, boundaries
Conditional Use Permit
Form Design & Review Board
Professional Eng'r Design
Building Permits
Lease Tidelands
. Develop Rock Quarry
Construct Breakwater
Construct Floats
Dredge Basin
Build Harbormaster Office
Install Piling & Floats
Complete Basin Details
Construct utilities
Grade Roads
Transfer Tideland Deed
.
Lease property
Pave Roads
Project Schedule Nash Road Small Boat Harbor Master Plan Page 3
1 9 9 b ----------1 9 9 7 --------
SONDJFMAMJJA
Final landowner agreement
Final Master Plan details
Secure Financing
Survey Work markers, boundaries
Conditional Use Permit
Form Design & Review Board
Professional Eng'r Design
Building Permits
:
Lease Tidelands
Develop Rock Quarry
Construct Breakwater
Construct Floats
.. A..___________
Dredge Basin
Build Harbormaster Office
Install Piling & Floats
Complete Basin Details
Construct utilities
Grade Roads
Transfer Tideland Deed
Lease property
Pave Roads
"'/ -,
/
-
.!
.
I~ '!-~ .t--=r=~~-==~=
LOl'\lIIN(. * ~
Tf( N<;fi-lrL_
D L K:S
J
IJ
11'1(1'
,~
-+-
-t--
--+-
:
_...l.__
-+
- r'
----I---- ' ,
~~--~-------
" 1
124-32' Slip.
t-
--+--
I
J
t~__
_1__
--1=
. 16MLLW
.
.
----1- l ~
I -1= -I
3=' t lVi"
--+- I he>
F Ilia
L_ Ot:>c."
-I I
I ,
,- -I--
:=1--
-+- -I
96'5O'S1lps
I -----1
39' TYP _ r-
t ~
---- -~
It-2' T;;--
----1
t
I
---r
---t
._l.--__
't...:,l
---
- --- --- -----_.~_._---
I
WI'U."lKl::r.lt:Hf'HI~tc.
FOR: CITY OF SEWARD AND AFOGNAK LOGGING
DRAWN KIO "IN WAll<lH
NASH ROAD SMALL BOAT HARBOR
PROPOSED BERTH PLAN
60)( 1<;111
SCAlf 1" = 100
SEWAHl.J AI.A'>M ,,':.lI.>u4
OATl SIc.!'1 2ti I~~..
<:107 214-~111
f.",
I Noll!
\ Ughl I
- r /
.18'MLlW