Mentor Council reviews shoreline stabilization plan, staff seeks OK to start $340,000 due diligence

Mentor City Council members on April 7 reviewed a multi-year plan to stabilize the shoreline at the city nature preserve and were asked to permit an immediate round of technical due-diligence work funded in part by a Lake Erie Commission grant.

Ken Filipiak, the staff presenter, said the council has two related funding tracks: a Lake Erie Commission (LEC) grant that will support $340,000 of investigative engineering and a separate congressional design appropriation of $1,750,000 that carries a 1:1 local match. “We are going to lose more and more of that preserve over time,” Filipiak said, arguing that the city needs to advance studies and designs now to preserve future options and secure construction funding.

Michelle Johnson of SmithGroup said the LEC award is federal money administered through the state and has distinct grant requirements, including a five-year data-hosting obligation for the city. She told council members that NOAA has not yet opened its application portal for the congressional appropriation but staff are coordinating with NOAA and expect a preapproval path because the shoreline presents health and safety risks. “NOAA understands that, and they are willing to consider this a special case and move us forward quickly,” Johnson said.

Staff outlined the immediate work in the $340,000 contract: wave and current measurements, bathymetric and topographic surveys and other site-specific field investigations that are prerequisites to detailed design. Johnson said the project team plans to take shoreline-protection elements to a 30% design under an initial $1.2 million design contract while leaving trails and overlooks at conceptual level until the council decides whether to advance them.

Council members pressed staff on timing and the risk of spending design dollars before putting larger funding asks to voters. One council member raised a rough estimate that the full project could exceed $30 million and asked whether it is prudent to spend local match dollars if voters ultimately reject capital funding. Filipiak and Johnson said structural and grading changes likely require voter approval and that bonding and a finalized funding package would come after permits and a more complete design; Johnson said roughly 60% design is typically the point at which applicants can successfully pursue major construction grants and present a clear package to voters.

A question about flexibility for the congressional funds drew a direct answer from staff: the appropriation is directed to the approved project and cannot simply be diverted to an unrelated stone revetment. Johnson also said the permitting agencies have made it clear a traditional revetment wall would not be permitted, and the alternative measures under study are similar in cost per linear foot while aiming to avoid downstream impacts.

Filipiak asked the council for its OK to proceed with the LEC-funded due-diligence work and noted that the expenditure ties to an appropriation ordinance on the meeting agenda. The transcript ends after a motion to adjourn; a formal council vote on the due-diligence authorization is not recorded in the provided excerpts.

If the council agrees to proceed, SmithGroup estimates the team would pursue a roughly three-year design window and work toward a 60% design milestone by about October 2028, at which point the city would be better positioned to seek construction funding and determine what — if any — items should appear on a ballot for voter approval.