DEQ decision goes in developer's favor

A PONTOON boat motors north through the Lake Leelanau Narrows Tuesday afternoon. The development at the Narrows which has received a green light from the state will be built between the boathouse on the east bank and the M-204 bridge.

The developer of the controversial Provement Village development project in the Lake Leelanau Narrows received the green light he was looking for from the state Department of Environmental Quality.

Developer Wayne Tyge now has a land use permit for the project from Leland Township and a DEQ permit for construction of dock slips – enough to begin construction. He still hopes, however, to receive an additional DEQ permit to use “stepping stones” for the project and doesn’t plan to start work until that issue is resolved.

DEQ director Steven E. Chester on Thursday, July 12, ruled in favor of the Narrows Land Development Company which was fighting an appeal of the administrative law judge’s decision that supported issuance of a permit for the development.

Chester issued a final determination and order affirming decisions made by Administrative Law Judge Dennis W. Mack on Dec. 7, 2006. The Lake Leelanau Lake Association, through it attorney Tracy J. Andrews, filed exceptions to the proposal and asked Mack to rule on whether the DEQ should have issued a modified permit allowing Tyge to build a 250-foot long dock that would provide up to 14 boat slips.

In his decision, Chester wrote that the DEQ does not retain jurisdiction in the matter. Future litigation would take place in 13th Circuit Court.

Tyge said he was very pleased with Chester’s ruling.

“We still have to get a permit from the DEQ on the stepping stones. Our biggest concern right now is the nature of our state’s economy. We still have to get all our ducks in a row before we can move forward,” he said.

Tyge said he was also pleased with efforts of adjacent landowners to make improvements on Lake Leelanau’s east end. He referenced Larkin Insurance buying and renovating a building on the south side of M-204 that formerly housed the county Building Inspections office; a coffeehouse that will open soon; and a new doctor’s office at the corner of M-204 and Co, Rd. 641.

Andrews said she was disappointed Chester did not question decisions Mack reached in his decision in 2006. “We still think he (Mack) made mistakes in his decision,” she said.

The association is considering its options. Andrews said association members knew going through the DEQ’s administrative law appeal process rarely results in overturned decisions. Further legal action would come before Circuit Court judges Thomas Power or Philip Rodgers Jr.

The association has until Aug. 9 to appeal Chester’s decision in the court.

In November 2006, the Leland Township Planning Commission approved the special land use application for a 22-unit condominium development to be placed on property that fronts on the Lake Leelanau Narrows. A condition of that approval was limiting the number of boat slips for the 250-foot long dock to eight.

Earlier this month, the planning commission approved a change in the Provemont Village site plan that allows Tyge to renovate the existing boat house so its exterior matches the decor of the condominium units. The boat house may also be used to house boats, which adds two more boat slips to the project, making 10 total slips available.

In his order dated July 12, Chester affirmed Mack’s decision to support the issuance of the modified permit granted on Jan. 26, 2006. The lake association in its appeal of the modified permit contended that the Narrows company should submit a new application for the project rather than modify the existing application for use of wetlands.

Chester wrote Mack was correct when he rejected the argument in the 2006 decision. “This issue was rejected in an order entered on March 20, 2006, and again in the PFD (proposal for decision),” Chester wrote.

Chester also threw out six proposed exhibits the association sought to have entered as part of its exceptions filing. The exhibits supported the group’s claims that Mack erred in making his ruling and that his decision was not based on existing facts.

“In considering the transcripts, each of the rulings are proper and will not be reversed. Therefore, the proposed exhibits shall not be admitted,” Chester wrote.

The director’s decision states Mack followed proper procedure in analyzing information presented by both sides.

“In this regard, the PFD undertook a detailed analysis of the record, consisting of six days of hearings and over 100 exhibits, and determined the project would not impair the resources or uses protected by statutes. In considering this record, as a whole, the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the PFD are proper,” Chester wrote.