POTENTIAL FLOODPLAIN DISCREPANCY

✅ Key Factual Points: Eagle Lake OHWM & Water Level History

• Historical Fluctuations:
  Eagle Lake has varied by up to 7 feet below current levels, reflecting a dynamic hydrological cycle.

• OHWM Determinations:

• 1968: Vince McCann established the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) at 898.4 ft NGVD29 (≈897.96 ft NAVD88).

• 1976: Don Bissell reaffirmed this elevation—no change warranted.

• 1982: Inspection showed button bush growing 1.3–2 ft below water level of 899.06 ft NGVD29 (≈898.62 ft NAVD88), but no evidence to revise OHWM.

• Bilow’s Position (Dec 16, 1982):

• High water levels are natural, not justification for OHWM revision.

• Warned against adjusting OHWM based on temporary extremes.

• Reaffirmed 898.4 ft NGVD29 / 897.96 ft NAVD88 as valid OHWM.

• Regulatory Guidance:

• Recommended enforcement via Section 3(d) or 3(e) of the Inland Lakes and Streams Act.

• Supported use of the Wetlands Protection Act for adjacent wetlands.

• Urged protection during high water without altering OHWM.

• Documentation Notes:

• Bilow committed to providing a map of the Public Access Site (NW shore, per Mr. Milbeck).

• Included a list of OHWMs established by the Engineering Division for staff reference.

📜 Key Factual Points: August 17, 1988 – Eagle Lake OHWM Memo

• Concern Raised:

• On July 27, 1988, Glen Haney (Kalamazoo County Drain Commissioner) reported Eagle Lake’s water level was exceeding the OHWM set in 1982.

• Haney had been present during the original OHWM determination.

• Legal Status:

• Eagle Lake does not have a court-established lake level via Circuit Court.

• High water was causing property damage, prompting resident action.

• Resident Response:

• No permit required for pumping, per guidance from Jeff King.

• Technical Validation:

• Lake level was ½ inch above OHWM at time of memo.

• The 1982 OHWM was set when lake was already 1.6 ft above benchmark, reinforcing its validity.

• Benchmark and OHWM documentation were shared internally for review.

• Regulatory Position:

• Memo reaffirms that fluctuations are natural and do not justify OHWM revision.

• Emphasizes regulatory management tools over reactive elevation changes.

 📅 Key Factual Points: April 2004 – Eagle Lake Floodplain & Water Level Summary

• No Legal Lake Level:

• On April 19, 2004, Engineer Thomas C. Wheat confirmed Eagle Lake does not have a court-established “Normal Lake Level.”

• Established Elevations:

• 100-Year Floodplain:

• 902.00 ft NGVD29 (≈901.56 ft NAVD88)

• Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM):

• Reaffirmed at 898.40 ft NGVD29 (≈897.96 ft NAVD88)

• Determinations supported by MDNR, MDEQ, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

• Planning Integration:

• At the April 26, 2004 Township Board meeting, Wheat presented these findings.

• Board authorized him to establish an Ordinary Water Elevation for zoning setback purposes.

• This marked a formal move to assign benchmarks for Eagle Lake, which differed from the state

📍 Key Factual Points: April 3, 2007 – ZBA Elevation & Variance Deliberations

• Variance Request:

• Concerned lot coverage and setbacks for a lakefront parcel on Eagle Lake.

• Debate centered on which elevation should define the buildable area.

• Elevation References:

• Historical reference: 898.4 ft NGVD29 (OHWM).

• Applicant’s survey cited 899.84 ft as high water elevation, used in board’s decision.

• Board Deliberation Highlights:

• Mr. Sprau recommended using 899.84 ft as boundary for lot coverage.

• Attorney Thomsen noted township engineer and surveyor supported using high water elevation, not the meander line.

• Ordinance did not define lakefront platted lot area.

• Variance Outcome:

• Approved 20% lot coverage, measured from 899.84 ft elevation to street and side lot lines.

• Setback requirement: No structure within 46 ft of 899.84 ft elevation, based on neighboring averages.

• Motion passed 4–1.

• Dissenting Vote:

• Mr. Weurding opposed, citing:

• Prior neighbor complaints about denied use beyond meander line.

• Cited the need for consistent treatment.

🗓️ Key Factual Points: June 2007 Newsletter – ZBA Elevation & Zoning Impacts

• ZBA Meeting Reference:

• The newsletter highlights the April 3, 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) meeting as pivotal for zoning changes affecting lakefront parcels.

• This meeting directly addressed lot coverage and setbacks in relation to water elevation.

• Elevation Used:

• The “high water line” was defined by survey at 899.84 ft elevation.

• This elevation was used to calculate the buildable footprint of lakefront lots.

• Represents a shift from earlier references like the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of 898.4 ft NGVD29, used historically.

• Zoning Impact:

• Residents were encouraged to review the April 3 ZBA minutes and consult township officials for clarification.

• Contextual Notes:

• The newsletter also discusses the special assessment district approved on April 23, 2007, and ongoing efforts to manage water levels and invasive species.

📍 Key Factual Points: Eagle Lake Water Level Policy – May 29, 2008 Survey & ZBA Context

• Background:

• Eagle Lake has no surface inlet or outlet, leading to low water levels during dry periods.

• Since December 1965, water has been pumped from a well at the east end to stabilize levels.

• Pump rate: 1,000–1,200 gallons per minute.

• May 29, 2008 Survey – Prein&Newhof:

• Commissioned by the Eagle Lake Texas Association (ELTA) to establish an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM).

• Survey determined the OHWM to be 899.84 ft elevation.

• This elevation became the target level for pump operation and lake management.

• ZBA Connection – April 3, 2007:

• Just 14 months earlier, the Zoning Board of Appeals used the same 899.84 ft elevation to define the buildable footprint for lakefront parcels.

• This alignment between zoning decisions and hydrological management reinforces the elevation’s regulatory significance.

• Unresolved Survey Methodology:

• It remains unclear how Prein&Newhof’s 2008 survey arrived at the exact same elevation (899.84 ft) used in the 2007 ZBA meeting, especially given that it was presented as a new survey.

• No documentation has been provided explaining whether the 2008 OHWM was independently verified or simply adopted from prior zoning deliberations.

• Pump Operation Policy:

• Pump runs only as needed to maintain lake level near the 899.84 ft OHWM.

• Oversight by 2–3 designated ELTA personnel.

• In 2014, ELTA anticipated upgrading to a “hardened site” OHWM marker for improved monitoring.

📈 Key Factual Points: May 2009 Newsletter – Rapid Water Rise After Pump Policy Adoption #1

• Pump Policy Adoption:

• On June 2, 2008, the Eagle Lake Texas Association Board approved a formal lake water level and pump operation policy.

• Policy was based on a Prein&Newhof survey that established the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) at 899.84 ft elevation.

• Pump Operation Rules:

• April 15–Sept 15: Pump runs if lake is ≥3 inches below OHWM; shuts off when lake reaches that threshold.

• Sept 16–April 14: Pump remains off unless lake drops ≥7 inches below OHWM.

• Pump also remains off when lake is frozen.

• Rapid Water Rise:

• As of May 15, 2009, lake level was 7.5 inches above the OHWM (899.84 ft).

• Pump had been turned off since Sept 9, 2008, per policy.

• Rise attributed to higher-than-normal snow and rainfall, but the timing—less than a year after policy adoption—raises questions about policy responsiveness to hydrological extremes.

• Zoning Context Reminder:

• The 899.84 ft elevation was also used in the April 3, 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to define buildable area—further reinforcing its regulatory significance.

📈 Key Factual Points: 2018–2022 Elevation Escalation – Eagle Lake Rapid Water Rise #2

• Historical Benchmark:

• The 100-year floodplain for Eagle Lake has long been documented at 901.6 ft NAVD88.

• 2018 Update – Prein&Newhof Letter:

• Reaffirmed the 901.6 ft NAVD88 floodplain.

• Recommended a design elevation of 903.0 ft NAVD88 for new development.

• Justification: Elevated groundwater and updated elevation data warranted a precautionary approach.

• 2022 Update – EGLE Letter to Molnar Construction:

• Again cited 901.6 ft NAVD88 as the historical floodplain.

• Recommended an even more conservative 904.0 ft NAVD88 elevation for future development.

• Rationale: Persistent high groundwater levels and increased flood risk.

• Planning Implications:

• The rising recommended elevations reflect a trend toward more resilient infrastructure standards.

• Emphasizes the need to adapt zoning and site design to evolving hydrological realities.

1982 & 1983