Hovland Dock Design Project
Meeting Summary
May 20th, 2015
Attendees
1.
2.
3.
4.
CJ Fernandez, Consultant
Andy Hubley, ARDC
Justin Otsea, ARDC
Carrie McHugh, Cook
Historical Society
5. Frank
Moe
Cook
Commissioner
6. Deway Sandberg, Hovland
County
County
7. Virginia Hahn, Flute Reed, Hovland
8. Stephen Jackson, Hovland
9. Bill Beckstrand, Hovland
10. David Hammer, Hovland
11. Krystan Garey, Trinity Lutheran,
Hovland
12. Kristin Wharton, Moving Matters
13. Patrick Knight, Moving Matters
Meeting Summary
The Hovland Dock Design Options Review Meeting began at 6:00 p.m., May 20th, 2015
at the Chicago Bay Market in Hovland. The meeting began with Justin Otsea, Planner of ARDC
welcoming everyone, introducing himself, and giving a brief background regarding the process
that has lead up to the partnership between the North Shore Scenic Drive Council (NSSDC)
collaborating with Landscape Architect C.J. Fernandez to create design and improvement
recommendations for the Hovland Dock. Funding for the project is made possible in part by a
grant from MnDOT, Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program, IRRRB and others. efforts
supporting both Tofte design projects. Otsea also thanked ‘Moving Matters’ who has partnered
with ARDC for public engagement and outreach strategies.
Mr. Otsea continued to summarize the overall process of the project which involves three
total meetings which culminates in a public open house style meeting including a formal
presentation focused on a final design plans. The purpose of today’s meeting (#2) is to review
various design options for the site, the goals of which are to review the potential design options,
establish priorities of improvement options, and evaluate the feasibility of each recommendation.
After providing a summary of the initial kick-off meeting, Otsea handed the floor over to C.J.
Fernandez to present the design options composed since the last meeting.
Presentation
Landscape Architect C.J. Fernandez informed the group that he had created a preliminary
design, stemming from the information gathered from the initial kick-off meeting. He continued,
stating that the three main components drove the design concepts, which were: increasing ADA
aspects of the site, an interpretive strategy related to the historic and cultural significance of the
site, and preserving and improving the experience close to the water.
Existing Conditions
Mr. Fernandez led his presentation by providing a brief overview of the existing
conditions and uses of the wayside along with a look back at the history related to the dock and
previous activities. These aspects are extremely important, as they impact the design proposals.
Page 1 of 3
www.BecauseMovingMatters.org/HovlandDock
Hovland Dock Design Project
Meeting Summary
May 20th, 2015
The existing conditions at the Hovland Dock site can be described as the following:










Only known dock left fully intact on Lake Superior’s North Shore, Cook County Owned
No existing signage directing users to area or restrooms facilities
Existing Gravel Parking lot and boat launch, the latter being in deteriorating shape.
Opportunity for adjacent landowner donating historic fishing boats as part of interpretive
strategy
The location of a major lost at sea event, national story. Many fishermen have had heroic
experiences at this location or fishing from this location.
The building at the dock landing was used by fisherman and acted as the heart of the
community for the delivery of goods from steamer ships arriving in Hovland.
o Foundation is still in place and visible at the site.
Existing Uses:
o Locals who walk to that destination everyday
o The community of Hovland that doesn’t live on the lake, ‘that is their lake front’
o Kids have a bonfire and roast hotdogs, overall very community oriented
o Weddings and wedding pictures
o Fire department utilizes it as a pump location for their tanker truck
o People still pumping water to utilize at their homestead
Applied for historical register, but denied due to a concrete cap over the dock.
Most of the wood has rotted away on the cribs, due to waves, freezing, thawing, etc.),
concern for existing integrity of structure.
Engineering firm in Duluth did past study on Dock restoration.
Design Concepts of Draft Proposal
 Interpretive trail option on eastern adjacent property to tell the ‘Heritage of the location’
 Secondary trails are all gravel walk way, leading to a small platform to stand on far side
of a memorial (boat house) with the names on it of those lost to the Lake.
o Existing stone wall is expanded forward to create small outdoor room for a small
gathering (outside of the boat house).
o Additional details of interpretational strategies can be discussed in detail later on
in the project’s life.
 3 locations along the trail where the interpretation would be:
o Two additional shelters on the trail are for the fishing boats protection
 Community Boat House Structure-Design Details
o Flexible space, gathering throughout the year, fire place for heat, but nothing
more than electricity
o Concrete floor (maybe polished)-24 ft x 20 ft 400 sq ft
o Small deck on the rear side to sit on
o Overhead door can slide straight up to be able to not have anything overhead, but
also having protection for cold days
o No overhang, good for maintenance to reduce bugs, birds, bats, dirt, etc.
 Can move the interpretation off the original warehouse footprint, if desired, no new
interpretation
 One spruce tree would be lost, but opportunity to replant many others to offset.
 NSSD kiosk can be helpful specifically to building partners for funding moving forward.
Page 2 of 3
www.BecauseMovingMatters.org/HovlandDock
Hovland Dock Design Project
Meeting Summary
May 20th, 2015
For more pictures of existing conditions and design options, please see the scanned
design layouts posted on the project’s website: www.becausemovingmatters.org/HovlandDock
www.arrowheadplanning.org/HovlandDock or contact ARDC staff (information listed below).
Dialogue
This section of the meeting was focused on creating a dialogue with the committee in
order to gain feedback on each of the proposed improvement designs. While this segment of the
meeting was lengthy, a list of the topics from this discussion which will be utilized or need
further exploration for the final design(s) are listed below:
 Would the building be open at all times? –Security safety thing with the doors so could
be under lock and key-‘Who pays for electricity’, etc.-a topic of continued discussion.
 Restroom Facilities-Portable units have seen much preference with operating and
maintenance costs requirements.
 Bringing pictures of the warehouse into the new structure can help recreate the feeling of
the old warehouse when you see existing footprint, as part of the interpretive strategy.
 Property across the road that the county still owns, Parcel across the street could be
additional opportunity for design.
 Identified a need to further discus and develop some revenue generating opportunities
o I.e. Education, workshops, additional programming, weddings, etc.
 Open Vs Closed building brought up-- additional closed facilities locally were identified
(town hall, church, market), concern about duplication of community resources.
o Existing foot of warehouse can be filled up by rocks from waves when a big
storm comes in, issue to address as possible through design.
 Concerns on the traffic, brought up that there could be signage directing people back to
61 compared to continuing on Chicago Bay Road.
 Rationale for leaving the openness of the existing dock site (old warehouse footprint)
o Existing uses by fire and locals was the primary reason for moving the shelter to
the adjacent site, allows for unimpeded site line as well.
 Liability question brought up - (if no improvements made to the dock)
o Edge of the dock may need to be addressed for public safety.
o Identified need for preliminary engineering regarding the integrity of the dock and
options for restoration as part of funding strategy portion of project.
o Initial restoration funds raised was approximately $1,000 held by the county.
Could be utilized for engineering study, but additional funding needed.
Next Steps
Discussion was held on when the next meeting, a late summer/early fall meeting was
tentatively agreed upon, with continued communication in order to establish a date that would
work for a majority of stakeholders/committee members. Tentative plans also set the meeting
location, once again, to be the Chicago Bay Market.
Meeting Notes Compiled by:
Justin Otsea, ARDC (With assistance from C.J. Fernandez)
For Project Questions or Comments:
Justin Otsea, ARDC - (218) 529-7526 - [email protected]
Page 3 of 3
www.BecauseMovingMatters.org/HovlandDock