DNR options for Potawatomi Park tower upset local groups, legislators

TOWN OF NASEWAUPEE - The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources presented four options for the future of the currently closed, historic Observation Tower at Potawatomi State Park in a virtual meeting Thursday night, with the recommended option being a new tower with a helical (circular spiraling) ramp to the top for those with accessibility issues.

But local legislators and organizations interested in the tower aren't happy with the options or the way they were presented, calling them a "shell game," "sham" and "setup" designed to allow the tower to be destroyed because they believe the Legislature won't pass a project of this cost in its upcoming budget.

Built in 1931, the 75-foot-tall wooden tower overlooking the bay of Green Bay — the first purpose-built recreational observation tower constructed in a Wisconsin State Park, State Forest or State Recreational Area — was closed in 2018 after the DNR said it found significant wood rot and decay during routine inspections.

The DNR initially planned to dismantle the tower after an initial study said it was unsalvageable, but local efforts led by the Sturgeon Bay Historical Society Foundation drove consideration to instead rehabilitate the existing structure. The society commissioned a study by Wood Research and Development that indicated the tower could be repaired. Since then, the tower has been placed on the State and National Registers of Historic Places.

The DNR gave a half-hour Zoom presentation in which Fred Groth of Milwaukee-based engineering firm GRAEF, which was selected by the state to provide pre-design through construction services on the tower, outlined and explained the design options they are considering.

Groth said the firm reviewed three reports, including the one from Wood Research, and decided the tower can be repaired and restored.

However, he said the cost would be more than building a new tower. Groth said columns, joists, beams and the decks are deteriorating and handrails need to be brought up to 42 inches high to meet building codes, but the other concern would be long-term maintenance, with an estimated cost of $1.06 million over 40 years.

A new tower, 75 feet tall with three observation decks like the current one, would cost an estimated $1.03 million to build, compared to $1.1 million to repair, according to the GRAEF study. Also, it said its 40-year maintenance costs would be an estimated $448,000, about half a million dollars less than for a repaired tower. It would use wood and other materials that would "reflect the historic character of the existing tower."

The study also considered a 1,300-foot linear ramp option that would wind through the forest in the immediate vicinity to get to the top of the tower, similar to the ramp at Eagle Tower in Peninsula State Park that opened in 2021, and a helical ramp of the same distance but with a diameter of 155 feet that would disrupt less of the forest, allow those using it access to all three observation decks and cost more than a million dollars less ($2.58 million vs. $3.64 million).

All told, Graef recommended what it calls Option 2B, a new tower with the helical ramp at a cost, including 40-year maintenance, of $6.39 million. The report said Option 1B, repair with the helical ramp, would cost $6.06 million, while Options 2A and 1A (new tower with a linear ramp and repair with linear ramp) would cost $7.46 million and $7.56 million.

The ramps were included in all options to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) laws. To meet accessibility requirements, GRAEF also considered an elevator and a ski lift climber that would bring people to the top of the tower, but those were dismissed because of costs and the need to have someone on staff full-time to operate the equipment and maintain it, especially in case of a failure.

All of the plans include parking for 44 cars, bus parking and site improvements such as walkways.

The DNR said it will make a final decision on its recommendation after reviewing results of a public comment survey on the park's website that asks people to select which of the four given options they prefer. The DNR then will forward the preference to Gov. Tony Evers for inclusion in his 2023-25 Capital Budget. Those interested must submit their answers by midnight Feb. 13.

Options, process are questioned

But leaders of two local groups that want to preserve the current structure say the state is ignoring a third option — repairing and preserving it while making improvements to an existing, close-by overlook that they say would meet ADA requirements while offering a similar view of the bay of Green Bay, just not from as high as the tower.

Christie Weber, past-president of the Sturgeon Bay Historical Society, said a 1,300-foot ramp rising that high would be accessible to only about 30% of all people with mobility issues and could pose problems for descending wheelchairs, although the ramp design has flat platforms along the route like it does at Eagle Tower.

She also questioned the need for a version with a ramp when Eagle Tower, which also overlooks the bay of Green Bay, is 30 miles to the north.

"They decided to pick the most destructive and costly options that only serve 30% of the mobility-impaired population," Weber said. "Why did they limit it to that when it doesn't serve all of the people with ADA needs, or when you've got one 20 miles up the road with the same view of the bay?

"The ramp doesn't serve all of the mobility-impaired population, so that's disingenuous. Why aren't they choosing an option that to serve the other 70% of mobility impaired that can't go up all the way?"

Weber also brought up the idea of a kiosk at the tower base that would offer camera views from the top of the tower, which she said would meet accessibility requirements in conjunction with the overlook.

"We want the historic standing of this structure respected and a mobility alternative that represents 100% of that population," she said.

Weber also questioned the estimated repair costs given by GRAEF. She said when Wood Research conducted its study four years ago, the cost would have been $300,000, and while she acknowledges that figure most likely has risen, she thinks it wouldn't be close to the three-times-higher amount given by GRAEF.

Dave Allen, who helped form a loose-knit citizens group called Potawatomi Park Alliance, echoed those concerns and noted that even if an option that includes repair is considered, that could remove the structure from the historic places registers because of the proposed ramp.

"It didn't have a third option, which was to restore the tower and use the overlook," Allen said. "It's perfectly legal, meets the ADA legally. No one wants the tower bastardized with a ramp that would destroy its historic significance."

Allen noted that of the total costs, much would go toward building the ramps.

"Almost the entire cost is really the ramp," Allen said. "Really, the cheapest is to restore it as is."

Steve Schmelzer, director of Bureau of Parks and Recreation Management for the DNR, said in an email to the Advocate that the tower's historic places listings were taken into consideration, although he didn't say if any of the given options were likely to cause the tower to be delisted.

"The repair/restore options wouldn’t automatically remove its status," Schmelzer said. "The State Historical Society and the National Park Service would make the determination after the final scope of work was determined."

In a joint press release issued Friday morning calling the presentation "DNR's ludicrous shell game," Door County's state legislators, Sen. Andre Jacque and Rep. Joel Kitchens, also hammered the presented options, saying they ignored suggestions and feedback previously given to the state by the public. When the state announced last spring it would seek bids for a study on repair/replace options, the two Republican legislators said that the state has the money available to repair the tower immediately in its current budget but was continuing to drag out the decision.

“My office has received hundreds of contacts regarding the tower since it was shut down. Not a single person was asking for a new tower. Everyone wants to repair the existing tower," Kitchens said in the release. "All of our local governmental units passed resolutions asking for repair of the existing tower, not replacement. The administration has absolutely refused to listen to the people of Door County.”

“I’ve already heard from numerous confused and upset constituents wondering why their questions and input apparently aren’t important enough for the Evers Administration to take seriously," Jacque said.

Weber and Allen also were upset that the presentation didn't offer an opportunty for a question-and-answer session or feedback from those watching. They also noted the public feedback link only asks people to select which of the four options they prefer, again with no opportunity for comments, points that Jacque jumped on in his response.

"Misleading the public with such a short, scripted session is a sham, and a perfect example of why the DNR has been experiencing a crisis of credibility," Jacque said.

Allen said he believes the state is stalling until the tower gets to a state of deterioration where repair is not possible and it would be torn down with no rebuild, calling the process a "setup." He said that would follow a plan dating back to the administration of Gov. Scott Walker to save money by slashing the state parks budget.

"In the meantime, the hope (of the government) is by simply ignoring it, the tower will get to the point where it'll have to be torn down," Allen said. "Every single day that goes by, every rain storm that falls on it, that tower degrades. That's bogus."

Allen said he and his wife met with Evers during a public event in Green Bay last year, presented the Democratic governor with information on the tower and asked to meet with Evers and his staff to discuss it. He said he hasn't gotten a response.

"I don't know why he won't sit down with us and learn what's going on," Allen said. "He told my wife and I he would restore the tower. This isn't restoring it.

"We're hurt, confused and angry."

Contact Christopher Clough at 920-562-8900 or cclough@doorcountyadvocate.com.

On the web

To watch a video recording of the DNR's Zoom presentation, view its PowerPoint presentation or find a link to the public survey, visit https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/parks/potawatomi/tower.

MORE: Four primary elections are needed this year for local elections in Door County

MORE: Peninsula Players Theatre announces 2023 winter play reading series

MORE: Door County room taxes to fund grant program for projects that benefit tourism, residents

MORE: New band of bluegrass vets plays White Gull dinner concert series

FOR MORE DOOR COUNTY NEWS: Check out our website

This article originally appeared on Green Bay Press-Gazette: DNR's preferred options for Potawatomi Park tower called sham, setup