Adobe Acrobat File:masterplan.pdf
This document is a text-only version of the original Adobe Acrobat file. Graphics and formatting may be lost in the conversion from pdf to html.
View the Adobe Acrobat version of this file.
City of Muskegon
Master Land Use Plan
April 1997
Planning Commission Members
John Aslakson
Jane Clingman-Scott
Charles Davis
Lisa Fodrocy
Kenneth Griswold
George Harrison
Michael Kleaveland
Bryon L. Mazade
Blanch Smith
City Manager
Bryon L. Mazade
Community and Economic Development Director
Jim Edmonson
Planning Director
Cathy Brubaker-Clarke
Planning Staff
Bassem Bitar
Matt Dugener
Brenda Moore
Lead Consultant
Westshore Engineering & Surveying, Inc.
Consultants
Concept Graffix
The Chesapeake Group, Inc.
Diane Casey Consultants
Day & Associates
DeStigter/Smith Architects
Langworthy LeBlanc, Inc.
Progressive Engineering
Table of Contents
Master Land Use Plan
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................1 1
2. Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics .........................................................2 1
Historic Population Trends ..........................................................................................2 1
Gender, Racial & Ethnic Composition..........................................................................2 5
Income........................................................................................................................2 7
Housing .....................................................................................................................2 14
General Conclusions ..................................................................................................2 18
3. Existing Land Use........................................................................................................ 3 1
1983 to 1997 Comparisons ......................................................................................... 3 3
Land Absorption.......................................................................................................... 3 5
4. Transportation ............................................................................................................ 4 1
Road System Overview................................................................................................ 4 1
Traffic Counts.............................................................................................................. 4 5
Capacity.................................................................................................................... 4 10
Frequency of Accidents ............................................................................................. 4 13
Shoreline Drive ......................................................................................................... 4 14
Recommendations..................................................................................................... 4 16
5. Natural Features Inventory ......................................................................................... 5 1
Natural Features .......................................................................................................... 5 2
Dunes ......................................................................................................................... 5 6
Rivers & Streams ......................................................................................................... 5 8
Woodlands................................................................................................................ 5 15
Conclusions & Recommendations ............................................................................. 5 16
6. Historic Districts......................................................................................................... 6 1
Preservation Issues ...................................................................................................... 6 2
Historic Districts.......................................................................................................... 6 3
General Recommendations.......................................................................................... 6 9
Table of Contents
Master Land Use Plan
7. Park, Recreation and Community Facilities................................................................. 7 1
City Park & Recreational Facilities ............................................................................... 7 4
Community Facilities................................................................................................... 7 9
Summary & Recommendations...................................................................................7 10
8. Brownfield Analysis .................................................................................................... 8 1
Regulatory Climate...................................................................................................... 8 3
Muskegon's Brownfield Redevelopment Program ........................................................ 8 8
Brownfield Screening .................................................................................................. 8 9
Conclusions & Recommendations ............................................................................. 8 12
9. Neighborhood Condition Analysis .............................................................................. 9 1
Neighborhood Condition Survey ................................................................................. 9 1
Areas Exhibiting High Levels of Site Factors ................................................................. 9 3
Recommendations....................................................................................................... 9 4
10. Neighborhood Issues ................................................................................................ 10 1
Opportunities & Issues .............................................................................................. 10 1
Recommendations..................................................................................................... 10 4
11. Sub-Area Plans.......................................................................................................... 11 1
Sub-Area 1: Port City Industrial Center....................................................................... 11 1
Sub-Area 2: Sherman/Laketon.................................................................................... 11 5
Sub-Area 3: Getty to US-31........................................................................................ 11 9
Sub-Area 4: Peck to Getty........................................................................................ 11 12
Sub-Area 5: Peck to Seaway..................................................................................... 11 17
Sub-Area 6: Barclay Street........................................................................................ 11 21
Sub-Area 7: McGraft Park ........................................................................................ 11 25
Sub-Area 8: Lake Michigan Shoreline ...................................................................... 11 29
Sub-Area 9: Muskegon Lake/Lakeshore .................................................................... 11 33
Sub-Area 10: Seaway/Laketon/Lakeshore ................................................................. 11 37
Sub-Area 11: Seaway Drive/Waterfront.................................................................... 11 41
Sub-Area 12: North Apple ....................................................................................... 11 44
Sub-Area 13: Muskegon Community College.......................................................... 11 46
Table of Contents
Master Land Use Plan
12. Future Land Use Plan................................................................................................ 12 1
Mapped Land Uses.................................................................................................... 12 1
Overview of General Land Use Areas........................................................................ 12 2
Overview of Specialized Lane Use Areas................................................................... 12 4
13. General Plan Recommendations ............................................................................... 13 1
Traffic........................................................................................................................ 13 1
Natural Features ........................................................................................................ 13 1
Historic Districts........................................................................................................ 13 2
Parks, Recreation & Community Facilities.................................................................. 13 3
Brownfield Analysis................................................................................................... 13 3
Neighborhood Quality & Development..................................................................... 13 4
Sub-Areas .................................................................................................................. 13 5
Bibliography
Introduction
Master Land Use Plan
Located along the eastern shore of Lake
Michigan, the City of Muskegon is a
dynamic urban community. The City is
home to the nationally acclaimed Cherry
County Playhouse, the Muskegon Museum
of Art, the Frauenthal Center for the
Performing Arts, colleges, regional health
care institutions, and a host of national
firms, including representation in the
Fortune 500.
Recreational opportunities abound. Lake
Michigan's sandy beaches attract visitors
from throughout the Midwest. The
Muskegon Lake shoreline provides scenic
viewscapes and natural areas. Both lakes
are important sport fisheries.
Muskegon is a community of ethnic and now experiencing significant growth in
cultural diversity. The City is home to high-tech industrial development and
approximately 42,000 residents. It is the tourism.
region's largest city and the seat of
Muskegon County government. Founded The City is accessible by Interstate 96 and
on a lumbering base, and supplanted by US-31. Muskegon Lake provides deep
automotive and other industries, the City is harbor access for commercial, industrial,
and recreational watercraft. The Muskegon
Airport, located minutes from the City,
provides full-service passenger facilities
with linkage to major national airports.
Within West Michigan, the City is
considered a prime location for significant
growth due to lakefront development
opportunities, an existing industrial base, a
skilled labor force, and an extensive range
of educational, cultural, and recreational
amenities.
The City of Muskegon Master Land Use
Plan is designed to be a guide and strategy
for future land use. It is intended for use by
decision makers during the process of
making choices between varied and often
competing interests.
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 1 1
Introduction
Master Land Use Plan
The Master Land Use Plan is made up of rezonings, site plan reviews, variances,
three elements: the overall Master Land Use and the like should be evaluated on the
Plan document; a focused basis of consistency with specific plan
Downtown/Lakeshore Redevelopment plan; recommendations and standards.
and an extensive geographic information
system. The Master Land Use Plan As a guide for augmenting current land
summarizes numerous data gathering development regulations.
efforts, subsequent analytical steps, and
comprehensive land use recommendations. The Plan presents a framework for future
The Downtown/Lakeshore Redevelopment land use that is supported by findings and
Plan represents similar steps and recommendations which are based on:
recommendations, but focuses on the Core Perceptions of the City's past, present,
Downtown and Muskegon Lakefront. The and potential future, as shared by
geographic information system digitized members of City and regional business,
vast quantities of data for use in unlimited governmental, institutional, banking,
analysis and presentation of land use issues. investment, development, educational,
entrepreneurial, and residential
All elements of the Master Land Use Plan communities.
were generated during approximately 28
months of work in 1995 to 1997 by a large An analysis of demographic trends and
team of citizens, City and business officials, projections.
and consultants. The level of dialogue and
effort put into thinking, discussing, An analysis of traffic and accident data
proposing and finalizing a plan for the City and transportation needs.
of Muskegon was unprecedented in the
City's history. All participants should be An analysis of land use, development
proud. patterns, and natural resources.
The Master Land Use Plan should be used An analysis of potentially contaminated
as follows: property and redevelopment of former
industrial land.
As a tool when developing,
coordinating, and preparing specialized Neighborhood, business owner, City
plans and plan implementation official, and City staff workshops
programs; and when addressing issues conducted during the process of
such as neighborhoods, natural preparing the Downtown/Lakeshore
resources, and land development Redevelopment Plan component of the
proposals. Master Land Use Plan.
As a guideline during the process of Information gathered during downtown
administering zoning and other land patron and regional household surveys.
development ordinances. Decisions on
requests for special use permits,
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 1 2
Introduction
Master Land Use Plan
An examination of previous City
planning documents.
The plan is presented in thirteen sections:
1. Introduction
2. Population & Socio-Economic
Characteristics
3. Existing Land Use
4. Transportation
5. Natural Features Inventory
6. Historic District
7. Parks and Recreational Facilities
8. Brownfield Analysis
9. Residential Quality
10. Neighborhood Issues
11. Sub-Area Plans
12. Future Land Use Recommendations
13. General Plan Recommendations
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 1 3
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
HISTORIC POPULATION TRENDS population over the past decade.
Population numbers for 1970-1994 for the The average population per household has
City of Muskegon, its surrounding dropped from 2.80 in 1970 to 2.46 in
communities, and Muskegon County are 1990. In effect, the added population from
provided in Table 2.1. new housing is being offset by lower
population numbers within existing housing
Table 2.1 indicates that the City of units. This trend is consistent with State
Muskegon, after experiencing about a and national trends. Average population
4,000 drop in population between 1970 per household for the United States has
and 1980, has remained stable since that declined from 3.14 in 1970 to 2.63 in
time with an estimated population in 1994 1990. Likewise the State of Michigan has
of 40,639. The other cities surrounding declined from 3.27 in 1970 to 2.66 in
Muskegon have generally remained stable 1990.
or declined slightly in population between
1970 and 1994. The trend in household size during the next
20 to 30 years will be as big of an influence
The reason the City of Muskegon has not on future City population counts as
increased in population, despite slow infill continued infill of residential construction.
of new residential construction may be due
to a number of factors including It is difficult to predict whether this long
outmigration to the County's outlying areas, downward trend in household size will
other communities and counties, a continue or whether it has bottomed out.
declining area economy, and a trend This difficulty lies in the fact that people are
toward smaller per household population. responding to so many societal factors in
making their decisions relative to family
Outmigration trends may be influenced by size. The general trend throughout the
the increase in the City's African American County toward an aging population will be
population and the generally greater a factor in keeping the average population
economic mobility of the City's white per household low. Migration is likely to
Unit 1970 1980 1990 1994
City of Muskegon 44,631 40,823 40,283 40,639
City of North Muskegon 4,243 4,024 3,919 3,809
City of Muskegon Heights 17,304 14,611 13,176 14,017
City of Roosevelt Park 4,176 4,015 3,885 3,252
City of Norton Shores 22,271 22,025 21,755 22,061
Township of Muskegon 13,754 14,557 15,302 15,373
Muskegon County 157,426 157,589 158,983 163,436
Source: 1990 U.S. Census 1994 Estimates provided by West Michigan Shoreline Regional
Development Commission
Table 2.1 Population Trends
City of Muskegon and Surrounding Communities
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 1
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
also have a continued impact on population increase of 16,653 persons for Muskegon
size. Only 50 percent of the population County as a whole.
over five years of age lived in the same
residence in 1990 as it did in 1985. Ten Current WMSRDC projections for the City
percent of the population came from a of Muskegon are realistic given an analysis
different County in Michigan, and 6 percent of past construction and demolition trends
were from another State. According to IRS in the City, and anticipated changes in the
records from 1979 and 1980, Ottawa average population per household in future
County and the Southern United States are years. The population in the City of
the top two places from which both Muskegon is predicted to range between
population inflow and outflow from 43,000 and 47,000 by the year 2025. The
Muskegon County result. higher range will most likely be reached if
the average population per household does
2. Population Projections not continue to decline.
Data provided by the West Michigan A more accurate population projection is
Shoreline Regional Development unavailable because it is difficult, if not
Commission (WMSRDC) projects a 4,365 impossible, to accurately predict 1) the
person increase in the City's population number of homes or dwelling units that
over the next 30 year period. WMSRDC may be demolished as a result of age, fire,
population projections indicate that the City natural disaster, etc.; 2) the number of
will have a population of 45,004 by the dwelling units that may be displaced by
year 2025, a figure slightly higher than the other types of development; 3) the number
1970 population of 44,631 persons. of new dwelling units that might result from
Population projections for the City, future infill development, and; 4) changes
surrounding communities, and Muskegon in average household population.
County through the year 2025 are provided
in Table 2.2. These projections anticipate 3. Age Groups
an increase of 6,283 persons for the City
and its surrounding communities, and an A breakdown of age groups within City,
Unit 1994 2005 2015 2025
City of Muskegon 40,639 42,137 43,547 45,004
City of North Muskegon 3,949 4,082 4,218 3,809
City of Muskegon Heights 14,017 14,534 15,020 15,522
City of Roosevelt Park 3,252 3,372 3,485 3,601
City of Norton Shores 22,061 22,874 23,639 24,430
Township of Muskegon 15,373 15,940 16,473 17,024
Muskegon County 163,436 169,461 175,130 180,089
Source: 1990 U.S. Census Note: The City's 1984 Master Land Use Plan projected the 1990 and
2000 populations at 38,532 and 36,726 persons, respectively.
Table 2.2 Population Projections
City of Muskegon and Surrounding Communities
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 2
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
County and the State populations is in the elementary school, family forming
provided in Table 2.3. Table 2.3 shows no and mature family phases. Table 2.5 shows
significant differences between City, County the distribution of age on a census tract by
and State populations except in the 65 to census tract basis and supplements the data
74 and 85 and older age groups. The in Table 2.4.
number of persons in these City age groups
is slightly higher than that of the State's, 4. Gender, Racial & Ethnic
though almost double that of the County's. Composition
Persons within these age groups typically The City's population is composed of
have needs for lower housing costs; 19,942 males and 20,341 females.
efficient public transportation; easily Approximately 70 percent the City's
accessible community medical and population is white, 27 percent is African-
shopping facilities, assistance with home American, one percent American Indian,
maintenance, and increased neighborhood 0.03 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, and
security. Elderly renters often need rent 1.67 listed as other. The City's African
subsidies, or subsidized housing. American population has increased over the
Homeowners frequently need access to past decade, and the white population has
home maintenance programs. The greater declined. Between 1990 and 2000, the
number of persons within these age groups City's white population is projected to
may be a result of the City's ability to meet decrease by 620 persons, or from
such needs, or due to the general aging of approximately 70 percent to approximately
the City's long-term resident population. 66 percent of the City's total population.
The African-American population is
Table 2.4 illustrates life phases 1970, 1980 expected to increase by 2,263 persons, or
and 1990. While there have been changes from approximately 27 to 31 percent of the
in all life phase groups between 1970 and total population.
1990, significant reductions have occurred
Age Group Number Percent of City Percent County Percent State
Population Population Population
Under 5 3,495 8.6 8.0 8.0
5 to 14 5,780 14.3 20.0 19.0
15 to 24 6,239 15.4 4.0 5.0
25 to 34 7,832 19.3 5.0 6.0
35 to 44 5,353 13.2 31.0 32.0
45 to 54 3,018 7.5 10.0 10.0
55 to 64 2,850 7.0 4.0 4.0
65+ 5,923 14.7 18.0 16.0
Total 40,490 100 100 100
Source: 1990 U.S. Census Percentage figure have been rounded to next highest percentage point.
Table 2.3 Population by Age Group, 1990
City of Muskegon, Muskegon County, and State of Michigan
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 3
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Age Group Life Phase Number Percent in Percent in Percent in
1990 1980 1970
Under 5 Pre School 3,495 8.6 8.6 8.8
5 to 14 Elementary School 5,780 14.3 14.4 19.5
15 to 19 Secondary School 3,120 7.7 9.1 9.9
20 to 44 Family Forming 16,304 40.2 35.3 27.3
45 to 64 Mature Family 5,868 14.5 18.1 21.8
65 and over Retirement 5,923 14.7 14.5 12.7
Total 40,490 100 100 100
Table 2.4 Population by Life Phase Groups
City of Muskegon 1990
The racial composition of Muskegon varies Muskegon Heights. While the racial
significantly from neighborhood to composition for Muskegon County is quite
neighborhood. Minority households are similar to that of the State, the City's racial
concentrated in near-Downtown composition was about 13% lower in the
neighborhoods where high concentrations white category and about 13% higher in the
of low-income households are prevalent. African American category.
As of the date of this plan, the majority of Although Hispanic persons constitute only
the City's African-American population 3.5% of the City of Muskegon's population,
lives in the East Muskegon, Angell, and this group increased between 1980 and
McLaughlin census tracts. Between 1970 1990 by 16%. This segment of the
and 1980, more than 90 percent of population is distributed throughout the
Muskegon County's minority population community on a relatively even basis.
lived in the Cities of Muskegon and
Census Tract
Age 1 2 3 4 5 6.01 6 7 8 9 10 21
Group
Under 5 307 99 437 560 672 196 305 2 315 274 73 286
5 - 9 243 72 386 529 586 152 210 --- 310 248 66 197
10 - 14 215 83 335 447 506 151 185 1 254 229 67 165
15 - 19 298 79 298 447 607 158 242 --- 205 203 71 168
20 - 24 482 81 381 885 534 164 303 8 252 255 58 296
25 - 34 768 120 531 2,279 1,047 326 511 17 687 655 156 581
35 - 44 559 97 408 1,411 708 311 303 7 477 547 209 395
45 - 54 310 78 238 610 368 117 167 9 255 391 135 231
55 - 64 224 102 254 520 345 104 168 8 230 368 168 326
65 - 74 299 81 304 500 344 116 204 2 264 384 182 396
75 - 84 219 31 157 388 194 94 166 8 183 245 70 306
85+ 69 16 66 197 65 35 47 --- 75 53 20 121
Total 3,993 939 3,695 8,773 5,976 1,924 2,811 62 3,507 3,852 1,275 3,468
Source: 1990 U.S. Census & City of Muskegon 1995 Consolidated Housing & Community Development
Plan
Table 2.5 Age by Census Tract, City of Muskegon, 1989
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 4
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon Muskegon State of
County Michigan
Category Number Percent Percent Percent
White 28,148 69.9 84.2 83.4
African American 10,916 27.1 13.6 13.9
American Indian, Eskimo or Aleut. 390 1.0 0.8 0.6
Asian or Pacific Islander 139 0.3 0.3 1.1
Other Race 690 1.7 1 0.9
Hispanic (any race) 1,416 3.5 2.3 2.2
Table 2.6 Racial Composition
Muskegon County, City of Muskegon, & State of Michigan
Table 2.6 indicates that the City's Hispanic older age groups. The 16 to 64 age group
population is similar to State and regional has been assessed as to work disability,
populations. including disabilities which would prevent
individuals from working. Disability
Table 2.7 shows the breakdown of the information for the City of Muskegon,
City's populations by race and ethnicity on Muskegon County, and the State of
a neighborhood by neighborhood basis. Michigan is provided in Table 2.8.
5. Disabled Population Table 2.8 indicates that the City's labor
force exhibits nearly twice the rate of work
The disabled population is assessed by the disabilities and disabilities that prevent
Census Bureau as non-institutionalized working than is exhibited by the State's
persons either in the 16 to 64 or 65 and labor force. The City's labor force also
White African American Other Hispanic1
# % # % # % # %
All Tracts 28,148 69.9 10,916 27.1 1,219 3.0 1,416 3.5
Marquette 2,782 69.7 1,096 27.4 115 2.9 158 4.0
Jackson Hill 147 15.7 787 83.8 13 1.4 16 1.7
Angell 1,289 34.9 2,290 70.0 116 3.1 137 3.7
East Muskegon 5,649 64.4 2,821 32.2 303 3.5 331 3.8
McLaughlin 3,818 63.9 1,916 32.0 242 4.0 302 5.1
South Nelson 1,399 72.7 463 24.1 62 3.2 44 2.3
North Nelson 1,453 51.7 1,268 45.1 90 3.2 108 3.8
Downtown 59 95.2 2 3.2 1 1.6 0 0
Nims 3,280 93.5 106 3.0 121 3.4 140 4.0
Lakeside 3,716 97.6 38 1.0 53 1.4 73 1.9
Bluffton/Beachwood 1,255 98.4 8 0.6 12 1.0 3 0.2
Henry/Glenside/Rud 3,256 93.9 121 3.5 91 2.6 104 3.08
diman
Source: City of Muskegon 1995 Consolidated Housing & Community Development Plan
1The term Hispanic is used as an ethnic rather than a racial indicator. Persons of Hispanic origin can be of
any racial group and are included in other racial groups within the general population.
Table 2.7 Population by Race & Census Tract
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 5
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Category City of Muskegon State of
Muskegon County Michigan
Persons 16 - 64 years of age 21,474 94,727 ---
Having work disability (%) 16.0 12.0 9.0
Prevents from Working (%) 9.0 6.0 4.7
Mobility or self-care limitation (%): 17.0 10.9
a) mobility limitation (%) 15.0 11.0 8.9
b) self-care limitation (%) 4.0 3.0 3.3
Persons 65 years and older 5,368 19,719 1,108,461
Mobility or self-care limitation (%) 41.0 37.0 37.0
a) mobility limitation (%) 35.0 33.0 33.2
b) self-care limitation (%) 14.0 12.0 11.7
Table 2.8 Disability Status, City of Muskegon, 1990
exhibits higher numbers of people in the medium to lower income levels.
mobility and self care limitation categories
when compared to County and State Muskegon had about 16% more
figures. households in the three under $15,000
income range categories than did the State.
6. Income Likewise, the State had about 25% of
households in the income ranges of
An illustration of Muskegon households by $50,000 or more compared to 7% for the
income range (as reported in 1989) is given City of Muskegon.
in Table 2.9. This table also includes
percentages of households in each income Median household income is a commonly
range for both the City, County, and the used value to compare general income
State for comparison purposes. This table capacity among governmental units. Table
identifies a concentration of households in 2.10 indicates that with the exception of
Income Range Number of Percent of Percent of Percent of
City City County State
Households Households Households Households
Less than $5,000 1,334 9.1 6.0 6.0
$5,000 to $9,999 2,948 20.1 13.0 9.6
$10,000 to $14,999 1,741 11.8 10.0 8.6
$15,000 to $24,999 3,195 21.8 20.0 16.4
$25,000 to $34,999 2,355 16.0 17.0 15.3
$35,000 to $49,999 1,983 13.5 18.0 18.7
$50,000 to $74,999 929 6.3 11.0 16.3
$75,000 to $99,999 131 1.0 2.0 5.4
$100,000 to $149,999 36 0.2 1.0 2.5
$150,000 or more 33 0.2 1.0 1.2
Table 2.9 Household Income, City of Muskegon, 1990
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 6
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Community Median Income
City of Muskegon $18,748
City of North Muskegon $37,281
City of Muskegon Heights $13,778
City of Roosevelt Park $28,955
City of Norton Shores $33,646
Muskegon Township $25,058
Muskegon County $25,617
State of Michigan $31,020
Table 2.10 Median Household Income
City of Muskegon 1989
Muskegon Heights, the City of Muskegon household age ranges.
has a lower median household income than
its surrounding communities or that of Table 2.12 presents an illustration of City
Muskegon County or State. resident's use of certain types of financial
resources and services compared to or
The differences between incomes in the indexed against national averages. An
City and other County municipalities is index of 100 means the use of the resource
largely due to a concentration of low- or service is identical to that of national
income households. Female-headed averages. An index of less than 100 means
households with children are even more the use is less than the national average.
likely to be living in poverty. In the City of With limited exception, use of or access to
Muskegon, 74% of these households were certain types of financial resources and
living in poverty in 1989. With the services such as bank accounts, certificates
exception of households headed by persons of deposit, investments and investment
75 years of age and older, the income of services, by residents 18 years of age and
white households significantly exceeds that older is less than national averages.
of African-American households. Table
2.11 illustrates differences in the City's 7. Poverty Status
white and African-American median
household income within various head of As would be expected with a low median
Age Range White Households African-American Households Difference
Under 25 $16,323 $5,493 $10,830
25 - 34 $24,300 $10,698 $13,602
35 - 44 $27,319 $20,765 $6,584
45 - 54 $31,694 $21,188 $10,506
55 - 64 $26,815 $17,623 $9,192
65 - 74 $14,175 $11,989 $2,186
75+ $10,767 $11,125 $3,852
Source: Urban Decisions Systems
Table 2.11 Household Income - White & African American Households
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 7
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
income, the City has a significant 9,615 persons represent almost 24 percent
percentage of its population living below of the City's population. Only 13 percent
the poverty level. The 1990 Census of the State's population is identified as
Reports indicate in 1989 that of the 36,264 being below the poverty level. Table 2.13
persons for whom poverty level status was provides a breakdown of poverty status by
determined, 9,615 people were determined age group.
as living below the poverty level. These
Table 2.12 Use of Financial Resources by Household
Percentages Index
Bank Accounts/CD's
Non-Interest Checking 32.9 89
Interest Checking 29.2 89
Savings 45.0 91
Short Term CD 7.5 86
Long Term CD 8.5 76
Non-Interest Check Last Year 4.7 103
Interest Check Last Year 3.1 93
Savings Account Last Year 5.2 103
ATM Card 33.9 85
Check Guarantee Card 3.9 91
Safe Deposit Box 7.3 95
Investments and Investment Services
Own Investment Property 3.6 86
Keogh Account 1.4 94
Tax Sheltered Annuities 2.9 78
IRA 16.0 77
IRA - via Brokerage 6.5 84
IRA - Bank/Credit Union 10.1 92
Brokerage Firm Account 6.1 72
Use Full Service Brokerage 3.8 73
Use Discount Brokerage 0.9 50
Use Accountant 6.6 84
Use Lawyer 16.7 90
US Savings Bonds 10.0 75
Other Bonds 3.2 76
Mutual Funds 7.5 74
Stocks in Employer Company 3.2 78
Stocks in Other Company 5.7 75
Stock <10K 4.5 75
Stock >10K 3.4 74
3+ Transactions Last Year 2.2 73
Investment in Precious Metals 1.5 100
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 8
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Table 2.12 - Continued Use of Financial Resources by Household
Percentages Index
Christmas/Chanukah Club 3.7 90
Loans and Mortgages
Automobile 18.9 94
Personal Loan - Education 8.1 96
Other Personal Loan 10.6 90
Home Improvement 6.2 107
First Mortgage 22.4 86
First Mortgage - Last Year 2.7 74
Home Equity 6.0 84
Line of Credit 10.4 90
Credit Cards
Mastercard 22.3 82
Visa 30.1 82
American Express 7.2 73
Other Bank Card 2.8 85
Gold/Premium Cards 14.2 75
Gasoline 13.9 81
JC Penney 18.9 92
Montgomery Ward 8.1 88
Sears 19.4 86
Other Department Store 17.5 85
Air Travel Card 1.4 53
Auto Rental Card 0.9 55
AT&T Card 4.6 76
Any Credit Card 50.7 88
Other Services
Money Order Last Year 30.9 114
Non-Postal Money Order 20.6 124
Postal Money Order 8.4 95
Source: Urban Decision Systems
Median family incomes for Muskegon Table 2.14 presents an overview of
County are considerably lower than both neighborhood population trends between
the median family incomes for the State and 1970 and 1990, and 1990 poverty level
nation. The adjusted median family income and median age statistics.
for Muskegon County was $30,151 in
1989, compared to a State median family Table 2.15 presents an illustration of
income of $36,652, and a national median household income ranges for households
of $35,225. Muskegon County's poverty on a census tract by census tract basis.
figures also exceed State and national Muskegon households by income range (as
figures by 2 percentage points. reported in 1989) is given in Table 2.9.
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 9
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Age Group Number Percent
5 and under 1,890 19.7
6 to 17 2,441 25.4
18 to 64 4,529 47.1
65 and over 755 7.8
Total 9,615 100.0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1989
Table 2.13 Poverty Status by Age Group, City of Muskegon, 1989
8. Housing significant, the overall decline of housing
units exceeds the City's decline in
The 1990 Census indicated that the City population of 1.3 percent over the same
had 16,019 housing units. This figure period. This is significant when compared
represents a loss of 331 units, or 2 percent to trends between 1970 and 1980 when the
of the City's housing stock, since 1980. City's available housing stock increased by
The majority of the City's housing stock is 3% from 15,925 units to 16,350 units,
composed of detached single-family homes. while population declined by over 10%.
However, the City does experience a lower
percentage of single family detached The City has a high percentage of multiple
housing as a percent of total housing than family units in buildings having between 2
either Muskegon County or the State of and 4 units. Many of these multiple-family
Michigan. Conversely, Muskegon has units were originally constructed as single-
higher percentages in every category of family homes and have subsequently been
multiple family housing units. divided into multifamily rental units. The
City's 1995 Consolidated Housing and
Although a 2 percent decline in available Community Development Plan indicates
housing stock may not appear to be that much of the City's rental housing stock
Census Neighborhood 1970 1980 1990 % Below Poverty Median
Tract Level Age
1 Marquette 1,892 4,408 3,993 21.3 30.4
2 Frobel --- 1,181 939 55.4 30.2
3 Angell 4,947 4,095 3,695 48.1 26.8
4 East Musk. N&S 7,273 6,244 8,773 18.5 31.4
5 N&S McLaughlin 6,926 6,305 5,976 38.2 25.7
6.01 South Nelson 2,160 1,940 1,924 38.4 28.7
6.02 North Nelson 3,595 3,035 2,811 48.9 28.1
7 Downtown 328 26 62 34.5 41
8 E&W Nims 4,229 3,667 3,507 16.6 31
9 Lakeside 4,879 4,079 3,852 8.4 35.9
10 Beachwood & Bluffton 1,627 1,488 1,275 9.5 41.1
21 Henry/Ruddiman/Glenside 4,168 3,602 3,468 8.5 35.9
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Table 2.14 Population, Poverty Level & Median Age Comparisons
by Census Tract
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 10
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Inc ome Range 1 2 3 4 5 6.01 6.02 7 8 9 10 21
<$5,000 92 68 248 144 266 86 192 13 89 46 18 72
5,000-9,999 377 98 430 280 550 110 359 --- 235 212 48 249
10,000-14,999 270 31 186 275 231 108 177 --- 120 138 55 150
15,000-24,999 511 61 294 473 305 135 238 --- 321 351 135 371
25,000-34,999 199 40 106 420 375 126 117 15 324 256 57 320
35,999-49,999 165 17 63 353 323 34 50 11 203 386 140 238
50,000-74,999 96 7 30 140 77 52 52 --- 109 178 62 126
75,000-99,999 --- --- 8 32 10 6 --- --- 18 27 13 17
100,000+ --- --- --- --- 8 6 --- --- 20 16 14 5
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Table 2.15 Household Income by Census Tract
City of Muskegon 1989
is comprised of these converted units, few These are not considered significant
of which were originally constructed for percentages.
multifamily or rental use.
Age of Housing Stock
The City has a substantially lower
percentage of mobile homes than either the Table 2.17 presents an illustration of the
County or the State. A breakdown of age of the City's housing stock. New
housing units by type is illustrated in Table construction of housing units between 1980
3.16. Figures for Muskegon County and the and 1990 represents almost 25% of new
State are given for comparison purposes. construction figures during the 1970s.
Most of the new units built during the
In 1990 there were a total of 1,249 vacant 1980s were multifamily rental units. Much
housing units. Of those, 56 were classified of the City's owner-occupied housing stock
as vacant due to seasonal, recreational, or is older than the rental housing stock.
occasional use. The homeowner vacancy Almost 47 percent of the City's owner-
rate for the City in 1990 was 1.7 percent, occupied housing is over 50 year old,
and the rental vacancy rate 7.8 percent. compared to approximately 27 percent of
Housing Unit Percentages Percentages Percentages
Type Units City of Muskegon Muskegon County State of Michigan
1 unit detached 10,164 63.4 75.6 69.5
1 unit attached 238 1.5 1.2 3.4
2-4 units 2,784 17.4 7.2 7.0
5-9 units 716 4.5 2.3 3.9
10+ units 1,917 12.0 6.0 8.7
Mobile Homes 200 1.2 7.7 7.5
Total 16,019 100 100 100
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Table 2.16 Housing Unit Types City of Muskegon 1990
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 11
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
Year Number of Housing Units
1989 - March 1990 53
1985 - 1988 153
1980 - 1984 327
1970 - 1979 1,954
1960 - 1969 1,821
1950 - 1959 2,689
1940 - 1949 3,119
1939 or earlier 5,903
Total Housing Units 16,019
Table 2.17 Year Housing Units Were Built
City of Muskegon 1990
the rental units. Many of the City's older neighborhoods to replace old or
rental units are in structures originally built demolished housing stock.
as single family homes that have been
converted to rental use. The age of Muskegon's housing stock will
continue to present the issues of housing
Unlike many other urban communities, rehabilitation and demolition. Seventy
Muskegon has not experienced periodic three percent of Muskegon's housing units
redevelopment of its urban core. Much of are over 35 years of age, and 37% are over
the City's inner-City housing stock is intact 55 years of age.
excepting that which has been lost to fire,
demolition, and commercial or industrial 9. Employment Statistics
development. In certain locations, new
housing has been established in inner City In 1990 the City of Muskegon had 15,786
Occupation Category Number of Persons
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations 1,182
Professional specialty occupations 1,387
Technicians and related support occupations 422
Sales occupations 1,504
Administrative support occupations, including clerical 2,011
Private household occupations 68
Protective service occupations 274
Service occupations, except protective and household 2,368
Farming, forestry, and fishing occupations 78
Precision production, craft, and repair occupations 1,543
Machine operations, assemblers, and inspections 2,047
Transportation, and material moving occupations 435
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers 651
Total employed, persons 16 years and over 13,970
Table 2.18 Employment by Occupation
City of Muskegon 1990
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 12
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
people in the labor force. The areas in Muskegon County and other
unemployment rate at that time was 11.3 communities has been the primary
percent, so approximately 1800 of the contributing factor to the decline in the
15,786 were not employed. Table 2.18 City's population. Much of this movement
indicates the occupation of employed can be attributed to a decline in area
persons age 16 and over. The three economic opportunities. Population trends
occupation categories having the highest of the City's white and African American
employment numbers are: Service; population groups suggest that the overall
Machine Operators, Assemblers, and decline in population may be attributable to
Inspectors; and Administrative Support. a loss of the white population to other
areas. Although an increase in the City's
Employment by industry for employed population is expected to occur over the
persons age 16 and over is listed in Table next 20 years, outmigration trends among
2.19. This information indicates high the white population are likely to continue
employment levels in the industry for the foreseeable future. (Source: Urban
categories of: Retail Trade, Manufacturing Decisions Systems).
of Durable Goods, and Health Services.
As is the case in many older central cities,
10. General Conclusions Muskegon has first-hand experience with
the broad ranging impacts of a cyclical
Movement of the population to outlying economy. Although 1990 Census data
Industry Category Number of Persons
Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries 107
Mining 5
Construction 513
Manufacturing, nondurable goods 993
Manufacturing, durable goods 2,886
Transportation 351
Communications and other public utilities 374
Wholesale Trade 605
Retail trade 3,145
Finance, insurance, and real estate 422
Business and repair services 406
Personal services 469
Entertainment and recreation services 306
Health Services 1,191
Educational Services 978
Other professional and related services 616
Public Administration 603
Total Employed Persons 16 years and over 13,970
Table 2.19 Employment by Industry
City of Muskegon 1990
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 13
Population and Socio-Economic Characteristics
Master Land Use Plan
reflects a decrease in lower income
households over the past decade is a result
of a decrease in the City's population, not
an increase in household income. This
decline in income, while impacting all City
households to some degree, has had a more
dramatic impact on low-income individuals
and families.
Population, income, and housing data
suggest that the City will see increasing
numbers of persons in lower income
brackets. The City will also likely
experience increasing needs for (and
witness increases in) additional rental
housing to serve a lower income
population.
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 2 14
Existing Land Use
Master Land Use Plan
This portion of the plan presents an Commercial
overview of existing land use that is based
on a land use field inventory. Comparisons This category includes land occupied by
of land use are also made to the previous any type of business, retail and service
Master Plan completed in 1983. Data from facilities, and accessory off-street parking
this analysis were used in a number of areas.
different steps and evaluations in the
development of the Master Plan. The Office
existing land use data was also developed
into a layer of the City's geographic This category includes land occupied by all
information system so that the data could types of individual office facilities and
be presented and analyzed in a variety of related off-street parking. Office facilities
ways, including the attached existing land which are ancillary to commercial or
use map. The mapping effort relied on the industrial uses are not included in this
tax maps maintained by the City's category.
Equalization Department to delineate the
land parcels. Industrial
In addition to this section, additional land This category includes the land area
use detail may be found under the section devoted to all types of light and heavy
discussing the City's thirteen sub-area industrial uses, including warehousing,
districts. Also, the Downtown and bump and paint shops, tool and die shops,
Lakeshore Redevelopment Plan, a separate technological industries, assembly
component of the Master Plan, contains operations, and facilities that manufacture
extensive land use information on the City's finished or semifinished products from raw
Core Downtown. materials.
Descriptions of each category illustrated on Marinas
the existing land use map are provided
below. Land devoted to publicly and privately
owned marinas, including on-site parking
Single and Two-Family Residential areas, loading ramps, and boat storage
areas.
Single-family detached dwellings, and two-
family dwellings (flats, duplexes, and Government, Schools, and Museums
similar units).
This category includes facilities of the City,
Multi-Family Dwellings County, and State, public and private
schools, and public museums.
Structures containing three or more
dwelling units. All multi-family residential Hospitals and Medical Centers
zoning districts were field checked to make
a best estimate of actual multi-family use. This category includes medical facilities
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 3 1
Existing Land Use
Master Land Use Plan
primarily associated with the campuses of However, it indicates all road right-of-way
Mercy, General, and Hackley Hospitals. (ROW) in the City and is detailed within the
land use tables.
Churches, Cemeteries, and Funeral Homes
Vacant
This category includes local churches and
synagogues, cemeteries, and funeral homes. All land that was undeveloped at the time
of the land use field survey.
Public Parks and Recreation
Table 3.1 lists the number of acres within
The category includes public parks, each of the above land use categories.
playgrounds, waterfront facilities, state land, (Note: the following tables utilize land use
and associated uses. categories consistent with the 1983 land
use inventory in order to offer comparisons
Recreational Facilities and Clubs of change).
This category includes major recreational Table 3.2 presents a comparison of the land
facilities and clubs of a quasi-public area in each category in 1983 and 1996.
character. Unlike public park facilities,
land uses in this classification require The land use inventory indicates:
membership fees or other forms of
compensation as a prerequisite to use. the predominate land use is 1-family
residential;
Road Right-of-Way
significant percentage increase in multi-
This category is not depicted in the legend family versus single-family residential
box of the Existing Land Use Map. units;
Use Acres % Total
1-Family Residential 2,091 17.5
Multi-Family Residential 323 2.7
Commercial 382 3.2
Office 143 1.2
Industrial 789 6.6
Public 1,784 14.9
Marina 94 0.8
Road ROW 2,050 17.2
Vacant 1,824 15.3
Surface Water 2,453 20.6
Total 11,933 Acres
Sources: City of Muskegon 1983 Land Use Inventory City of Muskegon Tax Maps and 1996/1997 field surveys.
Percentage figures have been rounded.
Table 3.1 Existing Land Use
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 3 2
Existing Land Use
Master Land Use Plan
Use 1983 1997 Change (%)
1-Family Residential 1,768 2,091 +18.3
Multi-Family Residential 199 323 +62.3
Commercial 300 382 +27.3
Office 43.5 143 +229
Industrial 721 789 +9.4
Public 1,504 1,786 +18.8
Marina 37 94 +154
Vacant 3,243 1,824 -44
Water 2,453 2,453 NA
Road Right-of-Way 1,931 2,050 NA
Sources: City of Muskegon 1983 Land Use Inventory City of Muskegon Tax Maps and 1996/1997 field surveys.
Percentage figures have been rounded.
Table 3.2 Comparisons 1983 - 1997
significant percentage increase in office pedestrian scale neighborhood
space versus general commercial areas; commercial areas are virtually non-
existent;
small increase in development of
industrial and public land use in the long-established residential and corridor
past 14 years; commercial land use patterns have
remained generally unchanged since
significant percentage increase in adoption of the City's 1984 Master Land
marina development(though overall Use Plan;
acreage is still small);
commercial development has
significant decrease in areas designated encroached upon residential
as vacant; neighborhoods since the 1984 Master
Land Use Plan was adopted;
Muskegon is a mature urban
community with a limited amount of the City exhibits a general lack of
developable land; transition areas and buffers between
corridor commercial areas and
much of the vacant land is subject to adjoining residential development. The
constraints posed by location in same is true between industrial areas
wetland or floodplain areas; and adjoining residential development;
commercial development outside of the strip commercial development along
core Downtown, Sherman/U.S. 31, and the Apple, Getty, Lakeshore, Laketon,
Sherman/Henry areas is decentralized; and Henry Street corridors generally
contain older and underutilized retail
and service uses;
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 3 3
Existing Land Use
Master Land Use Plan
industrial development and change for single and multiple family
redevelopment has concentrated in the residential development. Collectively,
Port City Industrial Park, and in that these uses absorb approximately 35 acres
area of the City generally east of US 31 annually. The other land use showing a
and north of Sherman Boulevard; and significant change is the annual increase in
public lands. This reflects the City's
the Muskegon Lake shoreline presents aggressive policy of acquiring lands suitable
opportunities for high-quality for recreational and other public needs.
development and redevelopment that
can benefit the City and region. The Industrial land experiences an absorption
Muskegon Lake shoreline possesses rate of approximately 5 acres per year.
valuable aesthetic and natural resources While this rate appears somewhat low
not found in many urban centers. given the growth of such facilities as the
Port City Industrial Park, it is also indicative
Land Absorption of a need to create new space for industrial
use. Based on the Existing Land Use Map,
Based on land use counts between the industrial space is relatively limited..
1983 and 1997 period, the annual rate of
land use change was determined (Table The commercial and office categories
3.3). Although some caution must be used expand by approximately 14 acres per year.
when applying the data due to potential Historically, this growth has occurred in a
variations between historic and current decentralized fashion.
information, the counts offer insight into the
type and degree of ongoing change. The Marina development has grown at the rate
table reveals that all categories, except for of approximately 4 acres per year.
vacant land, experienced growth. Of Additional growth is anticipated as
particular note are the combined rates of lakeshore areas become available for
Use Annual Rate (Acres)
1-Family Residential 25
Multi-Family Residential 10
Commercial 6
Office 8
Industrial 5
Public 22
Marina 4
Vacant 89
Water NA
Road Right-of-Way 9
Note: Reflects 1983 to 1997 Period
Table 3.3 Annual Land Absorption Rate
1983 - 1997
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 3 4
Existing Land Use
Master Land Use Plan
redevelopment opportunities.
Build-out
Based on the absorption trends of the 1983
to 1997 period, the City will utilize all
developable vacant lands over an
approximate 19 to 20 year period. Since a
high percentage of vacant properties are
unbuildable due to natural/environmental
limitations or are poorly located for desired
uses, the City will face increasing demands
to redevelop properties in order to
accommodate continuing growth.
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 3 5
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
INTRODUCTION south and east-west directions. Streets
considered (for the purpose of this study)
Purpose have been designated as either
arterial/major streets or collectors.
The Transportation Section of the
Muskegon Master Plan provides an The major east-west streets in the City of
inventory of existing street and Muskegon are:
transportation factors, a determination of
existing and future traffic generators, a Sherman;
determination of road capacities, a Lakeshore;
discussion of other recent traffic studies, an Laketon;
inventory and discussion of major accident Apple; and
intersections, and a recommendation Marquette.
discussion. The purpose of these subunits
is to determine existing traffic conditions The major north-south streets in the City of
within the City of Muskegon, to accurately Muskegon are:
project future conditions and to provide
proper and studied recommendations both Quarterline;
for physical improvements and planning Getty;
and land use control guidance. Wood;
Peck;
Road Transportation System Overview Sanford;
Seaway Drive;
The City of Muskegon is well served by a Henry; and
series of freeways, state highways, major McCracken.
roads and local roads. Muskegon's primary
link to other metropolitan areas in southern Collectors include:
Michigan is by Interstate 96 which
terminates just south of the City. Access to Lakeshore (west of McCracken);
Downtown Muskegon from I-96 is provided Lincoln;
by Seaway Drive (BR-31). I-96 empties McGraft Park;
onto Seaway which provides the most Glenside; and
direct route to the Downtown. Other Creston.
regional access is provided by four lane
limited access (U.S. 31) which is the Refer to the Traffic Volume map for a
primary north-south road for communities depiction of these streets.
along the coast of Lake Michigan and by
Apple Avenue (M-46), a state highway Arterial/Major Streets
providing access to townships and
communities to the east.
Internally, the City is served by a series of
streets that move traffic in general north-
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 1
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
Arterial/major streets are those which serve access to neighborhoods, individual home
longer trips within an urban area, sites, and other such properties. Local
sometimes extending beyond municipal streets generally accommodate the lowest
boundaries to connect adjacent population traffic volumes and typically utilize a 25
centers, or more heavily traveled major mph speed limit. Access spacings are on a
streets. Arterial/major streets are designed parcel basis, via driveways, and side streets
for moderate to large traffic volumes tend to be located on a block-by-block
traveling at speeds of 35 to 45 mph. Speed basis. Except for winter months, on-street
limits on major streets outside of the City's parking is the norm. During winter, on-
boundaries may be higher. Conversely, street parking may be limited to a
lower speed limits may be found near designated area or during select hours in
schools and as one enters core Downtown order to accommodate municipal snow
locations. removal.
Some access to
adjacent Commercial
development Corridors
may be
permitted from Many of the
streets of this City's principal
type, but on- arterial/major
street parking streets function
and curb cuts as commercial
are usually corridors. Of
regulated to note are Apple
preserve capacity for vehicle traffic. Avenue, Laketon Avenue, Sherman
Avenue, Getty Street, Peck Street, and
Collector Streets Henry Street. In all cases these systems, and
commercial development, extend into
Collector streets are those which provide Muskegon's neighboring municipalities.
access and mobility within and between Table 5.1 provides a categorical breakdown
smaller residential, commercial, or of the business mix per corridor. The table
industrial areas. Collector streets also includes the absolute number of
accommodate lower traffic volumes and businesses per corridor within the City, as
utilize speeds of 25 to 35 mph. Access well as the number for the associated Metro
spacings and side streets may be closer Area.
together than on major streets, and on-street
parking is often permitted. Of the six corridors, Apple, Sherman , and
Peck experience relatively high
Local Streets concentrations of individual, or focused,
uses.
Local streets include the bulk of the City's
roadway network. Local streets generally Apple Avenue
link to collector streets and provide direct
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 2
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
Business Apple Laketon Sherman Getty Peck Henry
Industrial 3.4 6.0 10.0 17.6 --- 6.4
Institutional/Churches 3.4 6.0 --- 3.7 --- ---
Office/Service 63.8a 37.0 64.5b 18.4 88.5b 4.3
Restaurant/Lounge/Bar 5.2 15.0 6.4 5.1 --- 10.6
Retail 17.2 21.0 10.9 16.9 9.8 53.2
Vehicular Repair 6.9 11.0 2.7 18.4 --- 10.6
Vehicular Sales --- 3.0 --- 14.7 --- 10.6
Other --- 1.0 5.5 5.2 1.7 4.3
Number of Businesses per 58 100 110 59 61 47
Corridor - City Portion
Number of Businesses per 231 11 108 77 58 91
Corridor outside City
Portion
Notes: aConcentration of legal offices/attorneys, at eastern end.
bConcentration of medical services. In certain instances, more than one business may be located at the
same address. For instance, a group of (independent) physicians may share a single building complex.
For purposes of the above chart, each physician has been counted as a business.
Table 5.1 Business Type as a Percent of
Total Businesses per Corridor
The westerly portion of Apple Avenue, near along the remainder of the system are
the Muskegon City Hall and Muskegon generally mixed throughout, except for the
county Building, has a concentration of most westerly stretch where residential
professional offices devoted to legal development is found. With the exception
services. This is to be expected given the of Apple Avenue, Sherman possesses the
proximity of the governmental centers and highest number of businesses within the
courts. The second highest category is Metro area. The recent construction of a
retail development. Much of that large retail shopping complex on Sherman,
development is located within close east of U.S. 31, resulted in increased traffic
proximity to the eastern end of Apple, near volumes for Sherman. As development
the U.S. 31 highway. Business around that complex continues, Sherman is
development within these two extremes is likely to experience additional traffic.
relatively modest. The corridor continues
to maintain a large percentage of single Peck Street
family residential development.
Due to the presence of Hackley Hospital,
Sherman Boulevard Peck Street experiences heavy
concentrations of medical service uses.
Sherman Boulevard possesses a high These include physician offices and various
concentration of medical service uses, health agencies. Other corridor uses
generally in close proximity to Mercy include legal services, mortuary services,
Hospital. These include physician offices and small pockets of retail. Although 61
centered about the hospital campus. Uses businesses exist along the corridor, many
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 3
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
are housed in larger, well-maintained, older several bikeway construction phases. The
homes. As such, the corridor exhibits a project is being funded, in part, by the State
residential character. of Michigan.
Getty Street Henry Street
Once a street comprised of many homes, Henry Street has a rather large retail
Getty Street has become a collection of component, however, over the past decade
industrial, automotive, and retail uses. this system has experienced some
Throughout its length (including those areas modification in use and demand. Once
beyond Muskegon's borders), Getty has considered the prime commercial corridor,
approximately 25 vehicular repair/body Henry Street has not been able to maintain
shops, 20 used car dealerships, and 29 pace with some of the newer retail areas
industrial establishments. Interspersed occurring along Harvey Street (Norton
among these are retail and service uses and Shores/Fruitport Township) and U.S.
a declining number of homes. Much of the 31/Sherman (City of Muskegon and
corridor has developed in full strip Fruitport Township). Notwithstanding the
commercial fashion. Modifying that is not above, Henry Street does possess a strong
practical at this time, nor in the foreseeable retail base. We recommend that the
future. existing base be strengthened by orienting
future development to retail, restaurant, and
Laketon Avenue consumer service (e.g., banks, credit
unions, hair salons, etc.) uses. Wholesale
With the exception of those areas lacking operations, manufacturing, vehicular repair,
sufficient lot depth to construct modern assembly halls, storage, and other such uses
commercial facilities (e.g., former Grand should be discouraged.
Trunk Railroad/CSX right-of-way) and the
large enclaves of active industrial property, As future development occurs along the
Laketon Avenue has also developed in strip above road systems, we recommend that
commercial fashion. As with Getty, greater attention be given to streetscape and
reversing that trend would be difficult. overall site design efforts. To ensure that
this happens, the City Zoning Ordinance
Several Laketon Avenue business and should include detailed standards for site
property owners have recently voiced a landscaping, signage, lighting, access, and
desire to form a task force to investigate buffering protection for residential home
ways to beautify Laketon and strengthen its sites lying contiguous to commercial and
image as a prime, and highly attractive industrial development. One of the major
corridor. Efforts are underway to initiate problems with development occurring
that effort. In addition to possible task force along each of the corridors is a failure to
improvements, the City is currently require adequate buffering between
implementing a bikeway/trail beautification commercial uses and adjoining residential
project along the north side of Laketon, homes.
between Getty and Hoyt. This is the first of
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 4
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
Existing Traffic Counts An inventory of the major and selected
collector streets has been prepared using
Shown on the Traffic Volume map are the AADT data and identifying the year from
most recent traffic counts taken within the which the data originates. Projections to
City for major streets. Traffic counts were AADT were then performed based on
taken between the years 1988 and 1995 by varied non-compounded growth factors per
either the Michigan Department of year and compiled in five-year increments
Transportation or the City of Muskegon. to the year 2020.
The data identifies primary travel patterns
within the City, using comparable In reviewing the AADT data, the year 1988
benchmarks. provided a good deal of measurements, that
were often repeated in the year 1993 or
Traffic counts are reported using the Annual 1995. The year 1995 is used to project
Average Daily Traffic (AADT) count. The growth rates, verses earlier periods. Recent
AADT is a derived number in that it is a census data supports that Muskegon County
computation obtained from a sample count. is just starting to grow, and it is anticipated
that traffic data adjusted from 1995 counts
For a true annual daily average, a count of will give supportable volumes.
vehicles would have to be taken for 365
days and the total divided by 365. Since Growth Areas
this is relatively difficult, costly, and time
consuming, the AADT is usually based on Growth factors were applied based on the
counts of 24, 48, or 72 hours and up to a likelihood that the following major
week with the result factored, or multiplied, developments will occur during the time
by the known variations between the days period of the present to the year 2020.
in the week and the months in the year.
The result then is a close approximation to Continued commercial developments
the real number. along Sherman east of U.S. 31, the
Westshore Plaza.
Traffic count patterns obtained over several
years when utilized with land use and other Commercial developments along
data, can be effective tools in determining a Sherman west of U.S. 31 and Getty.
roadway corridor's suitability for
development. In addition, traffic counts are Proposed industrial park south of
useful for determining priority of needs in Laketon between Getty and U.S. 31.
funding highway improvements, measuring
the adequacy of existing roadways, Growth of Muskegon Charter
evaluating accident data, judging the Township, Egelston Township, and
necessity for traffic control devices, and other communities east of U.S. 31
planning operational improvements. affecting Apple, Marquette, and
Laketon.
Traffic Count Projections
Proposed commercial development at
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 5
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
Sherman and Getty.
Potential development south of
Sherman at Lake Michigan.
Continued development of Harbour
Towne and undeveloped property to
the west on Sand Products land.
Large potential to significantly develop
the Downtown area, lakeshore, and
properties to the north of Downtown.
Potential to develop large for industrial
properties along Lakeshore and Seaway
Drives, north and south of Downtown.
Projections of AADT are contained in Table
5.2.
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 6
Table 5.2 Existing AADT Along Major and Collector Streets
Projections of Growth to the Year 2020
Existing Projected AADT
Street From - To Growth
Factor AADT Year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Sherman East of U.S. 31 1 12,025 93 12,815-13,425 13,456-14,768 14,129-16,244 14,835-17,869 15,577-19,656
31 to Getty 1 17,826 93 18,717-19,609 19,653-21,569 20,636-23,726 21,668-26,099 22,751-28,709
Seaway to Henry 1 22,211 92 23,322-24,432 24,487-26,875 25,712-29,562 26,998-32,519 28,347-35,771
Henry to Glenside 2 11,033 93 11,033-11,585 11,033-12,164 11,033-12,772 11,033-13,411 11,033-14,081
Glenside to McCracken 2 19,618 93 19,618-20,599 19,618-21,629 19,618-22,710 19,618-23,846 19,618-25,038
McCracken to Lincoln 2 9,602 91 9,602-10,082 9,602-10,586 9,602-11,116 9,602-11,671 9,602-12,254
Lincoln to Westerly 2 8,890 93 8,890-9,335 8,890-9,801 8,890-10,291 8,890-10,806 8,890-11,346
Laketon Sheridan to U.S. 31 1 15,207 - 14,028 92-95 15,967-16,728 16,766-18,400 17,604-20,241 18,484-22,265 19,408-24,491
U.S. 31 to Getty 2 23,468 93 23,468-24,641 23,468-25,873 23,468-27,167 23,468-28,525 23,468-29,952
Getty to Wood 2 24,111 93 24,111-25,317 24,111-26,582 24,111-27,911 24,111-29,307 24,111-30,772
Wood to Peck 2 25,428 94 25,428-26,699 25,428-28,034 25,428-29,436 25,428-30,908 25,428-32,453
Peck to Seaway 2 20,835 93 20,835-21,879 20,835-22,970 20,835-24,119 20,835-25,325 20,835-26,591
Seaway to Henry 2 18,798 93 18,798-19,738 18,798-20,725 18,798-21,761 18,798-22,849 18,798-23,911
Henry to Lakeshore 2 14,835 89 14,835-15,577 14,835-16,356 14,835-17,173 14,835-18,032 14,835-18,934
Apple Quarterline to U.S. 31 2 32,780 88 32,780-34,419 32,780-36,140 32,780-37,947 32,780-39,844 32,780-41,837
U.S. 31 to Creston 2 24,700 88 24,700-25,935 24,700-27,232 24,700-28,593 24,700-30,023 24,700-31,524
Creston to Getty 2 16,600 - 16,000 88-95 16,600-17,430 16,600-18,302 16,600-19,217 16,600-20,177 16,600-21,186
Getty to Wood 2 14,000 88 14,000-14,700 14,000-15,435 14,000-16,207 14,000-17,017 14,000-17,868
Wood to Muskegon 2 12,600 88 12,600-13,230 12,600-13,892 12,600-14,586 12,600-15,315 12,600-16,081
Marquette Quarterline to U.S. 31 1 6,555 93 6,883-7,571 7,227-8,328 7,588-9,161 7,968-10,077 8,366-11,085
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 7
Table 5.2 Existing AADT Along Major and Collector Streets
Projections of Growth to the Year 2020
Existing Projected AADT
Street From - To Growth
Factor AADT Year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Getty to Wood 1 3,850 93 4,043-4,447 4,245-4,892 4,457-5,381 4,680-5,919 4914-6,511
Wood to Seaway 1 5,601 92 5,881-6,61 6,175-6,777 6,484-7,455 6,808-8,200 7,148-9,020
Lakeshore Northeasterly of Laketon 1 2,978 92 3,127-3,276 3,283-3,604 3,447-3,964 3,620-4,360 3,801-4,796
Laketon to McCracken 1 10,456 92 10,979-11,502 11,528-12,652 12,104-13,917 12,709-15,309 13,345-16,839
McCracken to Cottage
Grove 1 9,800 88 10,290-10,780 10,805-11,858 11,345-13,044 11,912-14,348 12,508-15,783
Cottage Grove to
Edgewater 1 7,723 93 8,109-8,495 8,515-9,345 8,940-10,279 9,387-11,307 9,857-12,438
Quarterline North of Marquette 1 5,194 93 5,454-5,713 5,726-6,285 6,013-6,913 6,313-7,605 6,629-8,365
South of Marquette 1 7,437 92 7,809-8,181 8,199-8,999 8,609-9,899 9,070-10,889 9,492-11,977
Creston Apple to Laketon 2 7,765 93 7,765-8,153 7,765-8561 7,765-8,989 7,765-9,438 7,765-9,910
Getty Access Highway to
Marquette 2 4,202 93 4,202--4,412 4,202- 4,633 4,202- 4,864 4,202- 5,108 4,202- 5,363
Marquette to Apple 2 8,108 95 8,108-8,513 8,108-8,939 8,108-9386 8,108-9,855 8,108-10,348
Apple to Laketon 1 11,709 - 11,629 91-93 12,294-12,880 12,909-14,168 13,555-15,585 14,232-17,143 14,944-18,857
Laketon to Sherman 2 20,893 93 20,893-21,938 20,893-23,034 20,893-24,106 20,893-25,396 20,893-26,665
Wood Apple to Laketon 1 3,981 93 4,180-4,379 4,389-4,817 4,609-5,299 4,839-5,229 5,081-6,411
Laketon to South 2 6,083 93 6,083-6,387 6,083-6,707 6,083-7,042 6,083-7,394 6,083-7,764
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 8
Table 5.2 Existing AADT Along Major and Collector Streets
Projections of Growth to the Year 2020
Existing Projected AADT
Street From - To Growth
Factor AADT Year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Peck North of Laketon 2 6,865 94 6,865-7,208 6,865-7,569 6,865-7,947 6,865-8,344 6,865-8,762
South of Laketon 2 6,243 92 6,243-6,555 6,243-6,883 6,243-7,227 6,243-7,588 6,243-7,968
Sanford North of Laketon 2 5,048 94 5,048-5,300 5,048-5,565 5,048-5,844 5,048-6,136 5,048-6,443
South of Laketon 2 6,028 93 6,028-6,329 6,028-6,646 6,028-6,978 6,028-7,327 6,028-7,693
Seaway Marquette to Eastern 1 Both Ways 22,700 88 23,835-24,970 25,027-27,467 26,279-30,214 27,592-33,235 28,970-36,559
Webster - Terrace to
Washington 3 One Way 13,903 95 8,650 9,083 9,537 10,013 10,514
Muskegon - Terrace to
Washington 3 One Way 13,606 95 8,250 8,663 9,096 9,550 10,028
Washington to Laketon 1 Both Ways 28,800 88 30,240-31,680 31,752-34848 33,370-38,333 35,007-42,166 36,757-46,383
Laketon to Sherman 1 Both Ways 32,800 88 34,440-36,080 36,162-39,688 37,970-43,657 39,867-48,022 41,862-52,824
Henry Laketon to Sherman 2 11,557 92-93 11,557-12,135 11,557-12,742 11,557-13,379 11,557-14,048 11,557-14,750
Barclay Laketon to Sherman 2 5,706 93 5,706-5,991 5,706-6,291 5,706-6,605 5,706-6,936 5,706--7,282
Glenside McGraft Park to Sherman 2 3,401 93 3,401-3,571 3,401--3,750 3,401-3,937 3,401-4,134 3,401--4,341
McGraft Park Lakeside to Glenside 2 6,012 93 6,012-6,313 6,012--6,628 6,012-6,960 6,012-7,308 6,012-7,673
McCracken Lakeshore to Sherman 2 3,105 93 3,105-3,260 3,105-3,423 3,105-3,594 3,105-3,774 3,105-3,963
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 9
Table 5.2 Existing AADT Along Major and Collector Streets
Projections of Growth to the Year 2020
Existing Projected AADT
Street From - To Growth
Factor AADT Year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Lincoln Lakeshore to Sherman 2 4,165 93 4,165-4,373 4,165--4,592 4,165-4,822 4,165-5,063 4,165-5,316
Growth Factors:
1: 1% - 2% non-compounded growth per year
2: 0% - 1% non-compounded growth per year
3: Readjusted based on Shoreline Drive Traffic Impact Analysis then grown at a rate of 1% per year after 2000
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 10
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
In general, traffic moving east and west were then completed assuming a Level of
travels Apple, Laketon, and Sherman roads, Service (LOS) of no worse than C with
using Henry, Getty and Seaway Drive to appropriate generalized signal attributes
travel north and south. The east-west roads corresponding with LOS C. Level of
are heavily traveled, at or near their design Service may be ranked from A to F with A
capacity (see below), and future potential representing the highest level of efficiency
developments are expected to have major pursuant to movement, safety, and the like.
effects on these roads, as they are adjacent Level F represents a high degree of
to or directly downstream of future inefficiency resulting from congestion, high
development. accident rates, and the like. Level of
Service C represents an acceptable level of
Capacity roadway efficiency and is generally used for
planning purposes. In some instances,
To understand the effects of increased Level of Service D is used when
traffic, using the growth assumptions determining acceptable levels of efficiency.
previously defined, roadway volumes were For purposes of this analysis, the higher
compared to existing capacity. efficiencies supported by LOS C were used.
Computations were carried out in
The capacity of a roadway includes several conformance with reference materials as
considerations. A field survey was per H.C.M. (Highway Capacity Manual)
accomplished to identify number of traffic 1994, and results indicated as "Existing
lanes available, posted speed limits, and Capacity" in Table 5.3.
general street classifications. Capacities
Table 5.3 Projected Traffic Volume and Capacity
Street From - To Year 2020 Existing
Volumes Capacity Deficiency
Sherman East of U.S. 31 15,577-19,656 23,740
31 to Getty 22,271-28,709 23,740 4,969
Seaway to Henry 28,347-35,771 20,950 7,397-14,821
Henry to Glenside 11,033-14,081 22,350
Glenside to McCracken 19,618-25,038 22,350
McCracken to Lincoln 9,602-12,254 22,350
Lincoln to Westerly 8,890-11,346 10,415
Laketon Sheridan to U.S. 31 19,408-24,491 22,344 2,936-7,147
U.S. 31 to Getty 23,468-29,952 23,344 128-7,608
Getty to Wood 24,111-30,772 20,950 3,161-9,822
Wood to Peck 25,428-32,453 20,950 4,478-11,503
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 11
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
Table 5.3 Projected Traffic Volume and Capacity
Street From - To Year 2020 Existing
Volumes Capacity Deficiency
Peck to Seaway 20,835-26,591 20,950 5,641
Seaway to Henry 18,798-23,911 20,950 2,961
Henry to Lakeshore 14,835-18,934 20,950
Apple Quarterline to U.S. 31 32,780-41,837 23,740 9,040-18,097
U.S. 31 to Creston 24,700-31,524 20,950 3,750-10,574
Creston to Getty 16,600-21,186 20,950
Getty to Wood 14,000-17,868 20,950
Wood to Muskegon 12,600-16,081 20,950
Marquette Quarterline to U.S. 31 8,366-11,085 18,820
Getty to Wood 4,914-6,511 18,820
Wood to Seaway 7,148-9,020 18,820
Lakeshore Northeasterly of Laketon 3,801-4,796 10,470
Laketon to McCracken 13,345-16,839 10,470 2,875-6,369
McCracken to Cottage Grove 12,508-15,783 10,470 2,038-5,313
Cottage Grove to Edgewater 9,857-12,438 10,470 1,968
Quarterline North of Marquette 6,629-8,365 11,170
South of Marquette 9,492-11,977 22,350
U.S. 31 Between Marquette and Apple 55,000
North of Sherman 55,000
Creston Apple to Laketon 7,765-9,910 10,475
Getty Access Highway to Marquette 4,202-5,363 11,170
Marquette to Apple 8,108-10,348 10,475
Apple to Laketon 11,709-18,857 20,954
Laketon to Sherman 20,893-26,665 20,954 5,711
Master Land Use Plan
City of Muskegon 4 13
Transportation
Master Land Use Plan
Table 5.3 Projected Traffic Volume and Capacity
Street From - To Year 2020 Existing
Volumes Capacity Deficiency
Wood Apple to Laketon 5,081-6,411 10,475
Laketon to South 6,083-7,764 11,025
Peck North of Laketon 6,865-8,762 11,025
South of Laketon 6,243-7,968 11,025
Sanford North of Laketon 5,048-6,443 11,025
South of Laketon 6,028-7,693 11,025
Seaway Marquette to Eastern 28,972-36,559 49,980
Webster - Terrace to Washington 10,514 23,520
Muskegon - Terrace to Washington 10,028 23,520
Washington to Laketon 36,757-46-383 47,040
Laketon to Sherman 41,862-52,824 47,040 5,784
Henry Laketon to Sherman 11,557-14,750 20,950
Barclay Laketon to Sherman 5,706-7,282 10,475
Glenside McGraft Park to Sherman 3,401-4,341 8,820
McGraft Park Lakeside to Glenside 6,012-7,673 8,820
McCracken Lakeshore to Sherman 3,105-3,963 8,820
Lincoln Lakeshore to Sherman 4,165-5,316 8,820
Master