North Perry Village Council will take more time to consider legislation involving a key aspect of the Townline Park waterfront improvement project. Council, at a meeting earlier this month, heard the first reading of a resolution authorizing the village engineer to prepare bid packets for the extension of the eastern offshore breakwater in the Townline Park harbor. The panel could have passed that resolution immediately, but a vote by council to allow that option ended in a tie. As a result, it will receive the second in a series of three possible readings at council’s Nov. 7 meeting. Extending the east breakwater is one component of a $1.7 million plan that’s aimed at reducing maintenance dredging in the harbor and improving the movement of sand to the shorelines of downdrift neighbors. Townline Park is located at the northern end of Townline Road. The park includes a harbor and marina that were constructed in 2009. The resolution was introduced this month because the Army Corps of Engineers asked the village to include bid packets for both major elements of improving the harbor in the plans it submits for final approval of the project. The village must obtain permits from the Army Corps and several other government agencies before the project can begin. Along with extending the eastern breakwater, plans call for closing a gap on the west end of the harbor that exists between an offshore breakwater and the western jetty near the boat launch ramp. In May 2023, council approved a $1.7 million budget for the harbor modifications. Original cost estimates included: • $500,000 for closing the gap at the harbor’s west end. • $1 million for extending the eastern offshore breakwall. The breakwall is often referred to as a “spur” by village government leaders. • $200,000 for engineering costs. Village Solicitor James O’Leary reminded council that it approved a resolution at its June 6 meeting that authorized the village engineer to prepare bid packets for closing the gap on the harbor’s west end. However, the Army Corps recently asked that the village revise its original submission — focusing on the west end gap closure — to also include the east end spur extension, so it could be reviewed as a total project, O’Leary said. North Perry government leaders didn’t have sole authority in developing a plan to modify the harbor. For the past 10 years, a mediator has been meeting with regularly with North Perry officials and a group of property owners who live east of the harbor in Madison Township. These sessions have been intended to continually monitor the impact of sand migration, and reach a consensus on ways to improve conditions. In 2012, these Madison Township property owners filed a lawsuit against the village. The neighbors alleged that the marina trapped sand that would have naturally washed eastward, and caused erosion of their properties. Although the lawsuit was settled in 2014, North Perry government officials and the group of downdrift neighbors have continued discussions about issues in the harbor, in the presence of the mediator. In 2020, the village entered into a contract with W.F. Baird and Associates, a Great Lakes engineering firm, to conduct a study of sedimentation and shoreline erosion issues in North Perry’s harbor. Baird eventually provided the village with a comprehensive report that addressed sediment and sand migration issues brought up in the lawsuit. The report also contained four options aimed at reducing maintenance dredging in the harbor and improving the movement of sand to the shorelines of downdrift neighbors. Once North Perry government leaders village agreed on what they considered the most favorable option, they shared that information with the downdrift neighbors’ engineering consultant, Jack Cox. He confirmed that the property owners also supported the proposal. “The whole purpose of moving forward with this is to be following the agreement that’s been reached with the downdrift neighbors on the renovations for the harbor,” O’Leary said. But Councilman Robert Ford wondered if the village could end up getting sued again, if the harbor modifications don’t deliver the results that are expected. O’Leary said there’s always a risk of being sued. But he also noted that the plan for harbor modifications has gotten good reviews from a variety of sources. “Because you’ve got both of our engineers and Baird, and their coastal engineer, coming to an agreement on what they believe is going to happen,” he said. In addition, O’Leary said the Army Corps “also agreed that the assumptions in the modeling that’s been done makes sense.”