Shawano Lake 2030 Sewer Service Area

Transcription

Shawano Lake
2030 Sewer Service Area
March 8, 2011
Prepared by the
East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
in cooperation with the State of Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
The preparation of this document was financed in part through a Water Quality Planning assistance grant
from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Section 205 ( j ) of the Clean Water Act.
EAST CENTRAL WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Dick Koeppen, Chair
Marshal Giese, Vice-Chair
Eric Fowle, Secretary-Treasurer
COMMISSION MEMBERS - 2008/2009
CALUMET COUNTY
WAUPACA COUNTY
Bill Barribeau
Pat Laughrin
Clarence Wolf
Dick Koeppen, Chair
Duane Brown
Brian Smith
DuWayne Federwitz
MENOMINEE COUNTY
WAUSHARA COUNTY
Elizabeth Moses
(Jeremy Johnson, Alt.)
Ruth Winter
Robert Hermes
Norman Weiss
Walter Petersen
Neal Strehlow
OUTAGAMIE COUNTY
WINNEBAGO COUNTY
Toby Paltzer
Clifford Sanderfoot
Tim Hanna
Helen Nagler
Jim Steineke
Paul Hirte
Mark Harris
David Albrecht
Ernie Bellin
Frank Tower
(Mark Rohloff, Alt)
Jim Erdman
Ken Robl
SHAWANO COUNTY
Marshal Giese, Vice Chair
Ken Capelle
M. Eugene Zeuske
ABSTRACT
Plane
Title:
SHAWANO LAKE 2030 SEWER SERVICE AREA
Authors:
Todd A. Verboomen/ SSA Planning
Joe Huffman, GIS /SSA Planning
Subject:
Sanitary sewer service area delineation for future community
growth.
Date:
Planning Agency:
March 8, 2011
400 Ahnaip Street, Suite 100
Menasha, WI 54952
(920) 751-4770
This plan updates and supersedes the 1999 Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area Plan which is an
element of the Water Quality Management Plan, which for this area includes the Wolf River Basin
Water Quality Management Plan (2001). The plan was prepared by the East Central Wisconsin
Regional Planning Commission and was certified by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
on March 8, 2011 as part of the Statewide Water Quality Plan. It provides population and land use
projections and delineates future growth areas for the Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area. Also
identified are environmentally sensitive areas which should not be developed. Policy
recommendations encourage cost-effective and environmentally sound development patterns.
This report, including maps and other related information on Sewer Service Areas and the East Central
Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, is available on our website at www.eastcentralrpc.org.
This page intentionally left blank
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................
Report format……………………………………………………………………………………….... ...................
Purpose……………………………………………………………………………………………... .......................
Background……………………………………………………………………………………….… ......................
Fox River Designated Water Quality Management Area …………………………………….…. ..........
Plan, Goals, Objectives And Policies…………………………………………………………………. .............
1
1
1
2
3
5
SHAWANO LAKE OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................
15
SHAWANO LAKE SEWER SERVICE AREA PLAN .........................................................................
Planning Area Description ..................................................................................................
Land Use And Development ...............................................................................................
Environmentally Sensitive Areas .........................................................................................
Limiting Environmental Conditions ......................................................................................
Designated Management Areas ..............................................................................
Sewerage Collection And Treatment System ............................................................
Forecast Growth And Development ...................................................................................
Growth Allocation Areas And 2030 SSA ..................................................................
Priority Development Area Mapping ..............................................................
Year 2030 SSA ............................................................................................
SSA Future Needs .......................................................................................
Holding Tank Service Areas ....................................................................................
Water Quality Assessment And Development Impacts..............................................
Point Source Impacts....................................................................................
Non-point Source Impacts ............................................................................
Groundwater Impacts ...................................................................................
Water Quality Protection And Stormwater Management..................................
Plan Implementation And Recommendations ..........................................................
17
17
18
25
28
31
35
41
43
43
47
48
51
51
51
51
57
57
58
SEWER SERVICE AREA DELINEATION AND PLANNING PROCESS ...........................................
Identification of Planning Area Limits ..................................................................................
Delineation of Environmentally Sensitive Areas....................................................................
Identification and Quantification of Existing Conditions .......................................................
Refinement of Goals, Objectives and Policies .....................................................................
Forecast of Urban Growth .................................................................................................
Public and Community Participation ...................................................................................
Adoption and Publication of Final Plans ..............................................................................
61
61
61
65
66
66
70
70
SEWER SERVICE AREA AMENDMENT And UPDATE PROCESS ..................................................
Background ......................................................................................................................
East Central Review And Recommendation .........................................................................
WDNR Review and Approval ..............................................................................................
71
71
71
71
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Plane Development And Approval Documentation ..........................................................
Appendix B – SSA Demographic and Acreage Projection Tables ......................................................
I
XXVII
Appendix E – Environmental Assessment of 2030 SSA Allocations ................................................ …….. XLI
TABLES
Table 1 - 2008 Wolf Treatment Plant Performance Report ...................................................................
Table 2 – Shawano Lake Population, Housing & Employment Projections ..............................................
Table 3 - Summary of 2020 & Proposed 2030 SSA Conditions ..............................................................
Table 4 - Wastewater Flow Projections ................................................................................................
Table 5 – Shawano Lake SSA– Existing (2005) Non-Point Source Pollution Loading Estimate ..................
Table 6 - Shawano Lake SSA – Future (2030) Non-Point Source Pollution Loading Estimate ...................
Table 7- Designated Management Agencies .......................................................................................
37
41
42
53
54
54
58
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Fox River Water Quality Management Area ......................................................................
Exhibit 2 - Shawano Lake SSA – Year 2050 Planning Area Boundary ..................................................
Exhibit 3 - Shawano Lake SSA – 2007 Existing Land Use ...................................................................
Exhibit 4 - Shawano Lake SSA – ESAs and Limiting Environmental Conditions ...................................
Exhibit 5 - Shawano Lake SSA – Political Jurisdictions & DMAs ...........................................................
Exhibit 6 - Shawano Lake SSA – WWTF & Infrastructure Locations ....................................................
Exhibit 7 - Shawano Lake SSA – Priority Development Areas .............................................................
Exhibit 8 - Shawano Lake SSA – Year 2030 Sewer Service Area .........................................................
Exhibit 9 - Shawano Lake SSA – Year 2030 SSA & Proposed Land Use ................................................
Exhibit 10 - SSA Amendment Standards & Update Procedures Application Area ....................................
4
21
23
29
33
39
45
49
55
72
Figures
Figure 1 - Environmentally Sensitive Area Standards ..........................................................................
64
1
INTRODUCTION
This is the third update of the Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area Plan (1987 And 1999) which is
an element of the State of Wisconsin Water Quality Management Plan, specifically, the State of
the Wolf River Basin Plan (WDNR publ. WT-664-2001). In the 30 years since sewer service
areas have been in effect, they have provided a guide for sewered development and have had a
significant impact in the protection of water quality. Both communities and land developers are
now more aware of the purpose of sewer service areas, using the plans and policies in
community and development planning.
Report Format
This plan describes and delineates the Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area. The plan was
developed in accordance with state and federal guidelines and involved various community and
public input measures including:
o
o
o
One public informational meeting;
Several ‘working’ meetings; and
One public hearing.
This plan discusses the Sewer Service Area (SSA) characteristics, projected growth levels and
the service area plan map. The beginning and end portions of this document discuss traits
common to all SSAs, such as:
o
o
o
Service area goals, objectives and policies;
Service area delineation and planning process; and
Service area amendment and update process.
Purpose
This Sewer Service Area Plan updates and amends the 1999 sewer service area planning
element of the State of the Wolf River Basin Plan (WDNR publ. WT-664-2001). The updating
process is part of a regularly scheduled five-year re-evaluation, the last of which was completed
in 1999 (and now again in 2010) according to Wisconsin Administrative Code NR121.07(2)(a)1.
Sewer service area plans serve as a basis for Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR) approval of state and federal grants for the planning and construction of wastewater
treatment and sewerage facilities. They also serve as a basis for WDNR approval of locally
proposed sanitary sewer extensions and Wisconsin Department of Commerce approval of
private and public sewer laterals. In addition, because the service area plans identify
environmentally sensitive areas, they serve as a guide for environmental permit decisions by
federal and state agencies.
Shawano Lake 2030 SSA Plan
March 8, 2011
2
Sewer service area plans are intended to be an important planning and development guide for
local communities. The updated plans:
o
o
o
o
o
o
Identify wastewater treatment and collection needs for sewer service areas for a 20 year
or more planning period;
Forecast the amount and location of future urban development areas;
Identify environmentally sensitive areas which should be preserved;
Contain land use development forecasts and recommendations for implementing
wastewater treatment and collection plans for individual sewer service areas;
Inform developers and property owners of community policies and restrictions before
development is proposed; and
Establish "holding tank" service areas for isolated and rural special uses.
Background
The passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment (P.L.92-500) in 1972
marked the beginning of a new approach to the planning, design and construction of municipal
wastewater collection and treatment facilities. This law established Areawide Water Quality
Management Planning under Section 208 and also the Facility Planning Grant Program under
Section 201. The preparation of sewer service area plans for major urban areas and designated
water quality management areas were significant parts of this planning process. In recent
years, the State of Wisconsin has embodied many of the federal areawide and facility planning
requirements in the Wisconsin Administrative Code. These administrative rules set forth clear
procedures and standards regarding the preparation of these plans and their implementation.
Specific sections of the code directly pertaining to these activities are NR121 which describes
water quality and areawide waste treatment planning and management; and NR110 concerning
wastewater facility and sanitary sewer extension planning. In June 1977, East Central
completed initial sewer service area plans for 23 communities within the Fox Valley area under
contract with the Fox Valley Water Quality Planning Agency. These plans delineated sewer
service areas through the year 2000. The service area plans were adopted as part of the Point
Source element of the Fox Valley Water Quality Management Plan in January, 1979.
On December 31, 1989 the Fox Valley Water Quality Planning Agency (FVWQPA) was disbanded
and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) took over agency responsibility for
the Fox Valley Designated Water Quality Management Area. Therefore, the WDNR now directs,
and is responsible for the implementation of sewer service area plans. East Central, as a sewer
service area planning agency, has a contractual agreement with the Department which provides
that East Central will periodically review, revise and update the service area plans, and review
proposed sewer extensions for conformance with the approved areawide water quality plan.
The Department's role is to provide a water quality assessment and comment on revisions and
updates of the sewer service area plan and to review and approve plans for wastewater
treatment facilities and sewer extensions based upon their conformance with the areawide plan.
The contract agreement outlines rather broadly the responsibilities of each of the agencies
involved in managing sewer service areas.
In order to address specific development proposals which impact sewer service area plans on a
day-to-day basis, East Central has adopted an "Amendment Policy and Procedure for Sewer
March 8, 2011
3
Service Areas." The amendment policy and procedures were initially adopted in 1978 and
revised in 1984, 1990, 1995, 2001, and 2004. These procedures establish standards and criteria
for amending sewer service area boundaries and also describe the process for amending sewer
service area plans. The amendment policies (page 69) provide a mechanism whereby
communities can alter service area boundaries in response to changes in both the rate and
direction of development. The amendment process provides the flexibility for communities to
adjust to short-term changes in development trends and thus provides a means of
accommodating changing development trends between the five-year updates.
Fox River Designated Water Quality Management Area
The Fox River Designated Water Quality Management Area comprises major portions of the four
urban counties surrounding Lake Winnebago (Exhibit 1). The 1,580 square miles have been
specially designated for water quality planning because of the concentration of industries and
urbanization along the Fox River and Lake Winnebago. Within this overall area 25 different
sewer service areas have been delineated and individual plans prepared (Exhibit 1). The East
Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission is responsible for preparing, maintaining and
updating sewer service area plans within the designated area. The Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources is responsible for plan implementation.
While the Fox Valley area is interrelated from a water quality viewpoint, it can be separated into
two distinct areas in terms of growth and development planning. These areas consist of the
large communities of the Fox Cities, Oshkosh and Fond du Lac and the individual smaller
communities of the outlying areas. In projecting future growth, these areas are handled
differently in service area plan development.
March 8, 2011
4
March 8, 2011
5
Plan Goals, Objectives And Policies
In the ten-county region of the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, sewer
service area plans are prepared within the context of the regional comprehensive plan, New
Directions for Growth and Development (ECWRPC, 1978). The process used for the 1978 land
use plan established goals, objectives and policies formulated in response to citizens' desires
and needs brought forth in East Central's public participation program. Appropriate goals,
objectives and policies were referenced as the groundwork for the establishment of 104 urban
service area plans and boundaries throughout the region.
A major review and update of the goals, objectives and policies was completed in 1995 and
1996 and have been incorporated within the Community Facilities Chapter of the Commission’s
approved 2030 Regional Comprehensive Plan (Visit www.eastcentralrpc.org for a .pdf copy.) As
part of the updating process in 1995 and 1996, the earlier set of goals, objectives and policies
have been refined to provide more specific guidance for service area planning. The refinements
are a result of additional community and technical advisory committee participation in the
service area update planning process. The refinements also reflect various state and federal
laws and regulations which impact sewer service area growth and development activities.
Four overall goals have been identified. These goals and related objectives and policies pertain
to growth management, urban service delivery, environmental resources and open space.
Objectives and policies related to the goals point out the significant interrelationship between
urban growth and land use, sanitary sewerage planning and the environment. Together, they
provide a sound basis for determining a community's future development.
Goals represent common community ideals and provide the direction in which planning is
aimed. Objectives are more specific targets along the path of satisfying community goals.
Objectives may be measurable, adding to the community good. Policies are strategies for
accomplishing the stated objectives. Specific policies can be used in the decision-making
process.
The intent of the Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area Plan is to encourage efficient, orderly and
planned land use development patterns which allow for logical, cost-effective sewered
development that incorporates sound environmental management practices. The land use
element provides direction and integrates four sub-area functional plans which have direct
impacts on future land use. These functional areas are Growth Management, Urban Service
Delivery, Environmental Resources and Open Space.
March 8, 2011
6
Growth Management
GOAL:
ENCOURAGE AN ORDERLY AND PLANNED PATTERN OF COMMUNITY GROWTH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
OBJECTIVE: Allocated Growth. Promote balanced allocation of land areas to
accommodate current and future urban development needs.
Policies:
1.
The supply of land allocated for urban development should approximate the current and
future needs as determined from population, employment and land use projections which
have been developed in conjunction with adopted comprehensive or urban service area
plans.
2.
New urban development patterns should incorporate planned areas of mixed use and
density neighborhoods that are clustered and compatible with adjacent uses.
3.
Work places, shopping centers, recreational facilities, and community facilities should be
located to provide a mix of land uses for improved accessibility for residents.
4.
Urban designs with higher density land use alternatives should be promoted.
OBJECTIVE: Planned Urban Communities. Promote planned urban communities which
contain centralized, compact, contiguous and compatible urban development patterns.
Policies:
1.
Vacant developable lands within existing urban areas should first be in-filled, then
development staged outward from the existing development limits.
2.
New subdivision development should be encouraged within existing urbanized areas or as
an expansion of existing urban areas concurrent with the provision of necessary facilities
and services.
3.
The expansion of major commercial and industrial land use activities should be adjacent to
existing areas or in areas designated for such development in adopted comprehensive
plans.
4.
Natural and man-made features, such as ridge lines, streams and major highways, should
be considered in the expansion and staging of urban development.
5.
Urban development should only take place in designated urban service areas.
6.
Community development plans should be coordinated in multi-jurisdictional urban areas.
March 8, 2011
7
7.
Urban sprawl in the form of unplanned development which is non-contiguous, low density,
scattered and inefficiently served should be discouraged.
OBJECTIVE: Environmentally Sound Development. Promote urban development
which protects environmentally sensitive areas and is compatible with the natural
resource base.
Policies:
1.
Urban development should be directed to suitable land and discouraged on unsuitable
land, such as floodplains, wetlands, prime agricultural soils, areas of high bedrock and
groundwater, steep slopes, prime wildlife habitat, unique scientific areas and areas of
historical or archeological significance.
2.
The development of environmentally sensitive areas should be discouraged.
3.
Adverse development impacts to surface water and groundwater should be mitigated.
4.
Designs and plans for new development should preserve open spaces for public use,
complement the existing landscape, and conserve energy and natural resources.
5.
Land reclamation should be required following extractive operations or other uses which
significantly alter the land surface.
6.
Urban redevelopment activities should weigh environmental, health and safety factors
against associated costs and benefits.
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient Development.
development in urban growth areas.
Promote
efficient
and
cost-effective
Policies:
1.
Urban development should be encouraged at densities adequate to sustain reasonable
urban service costs.
2.
Urban development should occur in areas served by adequate public facilities and services.
3.
A variety of types, prices and locations of housing should be provided to promote
convenience, choice and affordability.
4.
Development patterns and site designs that support multimodal transportation should be
encouraged.
5.
Major commercial and industrial areas should be provided with readily accessible major
transportation systems.
6.
Community comprehensive plans should be adopted prior to the extension of urban services.
March 8, 2011
8
OBJECTIVE: Rural Land Development. Preserve rural land uses by requiring planning
which considers water and sanitary sewer adequacy.
Policies:
1.
Agricultural and open space characteristics of rural areas should be preserved.
2.
Rural development should be limited to land with suitable physical characteristics and soils
supporting conventional on-site sewage treatment systems.
3.
Rural residential housing should be limited to dependent single lot use in agriculture and
open space areas.
4.
Rural subdivision development should be limited to areas which do not negatively impact
agricultural or open space uses and the provision of public services.
5.
Rural subdivision development should be restricted in urban planning areas until long-term
urban services are provided.
OBJECTIVE: Compatibility with the Transportation Network. Encourage development
in areas that are served by existing transportation infrastructure.
Policies:
1.
2.
Infill development and redevelopment projects should be promoted in order to avoid the
need for extension of transportation infrastructure and service.
Design standards for infill should be given different consideration for transportation/traffic
requirements compared to "greenfield" development.
Urban Service Delivery
GOAL:
PROMOTE URBAN SERVICES IN AN EFFICIENT, ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND, AND
SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE MANNER.
OBJECTIVE:
Economical Public Facilities.
Provide efficient, economical, and
equitable public facilities and services to urban development.
Policies:
1.
The use of existing public facilities and services should be maximized in the allocation of
future urban growth.
2.
Designing of new and upgraded transportation and utility facilities with capacities sufficient
to respond to existing demand levels and to the additional demand generated by planned
development should be encouraged.
March 8, 2011
9
3.
A full range of essential urban services and facilities should be provided to urban
development areas.
4.
The costs of providing urban services should be minimized through higher density
development.
5.
Major infrastructure extensions should be staged to coincide with community growth rates.
6.
Utilities serving individual developments should be extended consistent with community
water and wastewater system plans.
7.
Provision of public facilities and services should be coordinated with the location and
timing of new development.
OBJECTIVE: Cooperative Provision of Services. Provide services where efficiency,
equity, and economies of scale can be obtained through cooperation and
coordination.
Policies:
1.
Overlapping urban service areas, facility and system capacities and service capabilities
should be discouraged.
2.
The proliferation of major public infrastructure facilities should be discouraged.
3.
Inter-municipal agreements should be promoted for the provision of joint service.
4.
More uniform facility design and service standards should be encouraged for multiple
jurisdiction development areas.
Environmental Resources
GOAL:
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND
ECOLOGICALLY SOUND MANNER.
OBJECTIVE:
Water Quality Protection.
groundwater quality.
MANAGE
NATURAL
RESOURCES
IN
AN
Improve and protect surface and
Policies:
1.
The quality and supply of groundwater should be protected as the principal source of
water supply and encourage water conservation programs.
2.
The use of natural drainage patterns and measures should be promoted to enhance water
quality.
3.
Wetlands should be preserved as an essential component of the hydrologic system.
March 8, 2011
10
4.
The risk of groundwater contamination should be reduced in aquifer recharge areas.
5.
Lakeshore and streambank erosion should be minimized.
6.
Construction site erosion should be controlled and urban stormwater runoff reduced.
7.
Non-point source pollution abatement programs should be supported.
8.
The adverse water quality impacts of agricultural runoff should be minimized.
OBJECTIVE:
Air Quality Maintenance.
throughout east central Wisconsin.
Improve or maintain high air quality
Policies:
1.
Air pollution abatement programs and air quality regulations should be supported.
2.
Geographically coordinated abatement strategies should be encouraged.
3.
The public should be provided with information on air quality programs and specific air
quality problems.
4.
The increased use of transportation modes that are more efficient and environmentally
sound than the private automobile should be encouraged.
5.
Noise pollution should be reduced and noise sources isolated.
OBJECTIVE:
Environmentally Sensitive Area Protection. Preserve and protect
environmentally sensitive areas and promote the linkage of these areas into
environmental corridors.
Policies:
1.
The natural environment should be recognized as an integrated system of interacting and
finite land, water and air resources to protect the health and stability of this system.
2.
Shoreland, floodplain and wetland areas should be protected as essential components of
the hydrologic system and their scenic and recreational value preserved.
3.
The disturbance of environmentally sensitive areas by utilities and transportation facilities
construction should be minimized.
4.
Critical natural areas should be preserved and protected from development and other
adverse impacts.
5.
Adjacent land uses which adversely impact sensitive areas should be restricted or
mitigated.
March 8, 2011
11
6.
The interrelationship of adjacent landscape types should be recognized to avoid dividing
the natural units or breaking important linkages.
OBJECTIVE: Wildlife Habitat Management. Manage wildlife and wildlife habitat in a
manner that maintains ecological stability and diversity, and considers social and
economic impacts.
Policies:
1.
The diversity and population of plant and wildlife species should be maintained and
increased.
2.
Critical habitat areas for endangered and rare species should be preserved and enhanced.
3.
4.
Wildlife habitat such as fencerows, woodlots and natural areas should be protected and
expanded.
Adequate public access to hunting and fishing areas should be provided.
5.
Responsible public use of private land should be encouraged.
6.
Wildlife and plant populations should be managed in ways that do not impose undue
financial loss to individual property owners.
7.
Plant and animal preserves used specifically for educational and observational purposes
should be maintained and expanded.
OBJECTIVE: Food and Fiber Production. Preserve land suitable for the production of
food and fiber to meet present and future needs.
Policies:
1.
Land best suited for agriculture or forestry should be preserved for these uses or in other
uses which enable the land to be readily converted to agricultural or forestry production.
2.
Ecologically sound and economically feasible farm and forestry management practices
which preserve soil productivity and minimize soil loss should be encouraged.
3.
Soil should be recognized as one of the basic and most important resources and programs
to preserve and improve productivity and wise use consistent with soil capability should be
developed and promoted.
March 8, 2011
12
OBJECTIVE: Solid Waste Management.
approach for solid and organic wastes.
Employ a comprehensive management
Policies:
1.
The amount of solid waste generated by households, business and industry should be
reduced.
2.
Solid waste should be recycled as an alternative raw material for construction,
manufacturing, and energy production.
3.
Organic wastes should be used as soil amendments.
4.
Waste disposal operations and facilities should be centralized where economically feasible.
5.
Cost-effective waste management systems should be provided that are consistent with
development and water and air quality regulations.
6.
On-site waste disposal systems should be managed to minimize adverse land use,
environmental, and public health impacts.
7.
Health threats from toxic substances in the environment should be reduced.
Open Space
GOAL:
PROVIDE SUFFICIENT PUBLIC OPEN SPACE TO MEET THE RECREATIONAL NEEDS OF
ALL RESIDENTS AND PROTECT AND PRESERVE NATURAL AND CULTURAL
RESOURCES.
OBJECTIVE: Recreational Opportunity. Provide all area residents an opportunity to
partake in a wide range of active and passive recreational activities on a year-round
basis.
Policies:
1.
Recreational facilities should be provided to address the level of activity participation,
facility deficiencies and aesthetic needs of the community.
2.
Park sites to fully serve the local and areawide needs of the community should be located
and developed.
3.
Safe, convenient and adequate access to all parks and recreation areas should
be provided.
March 8, 2011
13
OBJECTIVE: Preservation Areas. Preserve areas of unique natural, historical, and
cultural significance or unusual beauty for public use and enjoyment.
Policies:
1.
All significance preservation areas should be identified and mapped.
2.
Unique areas should be protected by minimizing the impact of individual development
proposals.
3.
Significant natural areas should be preserved as public open space.
4.
Public access and use within environmental corridors and drainage ways should be
promoted.
OBJECTIVE:
Urban Recreation Needs.
recreational needs of the urban area.
Plan for the future open space and
Policies:
1.
All municipalities should be encouraged to participate in the development of
comprehensive park and open space plans.
2.
Opportunities should be identified for developing a network of recreational trails along
highly attractive environmental corridors, natural waterways, and transportation
rights-of-way to link major recreational facilities and residential areas.
3.
Coordination between neighboring jurisdictions should be facilitated for development of
parks and recreation facilities and linkages.
4.
Future parks and open space areas should be preserved so that suitable and adequate
land will be available to provide active and passive recreational opportunities as growth
occurs.
OBJECTIVE: Cost-Effective Recreation. Provide recreational opportunities in a costeffective manner.
Policies:
1.
Facilities should be developed which can provide multi-seasonal recreational opportunities.
2.
The use of existing recreational facilities should be optimized.
3.
Duplicative recreational facilities and programs should be avoided.
4.
Grants and funding assistance should be maximized in the acquisition and development of
recreational facilities.
March 8, 2011
14
5.
Municipalities and school districts should be encouraged to cooperate in the development
of community recreational and playground facilities.
6.
The development of the county park system should be encouraged to complement
recreational opportunities available in local parks.
7.
Municipalities should be encouraged to establish capital funding and other parkland
dedication methods to provide for future recreational needs.
OBJECTIVE: Attractive Communities. Make individual communities, and the region
as a whole, a more attractive place to live, work, and play.
Policies:
1.
Scenic areas should be preserved and landscaping and other site development
requirements strengthened to promote community beautification.
2.
Additional billboard proliferation should be prevented, their placement controlled and a
phase-out program promoted.
3.
Community tree planting programs on street terraces and public areas should be
promoted.
4.
Waterfront areas should be preserved and redeveloped to promote greater public
recreational use.
5.
Scenic easements to protect important viewsheds should be acquired.
March 8, 2011
15
SHAWANO LAKE SSA PLAN OVERVIEW
Plan Assumptions And Reader Notes
The beginning year for this update was 2009, and hence; data was finalized in early 2009 to
coincide with this starting timeframe. The plan itself looks out 20 years into the future (2030).
The reader should further note that all references to SSA boundaries and acreages are
associated with the ‘updated’ (2010) conditions, not with the ‘current’ (1999) plan features.
Basically, the plan is written as if it has already obtained WDNR approval.
2030 SSA Population, Development and Acreage Projections
In order to ease the reading of this document, all of the detailed demographic and development
projection data for each Designated Management Areas (DMA) are contained in a separate
appendix (Appendix B). Figures for the aggregate SSA are referenced in the text for descriptive
purposes. An attempt was made to have all data reflect conditions as of April 2009. The
planning horizon also encompasses a slightly longer time span, rather than the traditional 20
year span. This will allow staff to provide (in 5-year increments) a 20-year population and
development projection when reviewing sewer projects and sizing through the Water Quality
Management (WQM or 208) review process.
Future Land Use Designations
The SSA plan has tables and maps which illustrate 2030 SSA’s vacant acreage by proposed land
use type. Each community’s land use classification scheme was assessed and simplified so that
common land use categories could be compared.
March 8, 2011
16
March 8, 2011
17
SHAWANO LAKE SEWER SERVICE AREA
PLANNING AREA DESCRIPTION
The Shawano Lake Planning Area (Exhibit 2) is located in Central Shawano County and includes the
City of Shawano, Village of Bonduel, Village of Cecil, and portions of the towns of Washington,
Wescott, Richmond, Belle Plaine, Waukechon, and Hartland.
The updated Shawano Lake Planning Area covers approximately 56 square miles (as compared to
53 square miles in 1999). The Planning area is defined based on individual, or combinations of
factors, including, but not limited to representations of the “ultimate service” area of the treatment
plant based on capacity; the extent of planned service areas for individual lift stations or interceptor
sewers (as indicated on Exhibit 2), and/or; the proximity of nearby clusters of development
currently using on-site systems which may have long-term (20+ years) needs for sanitary sewer.
This boundary is, conceptually, a much longer-term indication of the service area, generally 40 to
50 years out into the future. Adjustments to the planning area were developed and proposed by
staff after a thorough review of information pertaining to the existing and planned wastewater
collection system, as well as through discussions with each Designated Management Agency (DMA)
during the plan development process. Each modification is discussed below:
1. Planning area additions/expansions: Approximately 2,981 acres were added to the planning
area. (See Exhibit 2 And Appendix B, Table: B-10 and B-11).
a. The Planning area was extended south of the Village of Bonduel encompassing
approximately 92 acres. Future growth is anticipated to move south of the Village
within the Town of Hartland. There is a proposed lift station located in the southwest
corner of the Village. The planning area’s addition encompasses the proposed lift
station’s entire service area.
b. Approximately 1,045.7 acres were added to the planning area in the Towns of
Washington and Waukechon to accommodate future growth by the City of Shawano.
This area is located to the east and southeast of the City. The Town of Waukechon
does not have a future land use designated for portion of the planning area addition
south of CTH B, however the City does recognize this area in its highway plans as future
commercial growth areas.
c. A great amount of discussion took place in the Plan’s working meetings discussing the
future needs of Shawano County’s Maple Lane Health Care Center located in the Town
of Belle Plaine along STH 22. The Maple Lane facility operates an on-site lagoon system
for wastewater treatment.
Throughout the update process Shawano County
representatives were pursuing the possibility of extending public sewer down Rose
Brook Road to STH 22. East Central staff directed the County to provide a cost-effective
analysis of extending sewer to the facility and asked for the life expectancy and
efficiency of Maple Lane’s on-site ponds. The County recently sold the Maple Lane
Facility, but will continue to own the on-site lagoon system. Because the County still
owns the on-site lagoon system the likely hood of a County led push for public sewer to
March 8, 2011
18
Maple Lane still exists. For this reason approximately 404 acres were added to
encompass the Maple Lane Health Center. Future sewer extensions to this facility will
be handled through East Central’s SSA Amendment process.
d. Approximately 444 acres were added within the Town of Richmond along STH 29 and
Maple Avenue. The Town has been discussing a future interchange with the Wisconsin
Department of Transportation. If this interchange becomes a reality, this area will be a
hot spot for commercial growth. Another 160 acres were added to the south of Walnut
Road. This area is currently developed with single family dwellings that utilize on-site
systems. This area was added to accommodate the extension of public sewer in the
long-term as the existing on-site systems reach their life expectancy.
2. Planning area Deletions/Removals:
area (See Exhibit 2).
Approximately 968 acres were removed from the planning
a. A total of 159.1 acres were removed in the Town of Richmond south of STH 29. This
area has a large number of wetlands and the Richmond Sanitary District representatives
felt that extending sewer to this area would not be feasible.
b. Approximately 583 acres of planning area was removed to the area west of Loon Lake
in the Town of Wescott. This area is a large wetland complex that is owned by the
Loon Lake Management District (LLMD). The LLMD bought this area to protect Loon
Lake’s west shore from development. If the LLMD should go defunct in the future,
ownership of this land automatically will go to the Town of Westcott.
c. A total of 226.2 acres of planning area was removed to the east of Springbrook Road
within the Town of Washington. This area is a large wetland complex and Shawano
Lake Sanitary District representatives felt that development and sewer extensions were
not possible.
LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
Exhibit 3 illustrates the current (2009) existing land use for the Shawano Lake SSA along with the
updated planning area boundary for reference purposes. This information is based on the
Commission’s detailed land use inventory with corrections made by each community during the
update process. This data corresponds with a timeframe (or ‘snapshot’) of early 2009.
In this update, the 2030 SSA contains 10,375 acres of land of which 5,344.6 acres (51.5%) are
considered to be developed. The developed lands can be described as follows (Appendix B, Table
B-10): 2,231.7 acres of residential land use (21.5% of total SSA); 309.2 acres of commercial land
use (3% of total SSA); 322.8 acres of industrial land use (3.1% of total SSA); 1,602.5 acres of
transportation/road use (15.4% of total SSA); 869.3 acres of public/institutional/utility use (8.4% of
total SSA). A total of 9.1 acres are considered undevelopable wetland buffers. The remaining
1,009 (9.7% of total area) acres are designated as environmentally sensitive areas (ESA).
March 8, 2011
19
Residential Development
Residential development is mainly distributed throughout the City of Shawano, Village of Bonduel,
and the Village of Cecil with a large concentration of single family dwellings located around the
Shawano Lake shoreline. Newer development within the City has been occurring to the south along
Engel Drive. The Village of Bonduel has seen residential development on the northeast side of the
Village. Newer development has been occurring both in the northeast side and southern portions of
the Village of Cecil.
Commercial Development
Existing commercial development consists of central or downtown districts or is generally located
along the highway corridors. Newer developments have primarily been occurring in the City and
Village commercial and industrial parks.
Industrial Development
Industrial development is primarily found within the City and Village industrial business parks, while
the Shawano Lake S.D. has seen recent developments along Green Bay Road. Within the life of this
plan, it is likely that the City of Shawano will be pursuing either extending the City’s industrial park
to the east or will proceed in the development of a new industrial park.
Public/ Institutional Uses
Various City and County governmental buildings are located within the City of Shawano including
the Shawano County Fair Grounds, Shawano County Court House and the Shawano County Sheriff
Department. Municipal buildings and recreation areas also occur within the Village of Bonduel and
the Village of Cecil.
March 8, 2011
20
March 8, 2011
Montoure Rd
Lake Dr
Korth Rd
WN
abo
r
Shawano
Lake
Walnut Rd
Mork Av
Fre e b
orn
!
.
Rd
Unincorporated Place
City Corporate Limits
Village Corporate Limits
Buss Dr
Township Boundary
Oak Dr
117
Hillcrest Dr
er
Riv
Wo
lf
S Union St
S Main St
BE
@
A
29
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
T
Pioneer Rd
W Slab City Rd
Ranch Rd
St Johns Church Rd
L
I
K
Y
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
L
I
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
Sandy La
Mc Donald Rd
Sc
r
Round La
Cir cle D
E Oak La
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
12,000
This data was created for use by the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission Geographic Information System. Any other use/application of this
information is the responsibility of the user and such use/application is at their
own risk. East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission disclaims all
liability regarding fitness of the information for any use other than for East
E Slab City RdCentral Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission business.
Source: Digital base data provided by Shawano County.
Thematic data created by ECWRPC.
Prepared By
EAST CENTRAL WISCONSIN
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH, 2011
S High Line Rd
as
rr
CCC
Valley Rd
ba
L
I
6,000
Shawano County
Hilltop La
Long
Lake
¶
Sunrise Rd
Swamp Rd
CC
0
This map and its associated sewer service area descriptions do
not obligate a community(ies) to provide sewer service to
property owners contained herein.
BE
Pit La
L
I
Evergreen Rd
L
I
3,000
Scale in Feet
Old 47 Rd
Church Rd
E State St
S Cecil St
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Brook Rd
To wn of Waukechon
Town of Belle Plaine
Grass Lake Rd
Belle Plaine
r
South St
Beech Dr
6,000
N High Line Rd
L
I
N First St
K
Rd
E Flambeau
W North St
Village
of
Bonduel
Valley Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
L
I
Hill Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
Rose Brook Rd
Oakc rest Dr
Clove r La
Capitol Dr
L
I
B
ve
Wastewater Treatment Facility
Ca stle Rd
L
I
Ri
2050 Planning Area
Plank Rd
Engel Dr
f
ol
W
2050 Planning Area Boundary
Town Line Rd
Porter Rd
!
.
Valley Rd
E
Town of Washington
22
22
PLANNING AREA CONDITIONS
Radloff Rd
Rusch Rd
S Airport Dr
E Richmond St
@
A
@
A
Timm Rd
@
A
Sanitary District Boundary
L
I
Waukechon Rd
a in
Maple Rd
Lakeview Rd
22
Thomas Av
Pl
e
Ct
@
A
Pine La
lle
Be
County Boundary
E Green Bay St
B
v
eA
ak
Meadow Rd
L
22
d
@
A
u
ers
Waukechon St
S Sawye r St
S Washington St
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
City
of
Shawano
v
Cedar A
L
I
Valley La
d
dR
Shady La
Locust Rd
MM
n
dla
ad
Pine Mead Av
L
I
29
Town of Richmond
o
Wo
M
Mapl e Av
L
I
@
A
Branch La
Village
of
Cecil
Rd
Pine Rd
Poplar Rd
Lake Dr
Sycamore Rd
r
22
M
Cypress Rd
Oak Av
MMM
i ve
MINOR CIVIL DIVISIONS
@
A
Dr
k Rd
Rods La
Old Lake Rd
iver
E Hazel Dr
R
Red
Thornton
!
.
sR
Lily Pond Rd
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
Star
La
ke
Birch La
Loon Lake Dr
Loon
2050 PLANNING AREA
SHAWANO-SHAWANO LAKE
SEWER SERVICE AREA
V
R
Cheese Factory Rd
Norton Rd
Lulu
Lake
L
I
L
I
N Lake Dr
Park Av
d
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
Apple Rd
eR
Li ly
Lake
Springbrook Rd
ak
Exhibit 2
Moonlight La
Lake
Curt Black Rd
Hazel Dr
on
L
HH
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
Lo
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
Broadway Rd
Retreat Rd
Raguse Rd
47-55
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
@
A
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
Butternut Rd
Strauss Rd
L
I
Northwood Dr
Wildlife Rd
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Certification Date - March 6, 2011
P:\12XX-SSA\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2030SSA_Ex#2.mxd
Swamp Rd
Pioneer Rd
r
Mc Donald Rd
Sandy La
Timm Rd
er
Riv
Wo
lf
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
L
I
Woodlands
WDNR Designated Wetlands
E Slab City Rd
12,000
Wildlife Rd
Vacant - Developable
Stormwater Detention Facility
Sunrise Rd
6,000
BE
S High Line Rd
CCC
Maple Rd
Lakeview Rd
Birch La
Loon Lake Dr
Dr
La
ke
Mork Av
¶
South St
E State St
Airport Property
Pit La
Valley Rd
L
I
Sc
Cir cle D
Branch La
0
Scale in Feet
Long
Lake
Valley Rd
Norton Rd
Oak Dr
Radloff Rd
3,000
W North St
N High Line Rd
K
Rd
E Flambeau
Old 47 Rd
L6,000
I
Mobile Homes - (Parks)
Vehicle Parking Facilities
Village
of
Bonduel
W Slab City Rd
Public/Institutional
Open Space/Recreational
S Cecil St
Church Rd
Hilltop La
E Oak La
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Brook Rd
er
St Johns Church Rd
e
T
Industrial
Farm Outbuildings
N First St
Hill Rd
L
I
Commercial
Agricultural
Oakc rest Dr
K
CC
Multi-Family Residential
Town Line Rd
Valley Rd
L
I
Ranch Rd
Evergreen Rd
ak
117
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
L
I
Single Family Residential
L
@
A
BE
Swamp Rd
Belle Plaine
Grass Lake Rd
!
.
EXISTING LAND USE
d
Meadow Rd
@
A
v
Township Boundary
u
22
L
I
B
Ri
Rd
Ca stle Rd
L
I
f
ol
W
Fre
rn
e bo
M
@
A
29
To wn of Waukechon
@
A
22
Village
of
Cecil
Hillcrest Dr
S Union St
S Main St
Rose Brook Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
a in
22
Pine Rd
n
dla
Town of Washington
Waukechon Rd
Pl
@
A
Buss Dr
d
dR
Porter Rd
lle
Be
E
Thomas Av
v
eA
Rd
County Boundary
22
Plank Rd
22
Cheese Factory Rd
N Lake Dr
Apple Rd
Springbrook Rd
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
Korth Rd
!
.
L
I
Engel Dr
@
A
Lily Pond Rd
k Rd
@
A
Rusch Rd
Waukechon St
E Richmond St
S Airport Dr
E Green Bay St
B
Valley La
R
Shady La
v
Cedar A
2009 EXISTING LAND USE
LSHAWANO-SHAWANO LAKE
I
SEWER SERVICE AREA
V
L
I
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
o
Wo
L
I
Pine La
Li ly
Lake
Shawano
Lake
Ct
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
S Washington St
Capitol Dr
Clove r La
Town of Richmond
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
MM
29
Star
Exhibit 3
Moonlight La
HH
WN
abo
r
Locust Rd
L
I
@
A
Lake
ers
Pine Mead Av
Sycamore Rd
Lulu
Lake
d
ad
Mapl e Av
MMM
eR
M
Poplar Rd
Cypress Rd
Lake Dr
ak
Northwood Dr
Lake Dr
Old Lake Rd
E Hazel Dr
iver
Walnut Rd
L
I
Park Av
Montoure Rd
Curt Black Rd
Oak Av
!
.
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
on
L
Loon
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
R
Red
Hazel Dr
Lo
Retreat Rd
Broadway Rd
Thornton
Raguse Rd
47-55
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
@
A
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
Butternut Rd
Strauss Rd
L
I
50 Foot Wetland Buffer
75 Foot Stream Buffer
Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission business.
Shawano County
Prepared By
P:\12XX-SSA_GIS\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2009ExLu_Ex#3..mxd
25
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
Watersheds and Water Features
As stated previously, the Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area Planning Boundary encompasses portions of four distinct sub-watersheds of the Wolf River Basin. Listed below is a brief description of
each watershed and its major features. More detailed information on these resources can be found
in the WDNR’s State of the Wolf River Basin Report (Publication # WI 664 200)
 Shawano Lake Watershed (WR15): A majority of the planning area is contained within this
watershed which encompasses 62 square miles with the 6,178-acre Shawano Lake as the main
water resource. Shawano Lake is a hard-water drainage lake, up to 40 feet deep, and is an
important year round recreational water-body. This lake experiences excessive weed growth
during July and August which is likely associated with non-point source pollution (i.e.,
phosphorus from lawn fertilizers, etc.). Other small lakes included in this watershed are Loon
Lake, Washington Lake, Lulu Lake, White Clay Lake and Lily Lake. Rivers and streams
associated with this subwatershed include the Shawano Lake Outlet, Duchess Creek, Loon
Creek, and Murray Creek. This watershed has been ranked as being a “high priority” for
selection as a Priority Watershed Project.

West Branch Wolf River Watershed (WR17): The majority of this watershed is located
north of the Planning Area Boundary. Only the southernmost portion of this watershed is within
the planning area and extends from the mouth of the Red River, south to the City of Shawano
(STH 29). The mainstem of the Wolf River is the main water resource feature and is classified
as a warmwater sport fishery along its entire reach.

Middle Branch Wolf River Watershed (WR14): Only the northernmost portion of this
watershed is within the planning area for the Shawano Sewer Service Area Plan. This 128
square mile watershed was designated as a high priority area for streams due to animal waste
problems and soil erosion. Groundwater concerns were ranked as medium under the priority
watershed selection process. The northern 20 percent of the watershed are of highest concern
for groundwater contamination due to poor land use practices.
The major water feature
within the planning area for this watershed is the mainstem of the Wolf River which is classified
as a warmwater sport fishery along its entire reach.

Shioc River (WR13): The vast majority of the Village of Bonduel is encompassed by the
Shioc River Subwatershed. The Shioc River’s headwasters are located within Shawano County
and is a tributary to the Wolf River. This subwatershed is not ranked according to the selection
process for the Wisconsin Source Water Pollution abatement Program.
Lakes
Shawano Lake is the most prominent lake within the Shawano Lake SSA which encompasses
over 6,000 acres. The majority of the shoreline is developed with residential, (seasonal), uses.
The Center for Watershed Science and Education at UW Stevens Point prepared an assessment
of Shawano Lake, which found the lake has relatively good water quality for a shallow drainage
lake, though increased vegetative growth and introduction of invasive species, particularly
aquatic plants, were identified as issues. A number of smaller lakes are clustered around the
March 8, 2011
26
Shawano Lake area including: Loon Lake, Washington Lake, Lulu Lake, White Clay Lake and Lily
Lake. These clusters of lakes are an important natural, recreational, and economical resource
within Shawano County.
Wetlands
Wetlands are essential environmental features providing wildlife habitat, scenic open spaces,
flood water retention, and groundwater recharge areas. Wetlands act as a natural filtering
system for nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrates. They provide a buffer zone protecting
shorelines and stream banks.
Significant wetland complexes exist to the north of Shawano Lake in the Town of Wescott, west of
Loon Lake, and within the City of Shawano’s industrial park area. Smaller wetland areas are
generally associated with stream corridors.
Floodplains
Mapped FEMA Floodplains are found within various portions of the defined SSA, (Exhibit 4).
Areas susceptible to flooding are considered unsuitable for any type of development due to the
potential health risks and property damage. As revised in 1984, the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM) for the incorporated and unincorporated portions of Shawano County identify designated
100-year floodplains. Flood plains are primarily located along the Shawano Lake shorelines and
associated with mapped wetland areas scattered throughout the planning area.
Soils
Soils support the physical base for development within the planning area. Knowledge of the
limitations and potential difficulties of soil types is important in evaluating land use proposals
such as residential development, utility installation and other projects. Some soils exhibit
characteristics such as slumping, compaction, erosion, and high water tables which place limits
on development. Severe soil limitations do not necessarily indicate areas cannot be developed,
but rather that more extensive construction measures must be taken to prevent environmental
and property damage. These construction techniques generally increase the costs of
development and the utilities needed to service that development. According to the Soil Survey
of Shawano County, prepared by the USDA in 1976, and the Soil Survey of Shawano County
(USDA 1982), five major soil series classifications are present within the Shawano Lake SSA:

Onaway-Solona: These soils are located throughout the Village of Bonduel, Village of
Cecil, and the Town of Washington. These soils are well drained to somewhat poorly
drained loamy soils. Most areas of these soils are used for cultivated crops, however,
areas with steep slopes are often woodland areas. Erosion and wetness are the main
hazards and limitations to the use of these soils for growing cultivated crops.

Cormant-Markey-Wainola: These soils are primarily located around the shoreline of
Shawano Lake. These soils are somewhat poorly drained to very poorly drained sandy
and mucky soils, located on nearly level, low-lying flats, drainageways and depressions.
Most of these areas are undrained and used for pasture and woodlands. Flooding,
ponding and soil blowing are the main hazards. Wetness is the main limitation.
March 8, 2011
27

Shawano-Rousseau-Wainola: These soils are primarily located within the City of
Shawano or within close proximity of the City. These are sandy soils that range from
excessively drained to somewhat poorly drained.
These soils generally support
cultivated crops, however, these soils are primarily developed within the Shawano Lake
SSA area. Droughtiness and soil blowing are the main limitations or hazards to the use
of these soils. Septic tank absorption fields will function satisfactorily, but there is a
danger of ground water pollution because of the rapid permeability.

Shiocton-Bach-Losco: These soils are located along Wolf River. These soils are silty
and sandy soils that are poorly drained to very poorly drained located on bottom lands,
on flats, and on upland depressions. These soils are used for cultivated crops, pasture
and woodlands. Flooding, wetness, and soil blowing are the main limitations and
hazards. These areas are poorly suited to residential development because of flooding
and the seasonal high water table.

Menahga-Croswell-Mahtomedi: These soils exist in small portions of the planning
area located north of Loon and Washington Lakes. These soils are sandy soils that are
excessively drained located on flats, on convex side slopes and in drainageways and
depressions on outwash plains. The soils in this unit are suited to trees. Where
irrigated and protected from soil blowing, these soils are suited for cultivated crops.
Septic tank absorption fields will function satisfactorily, but there is a danger of ground
water pollution because of the rapid permeability.
Groundwater and Geology
These natural features are closely related and will have the highest impact on future development
within the planning area. The existence of generally poorly drained soils on level slopes with highly
organic materials draws a concern over the potential for groundwater contamination. Failing on-site
waste disposal systems, abandoned and active landfills, agricultural practices and other land uses
can be a direct source of contamination of groundwater.
The Wolf River Basin contains three of the four major aquifers of Wisconsin. Formed during the
Ordovician and Cambrian Periods, the bedrock geology is comprised of the sandstone and dolomite
aquifer and overlain by the shallow, mostly unconsolidated, sand and gravel aquifer.
Most
groundwater uses for residential, industrial, and agriculture are fulfilled by the sand and gravel
aquifer. This aquifer is the most environmentally at risk in the basin due to the shallow depth to
groundwater and the high permeability of most of the subsurface materials. This may increase the
possibility that contaminants at the surface will percolate through the ground to contaminate
groundwater. While there are sandy soils in the planning area, there is also high groundwater
present in many areas. These conditions limit the use of individual septic systems and development
in many of the desirable areas.
Bedrock located near the surface is not of major concern within the planning area. If present, it
may not only hinder development due to the cost of rock excavation, but it also coincides with a
lack of soil which can filter pollutants before they reach groundwater; thus, the potential for
groundwater contamination in high or exposed bedrock areas can be extremely high. Several areas
of steep slope are also identified in both the planning area and sewer service area but are limited in
size and will not have a severe impact on future development.
March 8, 2011
28
LIMITING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Limiting environmental conditions for development are found throughout the Shawano Lake
planning as indicated on Exhibit 4. Areas of steep slopes, high groundwater and high bed rock
are scattered throughout the planning area.
March 8, 2011
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Maple Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
er
Riv
!
!
!
Mork Av
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Timm Rd
!
!
!
Norton Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Apple Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Birch La
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
P:\12XX-SSA_GIS\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2030ESA_Ex#4..mxd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources
Certification Date - March 8, 2011
!
!
!
!
!
Mc Donald Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Shawano County
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Prepared By
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
S High Line Rd
Valley Rd
!
Wildlife Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Loon Lake Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! was created for use by the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
This data
information
is
the
responsibility of the user and such use/application is at their
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
own risk. East Central
Wisconsin
Regional Planning Commission disclaims all
!
!
liability regarding fitness
of! the information for any use other than for East
!
Central Wisconsin
! Regional Planning Commission business.
!
!
!
!
! property owners contained herein.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Wo
lf
Valley Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Pit La
!
12,000
!
!
E Slab City Rd
!
!
6,000
Scale in Feet
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
0
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
3,000
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
6,000
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Oak Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¶
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
BE
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Lakeview Rd
!
!
!
Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
La
ke
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
2030 Sewer Service Boundary
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Subwatershed Boundary
!
Streams
!
!
!
!
!
!
L
I
Old 47 Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Slopes 12 Per Cent and Greater
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
S Cecil St
!
South St
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
SERVICE AREA CONDITIONS
N High Line Rd
E State St
!
!
W Slab City Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Sc
!
!
!
!
!
Sunrise Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
N First St
Village
of
Bonduel
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Rd
E Flambeau
W North St
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Church Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
er
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Pioneer Rd
!
!
!
!
!
Groundwater Within 2 Feet of Surface
!
!
!
Branch La
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
L
I
T
CCC
!
!
!
!
!
L
I
L
I
!
!
Township Boundary
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Wedge Rd
Swamp Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
Long
Lake
!
!
!
!
!
!
E Oak La
!
!
!
!
!
Valley Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
Hill Rd
Grass Lake Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
K
!
!
!
Floodplain Areas
!
!
!
!
Ranch Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Brook Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITATIONS
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Oakc rest Dr
!
BE
Hilltop La
!
!
!
!
!
County Boundary
!
!
L
I
Lark Rd
K
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Ca stle Rd
!
L
I
!
!
!
!
Town Line Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Town of Washington
!
29
St Johns Church Rd
!
!
!
!
!
Evergreen Rd
!
!
!
@
A
CC
!
!
!
!
B
L
I
!
!
!
!
Belle Plaine
Rd
rn
e bo
!
!
!
!
Plank Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
L
I
f
ol
W
!
!
.
!
!
!
Engel Dr
v
Ri
!
!
!
!
To wn of Waukechon
!
.
!
!
Fre
117
Porter Rd
!
!
Village
of
Cecil
!
@
A
!
lle
Be
!
!
!
!
Av
!
!
22
!
ne
!
!
Meadow Rd
@
A
!
@
A
Rd
!
ai
Pl
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Radloff Rd
!
!
@
A
!
!
!
!
!
22
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
22
E
Waukechon Rd
!
@
A
L
I
Thomas Av
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
22
!
E Richmond St
!
!
e
!
!
ak
!
!
L
!
!
Hillcrest Dr
!
!
d
la n
od
d
dR
@
A
Rusch Rd
!
!
!
S Airport Dr
!
!
u
Ct
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
22
Exhibit 4
!
!
Korth Rd
!
M
ers
!
!
!
ad
!
!
Buss Dr
M
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Waukechon St
!
!
!
!
E Green Bay St
B
Valley La
!
!
!
Shady La
v
Cedar A
S Union St
!
!
!
!
Wo
L
I
Mapl e Leaf Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Pine Rd
!
!
!
S Main St
!
Pine Ridge Rd
!
Lily Pond Rd
!
k Rd
!
!
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
!
S Washington St
!
!
!
Rose Brook Rd
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Pine La
!
!
!
!
ESA &
LIMITING CONDITIONS
SEWER SERVICE AREA
!
!
!
!
MM
!
!
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
!
!
L
I
!
!
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Pine Mead Av
!
!
@
A
!
!
!
Lake Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Clove r La
!
!
!
!
!
!
Capitol Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
Town of Richmond
!
!
Star
!
Cheese Factory Rd
!
!
!
Locust Rd
Sycamore Rd
!
!
R
!
!
!
!
!
29!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
Poplar Rd
!
!
L
I
!
Shawano
Lake
!
!
!
!
!
Li ly
Lake
N Lake Dr
!
!
MMM
!
!
L
I
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
WN
abo
r
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
! !
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Curt Black Rd
!
!
!
Walnut Rd
!
!
!
!!
Moonlight La
!
!
!
!
Lulu
Lake
d
!
!
Old Lake Rd
!
!
!
!
Mapl e Av
!
!!
!
!
!
E Hazel Dr
Oak Av
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Cypress Rd
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
Fox La
!
!
Balsam Rd
iver
!
!!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
eR
Lake Dr
!
!
ak
Lake
!
!
!
Montoure Rd
!
!
!
!
HH
!
!
Town of Wescott
!
!
!
!
Woods Rd
on
L
L
I
Northwood Dr
Loon
Park Av
!
!
R
Red
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
! !
!
! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
Elm Rd
Town of Richmond
!
!
! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Lo
Retreat Rd
!
!
!
!
! !
! !
!
!! ! !
!!
!!
!!
Springbrook Rd
!
!
Basswood Rd
!
Raguse Rd
!
Beec h Rd
!
!
!
.
!
!
!!
!!
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
!
Ash Rd
!
!
!
!
Thornton
!
!!
!!
Coz y Oaks Cir
!
r Dr
!
@
A
47-55
Hazel Dr
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Oak Park Rd
!
!
Box Elde r Rd
!
Strauss Rd
!
!
!!
!
!
Broadway Rd
!
!!
!
!
Ri ve
!
Butternut Rd
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!! !
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
31
Designated Management Areas
Exhibit 5 illustrates the existing Designated Management Agency (DMAs) within the Shawano Lake
SSA. DMAs are the legal entities (communities, sanitary districts, or utility districts) that are
responsible for the collection and/or treatment of wastewater. Within the SSA Planning Area there
are thirteen governmental entities, six of which are DMAs.
1. City of Shawano*
2. Village of Bonduel*
3. Village of Cecil*
4. Shawano Lake Sanitary District*
5. Richmond Sanitary District*
6. Belle Plaine/ Waukechon Utility District*
7. Town of Belle Plaine
*indicates DMA designation
8. Town of Hartland
9. Town of Richmond
10. Town of Washington
11. Town of Waukechon
12. Town of Westcott
13. Shawano County
Short descriptions of each DMA, including basic information on their involvement in land use
planning and intergovernmental cooperation activities is contained below:
City of Shawano - The City of Shawano covers an area of approximately 7 square miles,
or 4,252.9 acres. In 2005 the City of Shawano had a population of 8,515 persons with 2.2
persons per household.
Residential development totals approximately 866 acres with newer development occurring
on the south side of the City. Commercial and industrial (C/I) developments are generally
located along the highway corridors, Main Street and within the City’s industrial park totaling
approximately 393 acres. East Central’s 2009 land use analysis accounted for approximately
991 acres of vacant/developable lands within the City.
The City of Shawano has annexed the approximately 55 acres of the Wescott, (Wolf River),
Sanitary District #1 since the 1999 Shawano Lake SSA Plan Update.
Village of Bonduel - The Village of Bonduel covers an area of approximately 2.1 square
miles or 1,317.3 acres. In 2005 the Village of Bonduel had a population of 1,460 persons
with 2.41 persons per household.
Residential development totals approximately 175 acres and is slowly becoming a younger
family bedroom community. There is a total of 96.3 acres of C/I developments that are
generally located along the STH 47 and STH 29 highway corridors. East Central’s 2009 land
use analysis accounted for approximately 387 acres of vacant/developable lands within the
Village.
Village of Cecil - The Village of Cecil covers an area of approximately 1.6 square miles, or
1,039.9 acres. In 2005 the Village of Cecil had a population of 525 persons with 2.33
March 8, 2011
32
Residential development totals approximately 99.7 acres. Commercial development is
primarily located along the STH 22 highway corridor totaling approximately 19 acres. East
Central’s 2009 land use analysis accounted for approximately 60 acres of vacant/developable
lands within the Village.
Shawano Lake Sanitary District - The Shawano Lake Sanitary District is made up of
portions of the Town of Westcott and the Town of Washington. The District’s Sewer Service
Area covers an area of approximately 30.1 square miles or 19,263.1 acres. In 2005 the
District’s population was projected to be 4,951 persons with 2.32 persons per household.
Residential development totaling approximately 885 acres is primarily located along the
shoreline of Shawano Lake. It is anticipated that the District will continue to see a shift from
seasonal/vacation dwellings to permanent single family homes around the lake. There are a
total of 49.8 acres of commercial developments and 20.7 acres of industrial developments
within the District. At the time of this update the Sanitary District had a total of 916.4 acres
of vacant/developable lands.
Belle Plaine/Waukechon Utility District - The Belle Plaine/Waukechon Utility District is
made up of portions of the Town of Belle Plaine and the Town of Waukechon. The District’s
Sewer Service Area covers an area of approximately 4.4 square miles or 2,803.8 acres. In
2005 the District’s population was projected to be 3 persons with 2.6 persons per household.
Residential development totals approximately 41.2 acres while 7.6 acres are considered C/I
land uses within the district. At the time of this update the Sanitary District had a total of
213.6 acres of vacant/developable lands.
Richmond Sanitary District - The Richmond Sanitary District is made up of portions of
the Town of Richmond. The District covers an area of approximately 5.9 square miles or
3,789.7 acres. In 2005 the District’s population was projected to be 603 persons with 2.5
Residential development totals approximately 171 acres which is primarily located along the
shoreline of the Wolf River and the CTH MM corridor. There are a total of 34.4 acres of C/I
developments within the District. At the time of this update the Sanitary District had a total
of 330.8 acres of vacant/developable lands.
March 8, 2011
Pioneer Rd
W Slab City Rd
Sunrise Rd
r
Mc Donald Rd
Branch La
Sandy La
BE
6,000
3,000
0
¶
6,000
12,000
E Slab City RdThis data was created for use by the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
Pit La
Wildlife Rd
S High Line Rd
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
L
I
Valley Rd
CCC
Sc
Cir cle D
E Oak La
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
L
I
South St
!
.
E State St
Scale in Feet
Hilltop La
Long
Lake
Timm Rd
Mork Av
er
Riv
Wo
lf
K
Town of Wescott
Rd
E Flambeau
W North St
N High Line Rd
L
I
Town of Waukechon
Old 47 Rd
St Johns Church Rd
Evergreen Rd
Town of Richmond
S Cecil St
Ranch Rd
CC
Town of Hartland
N First St
Church Rd
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Brook Rd
er
Town of Washington
Village
of
Bonduel
Valley Rd
Hill Rd
L
I
T
L
I
Maple Rd
Lakeview Rd
Birch La
Loon Lake Dr
Dr
La
ke
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
Swamp Rd
Belle Plaine
Grass Lake Rd
!
.
Valley Rd
Norton Rd
Oak Dr
29
K
Village of Cecil
Radloff Rd
BE
L
I
Village of Bonduel
Town Line Rd
L
I
B
f
ol
W
e
117
City of Shawano
Ca stle Rd
L
I
v
Ri
MINOR CIVIL DIVISION
ak
@
A
@
A
To wn of Waukechon
22
Shawano Lake Sanitary District
L
Meadow Rd
d
22
u
@
A
Oakc rest Dr
Rose Brook Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
@
A
Belle Plaine/Waukechon Utility District
Hillcrest Dr
S Union St
S Main St
Clove r La
Capitol Dr
lle
Be
SANITARY DISTRICTS
Rd
M
d
dR
Porter Rd
n
orn
Fre e b
Richmond Sanitary District
Town of Washington
Waukechon Rd
ai
Pl
Village
of
Cecil
E
Thomas Av
v
eA
22
Pine Rd
n
dla
@
A
Plank Rd
22
Rd
@
A
L
I
Engel Dr
@
A
Cheese Factory Rd
Korth Rd
k Rd
22
Rusch Rd
S Airport Dr
E Richmond St
JURISDICTIONS
and DMA's
SEWER SERVICE AREA
Buss Dr
Ct
E Green Bay St
Lily Pond Rd
N Lake Dr
Apple Rd
Springbrook Rd
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
R
Shady La
v
Cedar A
L
I
POLITICAL
V
L
I
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
o
Wo
B
Valley La
Star
Li ly
Lake
Shawano
Lake
L
I
Pine La
Lake
ers
Waukechon St
29
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
S Washington St
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
L
I
@
A
MM
d
ad
Pine Mead Av
Sycamore Rd
Lulu
Lake
Exhibit 5
Moonlight La
HH
WN
abo
r
Locust Rd
MMM
eR
M
Mapl e Av
L
I
ak
Lake Dr
Old Lake Rd
Poplar Rd
Cypress Rd
Lake Dr
on
L
Loon
Park Av
Montoure Rd
Walnut Rd
Oak Av
Town of Richmond
Retreat Rd
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
Curt Black Rd
E Hazel Dr
iver
Thornton
Lo
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
R
Red
Hazel Dr
!
.
Raguse Rd
Broadway Rd
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
@
A
47-55
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
Butternut Rd
Strauss Rd
L
I
Northwood Dr
Prepared By
Shawano County
P:\12XX-SSA_GIS\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2050MCD_Ex#5.mxd
35
Sewerage Collection And Treatment System
The Shawano Lake Planning Area consists of the City of Shawano, Village of Bonduel, Village of
Cecil and three separate Sanitary Districts covering areas adjacent to the city and areas surrounding
Shawano Lake. All six entities are joint owners and share costs in the operation and maintenance
of a regional treatment facility known as the Wolf Treatment Plant. The plant is located adjacent to
the Wolf River in the Town of Belle Plaine and discharges treated waste into the Wolf River. The
Wolf Treatment Plant was constructed in 1972 and utilizes a conventional activated sludge
treatment system with a wet air oxidation (Zimpro) treatment process. In 2001 upgrades were
completed adding an aerobic digester and clarifiers for phosphorus removal. These upgrades
increased the plant’s capacity to 3.71 million gallons per day (mgd). Sludge disposal is done by
land spreading on nearby agricultural property.
Each DMA has a buy-in capacity agreement in place; however the original capacity amounts are
seldom looked at because there is not an issue with capacity. Should capacity become an issue in
the future, these buy in totals would need to be addressed. The average daily flows for each DMA
is listed below:



City of Shawano = 0.765 mgd
Village of Cecil = 0.04 mgd
Shawano Lake S.D. = 0.817 mgd



Village of Bonduel = 0.079 mgd
Richmond S.D. = 0.045 mgd
BPWUD = 0.07 mgd
The Wolf Treatment Plant facility consistently meets permit limits for all parameters. Based upon
a 2008 observation period, the facility has removal efficiencies of 96.66% percent biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD), with an average monthly effluent of 5.67 mg/l. Total suspended solids
(TSS) effluent averaged 4.08 mg/l per month and Phosphorus effluents averaged 0.625 mg/l per
month. Clearwater flows into the plant do not appear to have a significant effect on treatment
performance.
As noted below the Wolf Treatment Plant’s WPDES Permit expired on March 31, 2010. The WDNR
has temporally stalled issuing the Wolf Treatment Plant a new WPDES Permit until the WDNR’s
proposed phosphorus limits are established and understood. The proposed phosphorus reduction
mandates are expected to be confirmed in late 2010. At that time the WDNR will issue the Wolf
Treatment Plant a new WPDES Permit. Until this time the Wolf Treatment Plant will continue to
operate under parameters within the Plant’s WI-0030490 Permit that would have expired on March
31, 2010.
Discharge permit information and design characteristics of the plant are as follows:
WPDES Permit Number: WI-0030490
Expiration Date:
March 31, 2010
Receiving Water:
Wolf River
Design Flow:
3.71 mgd
Average Flow:
2.07
Treatment Type:
Secondary treatment by activated sludge process with effluent limits
for BOD, TSS, NH3,
Sludge Treatment:
Anaerobic digestion
Sludge Disposal:
Agricultural spreading
March 8, 2011
36
Listed below is a general description of each DMA’s sewer collection and transport system:

City of Shawano: The city infrastructure consists mainly of 8-inch PVC and clay pipe gravity
sewers. A 30-inch interceptor, located along CTH B, and into the treatment plant. The sewer
infrastructure is maintained by the City, for example half the system is jetted on a rotating
yearly timeframe. The City does have issues with inflow and infiltration (I & I) in the northern
portions of the City where the sewer is 50-plus years old. These areas are currently being
replaced along with areas along South Lafayette Street.

Village of Bonduel: The Village of Bonduel connects to the Wolf Treatment plant through
nine mile forcemain located primarily along Porter Road. Only dwellings along the original
forcemain are allowed to hook on at the time of private on-site system failure (this accounts to
approximately 150 hook-ups to the forcemain). The Village consists primarily of 8-inch PVC and
clay pipe gravity sewers although some sections of 12-inch sewer are present in various
portions of the Village. Before the forcemain was constructed the Village utilized nine lift
stations. Now only two are required. The Village does not experience a large I & I problem,
however the older sections of the downtown area require more maintenance such as root
removal.

Village of Cecil: The wastewater collection system for the Village of Cecil consists of entirely
8-inch PVC and clay pipe gravity sewers with two lift stations. The Village corrected problems
with I & I by fixing private lateral problems and disconnecting sump pump connections. The
Village’s waste is carried through the Shawano Lake Sanitary District infrastructure to the Wolf
Treatment Plant.

Shawano Lake Sanitary District: The District’s collection system consists of mainly 8-inch
PVC gravity sewer with pump stations and forcemains located along both the northern and
southern shores of Shawano Lake. The collection system eventually directs waste to a 30-inch
interceptor sewer and into the Wolf Treatment Plant.

Richmond Sanitary District: This district, created in 1968, is located wholly within the Town
of Richmond. The district’s collection system is comprised of mainly 8-inch PVC gravity sewers
with one forcemain. The district maintains five lift stations. A lot of work has been completed
in the past few years to correct I & I problems. The Village maintains a contract with the
Shawano Lake Sanitary District for infrastructure maintenance.

Belle Plaine/Waukechon Utility District (BPWU): The District only has four hook-ups (the
hotel, restaurant, the Shell station/car wash and one residential dwelling) which are all gravity
fed. There are eight homes along the river in the Town of Belle Plaine that utilize on-sites that
are reaching life expectancy. Sleeves and stubs for laterals are already in place for these
dwellings. The BPWU contracts with the Shawano Lake Sanitary District for the Utility’s
infrastructure maintenance.
March 8, 2011
37
TABLE 1: WOLF TREATMENT PLANT 2008 PERFORMANCE/CAPACITY ANALYSIS
INFLUENT
Month
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
Total
Average
Average Mo.
Average
(C)BOD
Monthly Flow
Concentration
(mgd)
(mg/l)
2.068
2.009
2.208
2.748
2.456
2.281
2.213
1.879
1.748
1.698
1.722
1.784
24.81
2.07
Max Month Design Flow
(mgd) =
90% of Design =
Design (C)BOD (lb/day) =
90% of Design =
EFFLUENT
BOD
Average Monthly
Average
Average
Removal
(C)BOD Loading
Monthly
Monthly TSS Efficiency
(lbs/day)
(C)BOD (mg/l) (mg/l)
160
161
158
136
157
159
168
186
188
190
190
187
2,040
170
3.71
3.339
3,984
3,586
2,764
2,705
2,908
3,123
3,220
3,032
3,097
2,918
2,740
2,685
2,725
2,779
34,696
2,891
5
5
5
5
5
6
7
5
5
6
7
7
68.00
5.67
BOD Permit Limit (mg/l) =
90% of Permit Limit =
TSS Permit Limit (mg/l) =
90% of Permit Limit=
4
4
5
5
3
4
4
2
3
4
5
6
49.00
4.08
96.88%
96.89%
96.84%
96.32%
96.82%
96.23%
95.83%
97.31%
97.34%
96.84%
96.32%
96.26%
11.60
96.66%
30
27
30
27
Note: Average of Monthly Avg. Flow is 55.7% of design flow.
Source: Wolf Treatment Plan, 2009
March 8, 2011
38
March 8, 2011
L
I
K
Pioneer Rd
South St
W Slab City Rd
Sunrise Rd
Wildlife Rd
ek Rd
r
Ci
Sandy La
L
I
Timm Rd
County Boundary
!
.
BE
6,000
3,000
0
¶
6,000
12,000
E Slab City Rd
Pit La
Mc Donald Rd
w
ie
g Rd
Branch La
Y
Rd
Round
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
m
CCC
Sc
L
I
Round La
be r La
r
22
Cir cle D
@
A
E Oak La
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
L
I
E State St
Township Boundary
Beech Dr
S High Line Rd
as
rr
r
Long
Lake
Scale in Feet
Valley Rd
ba
i ve
Valley Rd
Lakeview Rd
K
$
K$
$
K
Hilltop La
sR
Maple Rd
Loon Lake Dr
Dr
Mork Av
er
Riv
Wo
lf
La
ke
Birch La
Apple Rd
Norton Rd
Oak Dr
Rusty La
St Johns Church Rd
Evergreen Rd
Rods La
Radloff Rd
CC
Lift Station Locations
N High Line Rd
Village
of
Bonduel
Old 47 Rd
Ranch Rd
Rd
E Flambeau
W North St
S Cecil St
Church Rd
L
I
$
K
N First St
r
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
ve
Swamp Rd
Belle Plaine
Ri
Bonduel Force Main
Valley Rd
L
I
Hill Rd
Grass Lake Rd
!
.
f
ol
W
Cheese Factory Rd
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
Brook Rd
22
4" - 6" Force Main
Oakc rest Dr
29
T
@
A
36" - 42" Gravity Main
Town Line Rd
@
A
To wn of Waukechon
lle
Be
n
e
117
Porter Rd
ai
Pl
ak
@
A
BE
K
L
Meadow Rd
d
@
A
22
White
Clay
Lake
u
$
K
d
dR
L
I
L
I
v
eA
Ca stle Rd
Waukechon Rd
SEWER INFRASTRUCURE
White Clay Lake Dr
Buss Dr
Town of Washington
B
22
Rd
E
L
I
@
A
Fre
rn
e bo
L
I
Thomas Av
Rose Brook Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
Valley La
Village
of
Cecil
Hillcrest Dr
Engel Dr
B
22
Shady La
22
Plank Rd
L
I
Pine La
Rusch Rd
E Richmond St
la n
od
@
A
$
K
Rd
@
A
$
K
S Airport Dr
E Green Bay St
$
K
Wo
v
Cedar A
S Union St
Capitol Dr
Clove r La
S Main St
$
K
Waukechon St
MM
29
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
L
I
@
A
Town of Richmond
$
K
S Washington St
Sycamore Rd
$
K
WN
abo
r
Old 22 Rd
M
Locust Rd
MMM
$
K
Korth Rd
k Rd
Shawano
Lake
Ct
Pine Mead Av
$
K
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
Pine Rd
Lake Dr
Lily Pond Rd
$
K
ers
$
K$
K
$
K
Star
ad
Mapl e Av
L
I
Lake Dr
R
$
K
$
K
M
Poplar Rd
Cypress Rd
Oak Av
$
K
WWTP & INFRASTRUCTURE
L
I
LOCATIONS
SEWER SERVICE AREA
V
L
I
N Lake Dr
Walnut Rd
Lulu
Lake
d
Li ly
Lake
Springbrook Rd
$
K
eR
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
Old Lake Rd
E Hazel Dr
iver
Curt Black Rd
ak
Exhibit 6
Moonlight La
HH
Lake
$
K
$
K
on
L
Loon
Park Av
Montoure Rd
$
K
Thornton
!
.
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
R
Red
Hazel Dr
Lo
Retreat Rd
Broadway Rd
Red River
Raguse Rd
47-55
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
@
A
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
Butternut Rd
Strauss Rd
L
I
Northwood Dr
Prepared By
Shawano County
Swamp Rd
P:\12XX-SSA_GIS\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2050WWTP_Ex#6.mxd
41
FORECAST GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
The Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area is expected to have moderate growth within the planning
period. The Shawano Lake SSA population is projected to increase by 2,219, bringing the total
population to 19,161 persons by 2030. Demographic projections for the Shawano Lake SSA are
listed below in Table 2; Appendix B (Tables B-2 through B-8) offers detailed demographic
breakdowns for each entity within the SSA boundary.
Population growth, coupled with household size (persons per housing unit), indicates a need for
1,468 dwelling units. It is estimated that 85.3 percent of these, (1,252), units will be
single-family; 5.1 percent, (75), will be duplex units, and 9.5 percent, (139), will be multi-family
units. Given the residential densities, (Appendix B, Table B-7), of 2.7 single-family units per
acre, 5.4 for duplex units per acre and 10.9 multifamily units per acre an additional 490 acres
will be needed to sustain future development. With adjustment factors for necessary
infrastructure, (road, etc.), at 15% as well as the 20% market factor an estimated 678 acres of
additional residential land will be required by the year 2030. Utilizing the above densities and
adjustment factors approximately 640 acres single family, 19 acres of duplex and 18 acres of
multi-family will be needed.
Nonresidential, (commercial and industrial), growth needs were determined by multiplying the
existing amount of nonresidential development per capita by the projected 2030 population
increase for the sewer service area.
An estimated total of 73 acres are needed to support the areas commercial and industrial
development. After adding a 15% infrastructure factor and a market factor of 20%, the acreage
required increases to 101 acres, (Appendix B, Table B-9).
TABLE 2: SHAWANO LAKE SSA POPULATION AND HOUSING PROJECTIONS
Year
Projection Type
Total Population
Total Households (d.u.)
Change
2005 -2030
Change w/
10% of
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
16,942
17,467
17,973
18,402
18,826
19,161
2,441
19,383
7,056
7,367
7,687
8,040
8,189
8,390
1,334
8,523
increase
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000; ECWRPC, 2009.
Table 3 lists the acreage allocated to the Shawano Lake 2030 SSA Plan update based on the
previous projections. The allocations also take into account local development plans and allocations
for public use plans, market conditions and public and institutional projects which are planned by
communities. Based upon this there is an excess of 3,144 acres of developable acreage included in
the service area most of which is in the residential category. There are 10,375 total acres in the
Shawano Lake 2030 SSA. Of this total, 3,922 acres are vacant and allocated for future
development.
March 8, 2011
SSA Characteristic
Developed Land Uses
Vacant Lands (see below for breakdown by proposed land use)
2020 SSA
2030 SSA
4,981
5,345
2,924
3,922
2020-2030
Difference
2030 SSA
Projected Need
364
998
"Excess"
(2030-projection)
n/a
778
n/a
3,144
Vacant/Undevelopable Lands (includes 50' wet land buffer)
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (wet lands & stream buffer)
87
100
13
x
n/a
444
503
58
n/a
n/a
Water Areas
503
506
3
n/a
n/a
8,939
10,375
Total SSA
1,436
778.0
3,144
2020-2030
Difference
2030 SSA
Projected Need
"Excess" (2030-
42
TABLE 3 - SUMMARY OF 2020 & PROPOSED 2030 SSA CONDITIONS
Vacant Land By
Proposed Land Use Type
Single Family Residential
(incl. duplex)
Commercial/Industrial
Public Institutional
Agriculture/Undeveloped (assumed to be SF Res.)
Total Vacant Acreage
Source: ECWRPC, 2009
Note: Single & Multi-family projections based on 2.5 units/acre
2020 SSA
2030 SSA
projection)
1,214
1,791
577
659
1132
100
146
46
149
23
203
18
128
804
n/a
n/a
756
216
638
2,924
905
239
841
3,922
998
101
n/a
n/a
778
3,144
March 8, 2011
43
Growth Allocation Areas and 2030 SSA
The policy basis for allocating growth areas is described in the Sewer Service Area Delineation and
Planning Process, (page 61). These policies take into account a broad range of land use and
environmental concerns directed towards encouraging orderly, cost-effective and environmentally
sound development. Working within this broad policy base sewer service area planning also
considers sewerage system capacities, land development market trends, development plans and
preferences of individual communities. East Central may recommend that conditions be attached to
WDNR sewer extension approvals, where needed, to preserve designated environmentally sensitive
areas or other significant natural features that lie within the growth allocation areas.
Priority Development Area Mapping
During the SSA Plan update a thorough assessment regarding the phasing or ‘priority’ areas of
development was determined by each community. During the working meetings with each DMA
and community, a map was developed which indicated their general thoughts of development
timing based on their local comprehensive plan, landowner knowledge and planned capital
improvements. Three levels of ‘priority’ were assigned to overall areas requested for addition
to the 1999 SSA and can be simply described as follows: #1 – generally felt to develop in the
next 5 to 10 years; #2 – generally felt to develop in 10 to 20 years, and; #3 – generally
thought to develop in 20 or more years, primarily based on the need for and timing of major
sewer infrastructure. For the entire SSA, the ‘priority area requests’, were as follows:
o
o
o
Priority #1 areas – 918.78 acres;
Priority #2 areas – 1,119.15 acres; and
Priority #3 areas – 1,711.95 acres.
Exhibit 7 indicates the ‘priority level’ which was assigned to each community’s acreage request.
The 2030 SSA growth allocation areas encompassed a total of approximately:
o
o
o
918 acres of Priority #1 areas;
192 acres of Priority #2 areas; and
95 acres of Priority #3 areas.
While East Central will not formally hold each community to these development priorities, they
will serve to remind the Commission, community and public of the basic thoughts of
development timing determined in 2009. It should be noted that East Central may and, in
some cases, has recommend that conditions be attached to WDNR sewer extension approvals
where needed to deal with conflicts related to development timing issues or to preserve
designated environmentally sensitive areas that lie within the growth allocation areas.
March 8, 2011
44
March 8, 2011
Maple Rd
Lakeview Rd
Timm Rd
Loon Lake Dr
Dr
La
ke
Birch La
Mork Av
Riv
er
Pioneer Rd
W Slab City Rd
Sunrise Rd
BE
6,000
3,000
0
¶
6,000
12,000
E Slab City RdThis data was created for use by the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
Pit La
Shawano County
Mc Donald Rd
Branch La
Sandy La
L
I
Wildlife Rd
S High Line Rd
Wo
lf
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
South St
E State St
Scale in Feet
Valley Rd
CCC
Sc
E Oak La
L
I
PRIORITY REQUESTS
Rd
E Flambeau
W North St
Village
of
Bonduel
Hilltop La
Long
Lake
Valley Rd
Norton Rd
Oak Dr
Radloff Rd
K
.
!
Third Priority Request by DMA
Old 47 Rd
L
I
County Boundary
Second Priority Request by DMA
S Cecil St
Church Rd
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Brook Rd
er
Township Boundary
N High Line Rd
Hill Rd
L
I
T
CC
First Priority Request by DMA
N First St
K
Valley Rd
L
I
St Johns Church Rd
e
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
Ranch Rd
Evergreen Rd
ak
29
L
I
Town Line Rd
BE
Swamp Rd
Belle Plaine
Grass Lake Rd
.
!
L
@
A
117
L
I
B
f
ol
W
d
Meadow Rd
Ca stle Rd
L
I
v
Ri
u
22
@
A
To wn of Waukechon
22
Oakc rest Dr
Rose Brook Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
@
A
Rd
Hillcrest Dr
S Union St
S Main St
Clove r La
Capitol Dr
lle
Be
Fre
rn
e bo
M
@
A
Pine Rd
n
dla
Porter Rd
n
Village
of
Cecil
Buss Dr
d
dR
Town of Washington
Waukechon Rd
ai
Pl
22
E
Thomas Av
v
eA
@
A
L
I
Engel Dr
22
Rd
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT
AREAS
SEWER SERVICE AREA
22
Plank Rd
@
A
Cheese Factory Rd
Korth Rd
k Rd
@
A
Rusch Rd
Waukechon St
E Richmond St
S Airport Dr
E Green Bay St
Lily Pond Rd
N Lake Dr
Apple Rd
Springbrook Rd
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
R
Shady La
v
Cedar A
B
Valley La
L
I
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
o
Wo
L
I
Pine La
Li ly
Lake
Shawano
Lake
Ct
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
S Washington St
MM
29
Town of Richmond
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
L
I
@
A
Star
ers
Pine Mead Av
Sycamore Rd
Lake
Exhibit 7
Moonlight La
HH
WN
abo
r
Locust Rd
MMM
Lulu
Lake
d
ad
Mapl e Av
L
I
eR
M
Poplar Rd
Cypress Rd
Lake Dr
ak
Lake Dr
Old Lake Rd
Walnut Rd
Oak Av
Park Av
Montoure Rd
Curt Black Rd
E Hazel Dr
iver
Thornton
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
on
L
Loon
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
R
Red
Hazel Dr
Lo
Retreat Rd
Broadway Rd
.
!
Raguse Rd
47-55
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
@
A
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
Butternut Rd
Strauss Rd
L
I
Northwood Dr
Prepared By
P:\12XX-SSA\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2050PRI_Ex#7.mxd
47
Year 2030 Sewer Service Area
The year 2030 Sewer Service Area for the Wolf Treatment Wastewater Plant is illustrated in
Exhibit 8 and contains a total of 10,375 acres. Of this total, 1,009 acres have been designated
as environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) and 3,921.5 acres are considered to be
vacant/developable areas. If one removes the vacant acreage that is reserved for public or
institutional uses based on community requests (239.4) from this total, a final figure of 3,682.1
acres are left to accommodate traditional residential, commercial, and industrial development.
This compares to a calculated vacant acreage need of 778 acres for these types of
development; therefore, an ‘excess’ of 3,144 vacant acres exists within the 2030 SSA. A more
detailed listing of SSA allocations are contained in Appendix B, (Table: B-10). A short
description of the major acreage allocations and growth areas are provided below (see Exhibit 8
regarding acreage allocation locations):

City of Shawano. A total of 132.9 acres were allocated to the City, of this total 30.8
acres are considered vacant/developable acres. The majority of the vacant acres (30)
are slated for residential uses, while 0.9 acres are designated for industrial uses. The
City’s agreed growth areas are located within the surrounding Towns and therefore
acreage allocation totals are accounted for in Town allocation descriptions below.

Village of Bonduel. A total of 92.4 acres were allocated to the City, of this total 78.9
acres are considered vacant/developable acres. The majority of the vacant acres (50.9)
are slated for residential uses, while 28 acres are designated for commercial and
industrial uses. The vast majority of allocations are located south of the Village.

Village of Cecil. Large areas within the Village’s corporate limits were outside the 2020
SSA boundary. During the Plan’s working meetings it was apparent that a rather large
area needed to be allocated, so that the Village could extend public sewer versus
continue the current trend of developing with the use of on-sites within the Village. A
total of 269.6 acres were allocated to the Village, of this total 233.8 are considered
vacant/developable acres.

Town of Washington. A total of 144.6 acres were added to the Town of Washington;
of this total 99.6 acres are considered to be vacant/developable acres. These acreage
allocations will be serviced by the Shawano Lake Sanitary District and the City.
Allocations areas are located to the east of the City’s current City boundary and south of
CTH B.

Town of Wescott. A total of 278.2 acres were added to the Town of Wescott; of this
total 135.8 acres are considered to be vacant/developable acres. Future service for
these areas will be provided by the Shawano Lake Sanitary District. Allocation areas are
located north of Pine Mead Avenue. A portion of the allocations acreage is owned by the
local school district. The district does not have plans to build and will likely sell this land
for residential purposes in the future.

Town of Richmond. A total of 120.8 acres were allocated to the Town that will be
serviced by the Richmond Sanitary District. A total of 98.4 acres are considered
March 8, 2011
48
vacant/developable acres. The majority of the vacant acres (88.7) are currently
considered to be agriculture or unplanned, but are presumed to be residential areas in
the future.

Town of Belle Plaine. A total of 97.1 acres were allocated to the Town, which will be
serviced by the Belle Plaine/Waukechon Utility District. A total of 56.4 acres are
considered vacant/developable. The majority of the vacant areas are slated for
commercial uses located adjacent to the STH 22 corridor.

Town of Waukechon. A large amount of acres (408.9) were allocated within the
Town of Waukechon; however only a small portion of the allocations will be serviced by
the Belle Plaine/Waukechon Utility District in the future. The majority of allocated
acreage is located south of CTH B. This allocation area is slated for a mix of residential
and commercial uses. The area is recognized as a City growth area and it is well known
that public services to this area will be provided by the City of Shawano in the future.

Town of Hartland. A total of 22.5 acres were allocated to areas within the Town of
Hartland. These areas are considered growth areas for the Village of Bonduel which will
provide public services as the Village grows.
The WDNR has requested that a 100 foot buffer be placed along all sewer lines that are
located outside adopted SSA boundaries. Due to this, a 100 foot buffer has been added
to the Village of Bonduel’s forcemain running east and west to indicate its inclusion in
the 2030 SSA. The forcemain transports the Village’s wastewater westerly to the Wolf
Treatment Plant. Although the forcemain is technically within the 2030 SSA boundary
individual connections to the forcemain are limited to properties that existed adjacent to
the forcemain at the time of construction.
SSA Future Needs
As discussed above potential future needs exist for Shawano County’s Maple Lane Health Care
Center located in the Town of Belle Plaine along STH 22. At the time of this plan’s completion East
Central did not have records indicating the existing performance of the lagoon system and therefore
the need for alternative treatment has not yet been considered. East Central will consider a SSA
Amendment to the Shawano Lake 2030 SSA Plan should further facility studies and cost-effective
analysis justify a need to provide this facility with public services.
March 8, 2011
Mork Av
Pioneer Rd
¶
6,000
12,000
Scale in Feet
E Slab City Rd liability regarding fitness of the information for any use other than for East
Pit La
Shawano County
r
Mc Donald Rd
Sandy La
Maple Rd
Lakeview Rd
er
Riv
Wo
lf
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
Timm Rd
Loon Lake Dr
Dr
La
ke
Birch La
Y
k
ic
en e
ho ak
L
Branch La
CCC
Sc
L
I
Round La
Cir cle D
E Oak La
Cloverleaf Lake Rd
L
I
0
BE
Wildlife Rd
S High Line Rd
as
rr
r
Long
Lake
L
I
N High Line Rd
W Slab City Rd
Valley Rd
ba
i ve
South St
3,000
Hilltop La
sR
Beech Dr
Old 47 Rd
K
SERVICE AREA CONDITIONS
6,000
E State St
S Cecil St
L
I
County Boundary
Sunrise Rd
Swamp Rd
St Johns Church Rd
Evergreen Rd
Rd
E Flambeau
N First St
Ranch Rd
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Church Rd
CC
Township Boundary
2030 Sewer Service Area
W North St
Village
of
Bonduel
Valley Rd
Hill Rd
L
I
er
L
I
Valley Rd
Norton Rd
Oak Dr
Radloff Rd
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
Brook Rd
To wn of Waukechon
Belle Plaine
Grass Lake Rd
!
.
Town Line Rd
BE
T
v
e
117
@
A
Ri
ak
@
A
29
f
ol
W
L
Meadow Rd
Oakc rest Dr
Rose Brook Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
@
A
22
d
22
L
I
B
K
Ca stle Rd
L
I
L
I
!
.
Hillcrest Dr
S Union St
S Main St
Clove r La
Capitol Dr
a in
orn
u
@
A
Town of Washington
Waukechon Rd
Pl
Rods La
d
dR
Porter Rd
lle
Be
Fre e b
E
Thomas Av
v
eA
Rd
L
I
Engel Dr
22
Village
of
Cecil
M
@
A
Plank Rd
@
A
Rd
@
A
22
Pine Rd
n
dla
22
Rusch Rd
S Airport Dr
Waukechon St
E Richmond St
Cheese Factory Rd
Korth Rd
k Rd
Buss Dr
Ct
E Green Bay St
Lily Pond Rd
N Lake Dr
Apple Rd
Springbrook Rd
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
V
R
Shady La
v
Cedar A
2030
SEWER SERVICE AREA
L
I
L
I
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
o
Wo
B
Valley La
Star
Li ly
Lake
Shawano
Lake
L
I
Pine La
Lake
ers
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
S Washington St
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
MM
29
d
Exhibit 8
Moonlight La
HH
WN
abo
r
Locust Rd
L
I
@
A
Lulu
Lake
Lake Dr
Pine Mead Av
Sycamore Rd
eR
ad
Mapl e Av
MMM
ak
M
Poplar Rd
Cypress Rd
Lake Dr
on
L
Loon
Park Av
Walnut Rd
L
I
Town of Richmond
Retreat Rd
Montoure Rd
Old Lake Rd
E Hazel Dr
iver
!
.
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
Curt Black Rd
Oak Av
Lo
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
R
Red
Hazel Dr
Thornton
Raguse Rd
Broadway Rd
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
@
A
47-55
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
Butternut Rd
Strauss Rd
L
I
Northwood Dr
Prepared By
Swamp Rd
P:\12XX-SSA\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2030SSA_Ex#8.mxd
51
Holding Tank Service Areas
There are numerous sewage holding tanks and individual on-site septic systems within the
Shawano Lake Planning Area. According to Wisconsin Administrative Code NR113 septic pumpage
from these systems are directed to the regional treatment facilities. The Wolf WWTF accepts
approximately 350,000 gallons of septic sewage from private haulers each day. In addition, large
holding tanks exceeding 3,000 gallons per day need a special holding tank service area designation.
There are no large holding tanks present in the Shawano Lake Planning Area.
Water Quality Assessment and Development Impacts
Continued urbanization of the Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area will impact surface and
groundwater resources. Surface water runoff and pollutant loadings are likely to increase and
groundwater recharge is likely to decrease. The scope of these impacts cannot be precisely
determined because specific future development characteristics (location, type, density and site
mitigation) are unknown. However, it is possible to generally estimate water quality impacts by
applying assumptions relative to the nature of future development.
Point Source Water Quality Impacts
Population growth and commercial/industrial development will increase wastewater flows and
loadings to the treatment plant and ultimately to the Wolf River. Without a wastewater engineering
assessment it is not possible to analyze specific flows for the different existing land uses and
estimate future flows for comparison to treatment plant design capacity. A rough estimate
comparing existing average daily flows of current development to a percentage increase in overall
future development can be made (Table 4). Based upon this analysis, the average flows are
expected to increase by 0.95 mgd which is within the capacity of the current treatment facility
design.
Non-point Source Water Quality Impacts
The Shawano Lake SSA includes portions of three sub-watersheds. Various land uses within these
watersheds contribute significant urban and agricultural runoff to the Wolf River. Sediment loads,
nutrients and other pollutants are carried through storm sewers and drainageways throughout the
SSA.
Surface water runoff and pollutant loadings will increase with the forecasted growth for the 2030
SSA. The placement of roads, buildings and parking areas increase the amount of impervious area,
and hence, more water runs off the land surface carrying organic and inorganic pollutants
associated with these more intensive urban uses. The Department of Natural Resources has
general guidelines for estimating unit area loadings of pollutants by land use categories. Within the
Shawano Lake SSA, four pollutants have been analyzed for seven land use categories. The
estimated loadings address both existing and future land uses. The estimates only relate to land
uses within the service area with resultant impacts on the local rivers and streams. Specific
subwatershed analysis has not been attempted.
The estimated annual pollutant loadings for the existing development area (based on 2009 land
use) within the Shawano Lake SSA are listed in Table 5. The land uses within this area consist
March 8, 2011
52
primarily of older development with significant infrastructure therefore stormwater mitigation is
more difficult and costly in these areas.
Table 6 illustrates the future annual pollutant loadings expected based on the total amounts of
development which could occur by 2030 within the Shawano Lake SSA if all the available vacant
lands were developed. The pollutant loadings are estimates for the proposed land uses with no
significant stormwater mitigation measures or practices adopted. Utilization of stormwater
detention facilities, site development controls, preservation of green space and other measures can
help mitigate urban non-point source impacts on water quality. These loadings can serve as a
baseline for proposed areawide stormwater reduction efforts.
March 8, 2011
SHAWANO LAKE SSA - PROJECTED 2030 RESIDENTIAL WASTEWATER FLOWS
2005-2030 SSA
Population Increase
Additional Flows (@ 80 gallons per day per
person)
2005
2030
(includes additional 10% of
Population Population 2005-2030 Increase
gallons per day (gpd)
2005-2030 increase)
SSA
millions of gallons
(mgd)
Peak Flows (@4.0 factor)
gallons per
millions of
day (gpd) gallons (mgd)
C. Shawano
8,515
9,223
708
779
62,304
0.062
249,216.00
0.249
V. Bonduel
1,460
1,657
197
217
17,336
0.017
69,344.00
0.069
525
700
175
193
15,400
0.015
61,600.00
0.062
4,951
5,851
900
990
79,200
0.079
316,800.00
0.317
603
733
130
143
11,440
0.011
45,760.00
0.046
3
3
-
0.000
-
0
16,057
18,167
V. Cecil
Shawano Lake S.D.
Richmond S.D.
BPW U.D.
Totals
-
0
2,110
2,321
185,680
0.186
742,720
0.743
53
TABLE 4: WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS
SHAWANO LAKE SSA - PROJECTED 2030 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL FLOWS
2005 C/I
Acreage
Totals
SSA
2030 C/I
Acreage
Totals
Difference
Difference + 20%
Market Factor*
Projected Flows (@ 1100 gal./ac./day)
Millions of Gallons per
Gallons per day (gpd)
Day (mgd)
C. Shawano
904.7
906
1
1
1,188
0.001
V. Bonduel
237.9
268
30
36
39,732
0.040
V. Cecil
40.6
41
0
-
Shawano Lake S.D.
81.6
117
36
43
46,860
0.047
Richmond S.D.
50.5
51
1
1
660
0.001
BPW U.D.
61.9
154
92
110
121,308
0.121
191
209,748
0.210
Totals
1,377
1,536
159
-
0.000
Note: C/I acreage totals include vacant/developed lands which are slated for C/I development delineated by the City and Town Comprehensive Plans.
March 8, 2011
SHAWANO LAKE - SUMMARY OF PROJECTED FLOWS & WWTF CAPACITIES
SSA
Additional Additional
Residential Comm/Ind.
Flows (mgd) Flows (mgd)
Shawano Lake SSA
0.743
* WWTF design flow based on 2008 CMAR
Source: Wolf Treatment Plant 2008 CMAR; ECWRPC
0.210
Total Additional
Flows (mgd)
0.95
Existing WWTF Flows Existing / Planned*
Difference
WWTF Design
(Avg. of 2008mo. Avg.
(Ex. / Planned Capacity flows - mgd)*
Existing & Projected Flows)
Capacity (mgd)
2.07
3.710
0.69
2009
Acres
2,074.6
114.8
300.4
320.6
1,293.5
2,923.7
868.7
Unit Area Loads by Land Use (lbs/acre/yr)
Sediment Phosphorus Zinc
Development Type
Medium Dens Res. (2-6 units/ac, no alleys)
190.0
0.5
0.2
Multi-Family Res. (3+ units / 1-3 stories)
420.0
1.0
0.7
Commercial (strip/downtown)
1,400.0
1.5
2.1
Manufacturing Industries
900.0
1.5
2.1
Freeways / Local Roads
600.0
0.9
1.9
Undeveloped / Vacant
25.0
0.0
0.0
Institutional / Governmental
700.0
0.5
0.6
Lead
0.2
0.8
2.7
2.4
2.5
0.0
1.1
7,896.3 TOTALS
Tons
Calculated Loadings
Sediment
Phosphorus
Zinc
394,174.0
1,037.3
414.9
48,216.0
114.8
80.4
420,560.0
450.6
630.8
288,540.0
480.9
673.3
776,100.0
1,164.2
2,457.7
73,092.5
12.9
0.0
608,090.0
434.4
521.2
Lead
414.9
91.8
811.1
769.4
3,233.8
6.5
955.6
2,608,772.5
3,695.0
4,778.3
6,283.1
1304.39
1.85
2.39
3.14
Note: Total SSA acres is less than previously noted due to water features not being included in these calculations.
54
TABLE 5: SHAWANO LAKE SSA - EXISTING (2009) NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION LOADING ESTIMATE
TABLE 6: SHAWANO LAKE SSA - EXISTING (2030) NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION LOADING ESTIMATE
Unit Area Loads by Land Use (lbs/acre/yr)
Sediment Phosphorus Zinc
Development Type
Acres
2,116.9
114.8
309.2
322.8
1,602.5
3,921.5
869.3
Medium Dens Res. (2-6 units/ac, no alleys)
Multi-Family Res. (3+ units / 1-3 stories)
Commercial (strip/downtown)
Manufacturing Industries
Freeways / Local Roads
Undeveloped / Vacant
Institutional / Governmental
9,257.0 TOTALS
190.0
420.0
1,400.0
900.0
600.0
25.0
700.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
1.5
0.9
0.0
0.5
0.2
0.7
2.1
2.1
1.9
0.0
0.6
Lead
0.2
0.8
2.7
2.4
2.5
0.0
1.1
Sediment
Calculated Loadings
Phosphorus
Zinc
Lead
402,211.0
48,216.0
432,880.0
290,520.0
961,500.0
98,037.5
608,510.0
1,058.5
114.8
463.8
484.2
1,442.3
39.2
434.7
423.4
80.4
649.3
677.9
3,044.8
0.0
521.6
423.4
91.8
834.8
774.7
4,006.3
19.6
956.2
2,841,874.5
4,037.4
5,397.3
7,106.9
2.02
2.70
3.55
Tons
1420.94
Note: Total SSA acres is less than previously noted due to water features not being included in these calculations.
March 8, 2011
Wedge Rd
Lark Rd
Timm Rd
BE
6,000
E Slab City Rd
Pit La
Mc Donald Rd
S High Line Rd
CCC
Valley Rd
L
I
L
I
3,000
0
¶
6,000
12,000
Scale in Feet
er
Riv
Hilltop La
Long
Lake
South St
E State St
N High Line Rd
K
Old 47 Rd
L
I
W North St
Sunrise Rd
Swamp Rd
St Johns Church Rd
Evergreen Rd
W Slab City Rd
Existing Development
Rd
E Flambeau
S Cecil St
Ranch Rd
CC
Proposed Single Family Residential
Proposed to Remain Woodlands
N First St
Church Rd
Town of Har tland
Town of Waukechon
Brook Rd
er
Proposed Public/Institutional
Vacant - Developable
Village
of
Bonduel
Valley Rd
Hill Rd
L
I
T
L
I
Maple Rd
Lakeview Rd
Birch La
Loon Lake Dr
Dr
La
ke
Mork Av
29
To wn of Waukechon
Belle Plaine
Grass Lake Rd
.
!
Valley Rd
Norton Rd
Oak Dr
Radloff Rd
@
A
K
Proposed Open Space/Recreational
Proposed to Remain in Agriculture
BE
L
I
Proposed Multi-Family Residential
Town Line Rd
L
I
B
f
ol
W
e
117
Proposed Industrial
Ca stle Rd
L
I
v
Ri
ak
@
A
Proposed Commercial
Oakc rest Dr
Rose Brook Rd
Mapl e Leaf Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
@
A
22
2030 PROPOSED LAND USE
L
Meadow Rd
d
22
u
@
A
Hillcrest Dr
S Union St
S Main St
Clove r La
Capitol Dr
lle
Be
County Boundary
Porter Rd
Av
Rd
M
d
dR
Town of Washington
Waukechon Rd
ne
orn
Fre e b
E
Thomas Av
ai
Pl
Village
of
Cecil
L
I
Engel Dr
22
Sewer Service Boundary Line
@
A
22
Pine Rd
n
dla
@
A
Plank Rd
@
A
Rd
.
!
Buss Dr
22
Rusch Rd
S Airport Dr
E Richmond St
Cheese Factory Rd
Korth Rd
k Rd
Shady La
v
Cedar A
E Green Bay St
Lily Pond Rd
YEAR 2030 SSA &
PROPOSED LAND USE
SEWER SERVICE AREA
Township Boundary
Ct
Wo
lf
R
N Lake Dr
Apple Rd
Springbrook Rd
Town of Washington
Town of Wescott
L
I
Wa s hi n g t o n
Lake
o
Wo
B
Valley La
Star
Li ly
Lake
Shawano
Lake
L
I
Pine La
Lake
ers
Waukechon St
29
City
of
Shawano
S Sawye r St
S Washington St
Sunset Dr
S Wee d St
L
I
@
A
MM
d
ad
Pine Mead Av
Sycamore Rd
Lulu
Lake
Exhibit 9
Moonlight La
HH
WN
abo
r
Locust Rd
MMM
eR
M
Poplar Rd
Mapl e Av
L
I
ak
Lake Dr
Old Lake Rd
E Hazel Dr
Lake Dr
on
L
Loon
Park Av
Montoure Rd
Walnut Rd
Oak Av
Town of Richmond
Retreat Rd
Woods Rd
Town of Wescott
Curt Black Rd
Cypress Rd
Thornton
Lo
Fox La
Balsam Rd
Elm Rd
Beec h Rd
Hazel Dr
.
!
Raguse Rd
Broadway Rd
Coz y Oaks Cir
r Dr
Ash Rd
Basswood Rd
Box Elde r Rd
@
A
47-55
Town of Richmond
Oak Park Rd
Ri ve
Strauss Rd
L
I
Northwood Dr
Prepared By
Shawano County
P:\12XX-SSA_GIS\SHAWANO\SSA_2008\SSA\Report_Graphics_Final\Shawano2050ProLu_Ex#9..mxd
57
Groundwater Impacts
According to Shawano County’s Land And Water Resource Management Plan, 2009 Revision,
Shawano County’s groundwater resources are generally of good quality and supply although draw
downs in the Fox Valley and Wausau areas threaten the County’s groundwater quantity.
Glacial drift aquifers are the major source of groundwater in the western ¾ of the county. The
glacial drift over much of this area is 50 to 200 feet thick and produces well yields of 100 to
1,000 gallons per minute. There are some areas that have rock outcroppings or bedrock close to
the surface, which hampers getting an adequate supply of potable water. The bedrock aquifer is
the major source of ground water in the eastern ¼ of the county. The Cambrian sandstones,
the Prairie du Chien Group, and the St. Peter sandstone form the principal bedrock aquifer in
this area. In general, these rock units are hydraulically connected and act as an aquifer to
produce well yields of 100 to 500 gallons per minute. There are some karst features in the area
which need to be protected such as adequate set back distances and buffering of sink holes.1
While there are no significant negative groundwater impacts anticipated with increased
development in the service area, there may be localized impacts as areas develop. The City of
Shawano, Village of Bonduel and Village of Cecil utilize high capacity wells to obtain thier potable
water supply. Development in the Sanitary Districts and surrounding Towns utilize private wells.
An investigation of the public water supply system was performed by the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources in November of 2000. The inspection report notes that there have been
concerns regarding declining water levels. Increased development of the recharge areas could
have long-term impacts on the groundwater recharge. Conversion of rural/agricultural lands to
urban uses may impact both the quality and quantity of groundwater as development continues.
Groundwater recharge will decrease as areas are paved over or built upon. At the same time,
withdrawal of groundwater on a regional basis is likely to increase for domestic, commercial and
industrial use.
Water Quality Protection And Stormwater Management
Cumulative impacts, including loss of baseflow in streams, from increased development of
impervious surfaces and enhanced stream flashiness, and the resulting streambank erosion from
alterations to headwaters and tributaries, will occur with full buildout of the sewer service area.
Stormwater management actions other than large-scale detention ponds are available for older
urban areas such as enhanced street sweeping, comprehensive stormwater management and other
nonstructural best management practices.
East Central recommends receipt of preliminary subdivision plats for review for a conformance
check with the sewer service area and water quality plan. Recommendations would be made for
final plat approval based on water quality, stormwater management, environmental and cultural
resource concerns.
East Central also provides mandatory sewer extension review comments. Where sanitary sewer
extensions are proposed in mapped environmentally sensitive areas or on other lands whose
physical characteristics indicate susceptibility to erosion or flooding, or where development of such
1
Shawano County’s Land & Water Resource Management Plan, 2009
March 8, 2011
58
lands is likely to impair surface or groundwater quality or uses, East Central may identify mitigating
conditions to be incorporated into the development proposal. East Central may also request the
WDNR to attach such conditions to any sewer extension approval for the proposed development.
Where the impacts of development pose significant water quality impacts or negatively impact
environmentally sensitive areas, the Commission may recommend denial of the proposed extension.
Voluntary preliminary plat review and mandatory sewer extension review are the primary
mechanism for service area plan implementation and the attainment of water quality plan
objectives.
Plan Implementation And Recommendations
Plan Implementation
Although sewer service area planning was initiated at the state and federal levels, successful
implementation of each plan rests at the local level. In the state-approved Areawide Water Quality
Management Plan for the Fox River Valley, certain local units of government are assigned water
quality management functions. Entities with adequate authority to plan, construct, operate and
maintain wastewater collection and treatment facilities are designated as management agencies for
portions of the planning area within their jurisdictions. The City of Waupaca and the Chain ‘O Lakes
Sanitary District are currently designated. The functions of the respective units concerning
sewerage system management are shown in Table 7:
Table 7: DESIGNATED MANAGEMENT AGENCIES
Governmental Unit
Category of Designation
Management Function
Shawano Lake S.D.
III
Collection And Treatment
City of Shawano
I
Collection
Village of Bonduel
I
Collection
Village of Cecil
I
Collection
Belle Plaine/Waukechon U.D.
I
Collection
Richmond S.D.
I
Collection
March 8, 2011
59
Plan Recommendations
The City, Villages and Sanitary Districts, as the designated management agencies for the
wastewater treatment and collection systems, and the City, Villages, Towns and County, as the
agencies responsible for development policies and regulations, should do the following:
1.
Adopt the Shawano Lake 2030 Sewer Service Area Plan update;
2.
Review and update development policies and regulations in light of the sewer service plan
boundaries and recommendations;
3.
Submit preliminary land subdivision plats to East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission for review for consistency with sewer service area plans for the area;
4.
Submit sanitary sewer extension requests to the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission for review for consistency with sewer service area plans prior to being
submitted to the WDNR for approval; and
5.
Submit wastewater facilities plans and amended plans to the East Central Wisconsin
Regional Planning Commission for review for consistency with sewer service area plans
prior to submittal to the WDNR for approval; and
6.
Carry out their management responsibilities for treatment facilities and collection systems
as specified by state and federal requirements.
7.
Sewered development should be developed at 2.5 units/acre single family, 5 units/acre
duplex and 10 units/acre multi-family as designated in this plan.
In addition to implementing sewer service area plans, local government may exercise other
authority conferred upon them by state statute to preserve and protect water quality. Local
governments may use this authority to plan and manage land use and development through
subdivision, zoning and other development ordinances. Criteria can be written into existing
ordinances or new ordinances can be adopted which promote orderly development and address
water quality concerns. Additional actions by local units of government which are recommended for
water quality protection include the adoption of construction site erosion and stormwater
management ordinances and the preservation of greenways along existing drainage corridors.
1.
All communities should review and address issues and recommendations identified in the
Upper Wolf River Basin Integrated Management Plan.
2.
Monitor development amounts and rates to better determine the need for WWTF Facility
Planning.
3.
Continue to address issues and regulatory methods for the management of on-site system
development within the 2050 Planning Area to better recognize the existing investment in
sewer infrastructure.
March 8, 2011
60
4.
Complete and/or update as necessary, local and county ‘smart growth’ comprehensive
plans and incorporate information as necessary from the 2030 SSA Plan.
5.
Intergovernmental cooperation should continue between the City of Shawano, Village of
Bonduel, Village of Cecil, Shawano Lake S.D., Richmond S.D., Belle Plaine/Waukechon
Utility District, and Towns of Belle Plaine, Richmond, Wescott, Washington, Waukechon,
and Hartland to establish such things as:
 Growth agreements;
 WWTF capacity agreements;
 Municipal service agreements;
 Annexation agreements;
 Wellhead protection plans/ordinances;
 Sanitary sewer agreements; etc.
6.
Consider the utilization of various regulatory tools to ensure the timely planning, financing,
and extension of public utilities for new development:
a. Sewer Use Ordinance – should be updated and enforced including such things as:
 Enforce a mandatory sanitary hook-up when public sewer becomes available;
 Develop payout policies for the remaining life expectancy of on-site systems
when public sewer becomes available.
b. Subdivisions Ordinance – particularly with respect to interim development serviced
by on-site systems within the 2050 Planning Area in order to ensure the logical
extension of future sanitary sewer mains. Things to consider, from a design
perspective include:
 Lot size;
 Lot frontage;
 Potential for future lot splits;
 Allowance of ‘cluster developments’ with a single community well and treatment
system (conservation subdivisions);
 Reservation of easements for future sewer extensions;
 Road patterns which allow for effective extension of sewer in the future.
March 8, 2011
61
SEWER SERVICE AREA DELINEATION AND PLANNING PROCESS
A sewer service area is a geographic area which is currently served or anticipated to be served
with sanitary sewers within a 20-year planning period. Sewer service areas, called "urban
service areas," were first delineated for the east central region in 1978 in the plan New
Directions for Growth and Development. In the initial plan, a generalized methodology was
used for the estimation and allocation of growth which led to the identification of service area
boundaries. Various state and federal guidelines, as well as regional policies, were utilized in
the planning process. Since the initial delineation of service areas, the planning and
management process has become much more complex and multi-faceted, thus greater detail in
the explanation of the updating process is required.
The process of updating and refining sewer service area plans consists of the following major
steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
identification of planning area limits;
delineation of environmentally sensitive areas;
identification and quantification of existing conditions;
refinement of goals, objectives and policies;
forecast of urban growth and redefinition of service area limits;
public and community input; and
adoption and publication of final plans.
IDENTIFICATION OF PLANNING AREA LIMITS
The first step in delineating sewer service areas is the outlining of broad planning areas which
include all feasible options for where urban growth might occur within the 20-year planning
period (through the year 2030). Planning area boundaries generally include all areas within
existing city, village and sanitary district limits. Undeveloped lands surrounding these entities
are also included based on the potential ability to provide sewer service in the long-term future
according to the existing/planned wastewater treatment and collection system. Additionally,
clusters of nearby, existing development may be included if sewer may be warranted in the
future due to failing on-site systems.
Planning areas also serve as the study areas for
wastewater facilities planning efforts.
DELINEATION OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
Environmentally sensitive areas are geographic areas consisting of all lakes and streams shown
on the USGS quadrangle maps and adjacent shoreland buffer areas as defined in Figure 1. All
wetlands shown on the state Wisconsin Wetland Inventory Maps and floodways as delineated
on the official Federal Emergency Management Administration Flood Boundary and Floodway
Maps are also designated environmentally sensitive. The environmentally sensitive areas are
mapped on the sewer service area file photos and are also shown on the maps contained in this
plan.
March 8, 2011
62
The purpose of designating environmentally sensitive areas is to preserve significant
environmental features from encroachment by sewered development. Environmentally sensitive
areas perform a variety of important environmental functions including stormwater drainage,
flood water storage, pollutant entrapment, and the provision of wildlife habitat. They can also
provide desirable green space to enhance urban aesthetics.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources through Wisconsin Administrative Code NR
121.05(g)(2)(c), has developed guidelines which serve as minimum criteria for the identification
and delineation of environmentally sensitive areas.
The WDNR’s code guidance document
states:
"Environmentally sensitive areas will be used for all environmental features that should
be excluded from sanitary sewer service areas."2
East Central, after deliberations with technical and policy advisory committees, defined
environmentally sensitive areas in a manner that complements existing local, state and federal
regulations which protect various environmental amenities. While NR 121 authorizes sewer
service area plans to identify a broad array of natural features as environmentally sensitive
areas, only those features which were believed vital in the East Central Wisconsin Region to
preserve environmental quality were so designated.
Although the delineation of
environmentally sensitive areas is intended to provide adequate long term and uniform
environmental protection for all sewer service areas within the East Central Wisconsin Region,
the environmentally sensitive area classification may be changed in two ways in response to
specific local development proposals.
First, the classification can be removed provided that the conditions outlined in Section (E) of
the Sewer Service Area Amendment Process are met. This re-designation is considered a major
change. Major changes have the potential for significant impacts on water quality and would
require the concurrence of the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission and the
Department of Natural Resources before these changes would become effective for the purpose
of reviewing sanitary sewer extensions. Examples include:
1. Removal of any mapped wetland area for sewered development, unless resulting from an
activity exempted by state administrative rules governing wetland protection [NR
117.05(2)] or state approved rezoning of wetlands;
2. Reduction of a delineated floodway of any navigable stream or river, or removal of any
area below the ordinary high water mark of a navigable stream, pond, or lake; and
3. Total removal or change in the continuity of any corridor segment including floodways,
wetlands, shoreland buffer strips or steep slopes adjacent to water bodies. The water
quality benefit associated with the portion of the corridor removed must be provided in
the development proposal.
2
”Guidance for Approving Sewer Service Area Plans and Plan Amendments." WDNR Correspondence, February, 1982.
March 8, 2011
63
In the second instance, the environmentally sensitive areas may be modified by a minor change.
Refinements and minor changes do not require prior approval of the East Central Wisconsin
Regional Planning Commission or the Department of Natural Resources. However, as part of
the sanitary sewer extension review process, East Central has to be informed of the change
before it is effective. East Central is then responsible for informing the Department of Natural
Resources of the change.
Refinements and minor changes are generally of two types. The first type involves changes
resulting from revised, improved or more detailed background resource information to include:
a) Improved or revised WDNR certified floodway delineations resulting from revised flood
studies; and
b) Revised wetland boundaries on the Wisconsin Wetland Inventory Maps resulting from
field inspections by WDNR personnel or resulting from an approved rezoning.
The second type involves changes which would not seriously affect water quality and are the
result of specific development proposals to include:
a) Relocation of a non-navigable stream or drainageway as long as the environmental
integrity of the stream or drainageway is preserved.
March 8, 2011
64
Figure 1
March 8, 2011
65
IDENTIFICATION AND QUANTIFICATION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
The ability to inventory existing conditions both quantitatively and qualitatively are paramount to
evaluating land use and development trends and impacts. Aerial photos are the basis for
identifying and quantifying land uses within the East Central region. Comparing aerial photos at
different time intervals can establish trends in types and magnitude of land uses. East Central's
2008 aerial photography and land use inventory was the last complete coverage of the Fox River
Valley and the region. For the most up-to-date coverage, aerial photography flown by individual
counties at various times is utilized. This information is supplemented by land use maps prepared
from spot field surveys. Acreages for major land use categories are computer digitized and
aggregated by section-township-range. Totals are also calculated for each town, town sanitary
district, village, city and county within the planning area. In conjunction with the land use mapping
program, all village and city municipal boundaries, as well as sanitary district limits, are identified on
the aerial photos and transferred to the sewer service area digital maps.
Sanitary sewerage systems for all communities are identified on the sewer service area GIS data
files. The location and size of most sewer collectors, mains, and interceptors (18” or larger), as well
as forcemains are mapped in detail. In addition, the locations of all lift stations, pump stations and
wastewater treatment facilities are shown. These maps are continually updated as new sewer
extensions are reviewed by East Central. Additionally, "holding tank" service areas, if they exist,
are identified on the GIS system within the planning areas.
Important for analyzing the planning areas, existing urban development areas are delineated on
digital maps based on land uses shown on the 2000 aerial photos. Urban development areas
consist of all concentrations of development within the planning area, together with undeveloped
lands which are sewered or otherwise committed for short-term development. These urban
development areas are, in most instances, the minimal land areas which should be designated as
sewer service areas.
In addition to the development information included on the digital maps, existing sewer service area
boundaries are identified to determine the location and amount of land currently available for
development outside of the urban development areas. This land, in most instances, is the area
which has been the primary long-term growth area forecast in the 2030 sewer service area plan.
These lands are automatically included within the updated sewer service area.
In addition to the designations of environmental sensitive areas (shorelands, wetlands and
floodways), other areas with natural characteristics which could impact environmental quality or
development potential are identified. These areas are termed areas with "limiting environmental
conditions" and include lands with seasonal high groundwater (within one foot of the surface),
floodplain areas, lands with shallow bedrock (within five feet of the surface) and areas with steep
slopes (12 percent or greater).
Unlike the environmentally sensitive areas, development is not excluded from land with limiting
environmental conditions. The primary purpose of identifying these areas is to alert communities
and potential developers of environmental conditions which should be considered prior to the
development of such an area.
March 8, 2011
66
Complementing the information placed upon the digital maps, additional data is collected on
existing population, numbers of dwelling units, mixes and densities of residential development,
existing employment by type and amount, and densities of industrial, commercial and institutional
development.
Much of this information is available from the 2000 and later census materials; other information is
gathered from state and local sources. This data is contained in East Central's data and GIS files for
each sewer service area.
REFINEMENT OF GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The conceptual and philosophical bases for sewer service area planning are the goals, objectives
and policies. As stated earlier, the service area planning process has become much more complex
since it was first initiated. In response to changing conditions, major refinements were made to the
original 1990 goals, objectives and policies over the years. This effort was accomplished early in
the planning process in order to give direction to decisions involving the amount of growth in a
given service area, especially the allocation and location of future growth.
A significant policy change involves the requirement of adopted community comprehensive plans
prior to SSA plan updates in the urbanized areas for the year 2000. An additional change involves
urban service delivery criteria which recommend thresholds and standards for levels of urban
services. The goals, objectives and policies are included in Appendix D of the plan.
FORECAST OF URBAN GROWTH
The forecasting of urban growth and development within the East Central region involves two
primary analytical processes. These are 1) population projections and related dwelling unit and
employment estimates, and 2) allocation of land use acreage. This process answers the question of
the quantity and location of new growth. The process utilizes the sewer service area policies and
various planning and development standards as a technical basis.
Population Projections
Population projections are the key factor in forecasting urban growth. The projections used are the
2000-2030 Department of Administration (DOA) population projections by five year increments for
individual counties. DOA utilizes the cohort component method of population projection. These are
the official state projections, consistent with U.S. Bureau of Census State of Wisconsin projections.
The DOA county projections are required to be used as control totals in accordance with Wis.
Admin. Code NR-121 for the development of sewer service area plans. A detailed description of the
population projection process is included in the East Central report Population Characteristics of the
East Central Region, October, 2004. The official DOA projections have been updated for this plan
using the DOA annual population estimates for the counties and individual MCD's.
East Central has developed a process for distributing the county population projections to the minor
civil division (MCD) level. This estimating process uses the "share-of-the-county trending
methodology." This methodology is used for all communities within the East Central region, with
March 8, 2011
67
the exception of the Fox Cities, Oshkosh, Sherwood and Fond du Lac. In these areas, a special
procedure is used which establishes "urban area" control totals. These control totals are then
allocated to Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ's) in the Fox Cities, Oshkosh and Sherwood areas
and Special Analysis Zones (SAZ's) in the Fond du Lac area. This special projection process is
needed because of the complex jurisdictional interrelationships of cities, villages and sanitary
districts within these areas.
Residential Development
In addition to population projections, household size and housing densities are required to
determine residential land needs. Household formation rates are estimated and translated into
household size. The household size thus represents a typical dwelling unit which can be compared
to population projections for estimating future dwelling units. The household size for the East
Central region has been steadily declining and is anticipated to continue to decline. Thus, an
anomaly occurs in which a community may not experience an increase in population, but still form
new households which require new housing construction.
Once household size is established, residential development densities and the mixture of
single-family/multifamily uses is determined. The number of dwelling units per acre is determined
from existing residential development densities for the three major urban areas using recent
subdivision plats for calculation purposes. Planned (future) densities are based on either locally
adopted land use plan policies or, in the case where plans did not exist or a density was not
specified, an assumption was made that existing densities will continue into the future.
The mix of residential development is determined from existing land use and building permit
records from the various communities. The residential mix varies greatly from community to
community.
Community specific mixes are used for freestanding communities; however,
standardized splits for the Fox Cities, Sherwood and Fond du Lac areas are developed and applied
within the growth forecast method.
Population projections divided by household size establishes the number of dwelling units. The
number of dwelling units by type (single or multifamily) divided by the density per acre results in
the number of acres of residential land required. The resultant acreage is allocated as residential
growth for land areas within each planning area.
Non-Residential Development
Forecasts of nonresidential development are also based upon population projections for sewer
service area planning. There is, however, a significant difference between the methodology used
for the three urban areas and the outlying rural planning areas. Within the urban areas the
population projections plus a commuter variable serve as a basis for estimating future employment.
These employment estimates are used in conjunction with documented employment densities
(number of employees per acre) for various land use types and employment categories to
determine acreage needs for future nonresidential employment. Similar to the household
participation rates for calculating dwelling units, labor force participation rates are used to calculate
employment for various employment categories. After future employment is estimated for
March 8, 2011
68
commercial and industrial uses, densities are applied (employees per acre) and total acres of the
land needs are calculated. This acreage is then allocated within particular planning areas.
In the outlying areas, a much simpler process for forecasting nonresidential growth is required,
because of deficiencies in labor force and employment data available for small communities.
Furthermore, because these communities have a small commercial and industrial base, a refined
process for estimating future employment could be subject to extreme error.
Local initiative for promoting development is a greater factor in future growth than statistical trends.
A simple forecast method is used which calculates the existing amount of nonresidential
development per capita within the area then multiplies this amount by the population growth for
the planning period resulting in the amount of non-residential acreage required.
Growth Allocation
After the amount of growth is calculated for residential and nonresidential uses within each planning
area, the process of allocating this growth acreage is undertaken. The allocation process (where
growth should occur) is complex, and must integrate service area growth policies, planning
standards and criteria, local politics, as well as historical and market growth trends for a particular
planning area. The allocation process establishes the future growth areas within each sewer service
area.
A major product of the allocation process is the mapping of growth areas. Again, the project’s GIS
files are used to designate these growth areas. The following criteria and standards are utilized in
the designation of growth areas:
1. All areas within a planning area which are currently served with public sanitary sewers shall be
designated sewer service areas. Areas along existing and proposed (WDNR approved) sewer
collector or interceptor lines (forcemains excluded) shall be designated sewer service areas.
The depth of the sewer service area boundary line shall be to the average lot depth (maximum
400 feet) bordering the sewer or where average lot depths cannot be distinguished to line 200
feet from the sewer line. Development within this area is generally considered to be serviceable
by a private sewer lateral.
2. Unsewered areas of development within close proximity to existing sanitary sewer lines where
the cost-effectiveness of the extension of sewers is not questionable shall be included in the
service area. These areas have generally been designated as an urban development area.
Where the cost-effectiveness of sewering areas of existing development is questionable, these
areas shall be designated with the approval of WDNR wastewater facility plans.
3. Areas of existing development with approved wastewater facility plans shall be designated
sewer service areas. (Note: Various areas of existing development previously designated have
been dropped because of lack of approved wastewater facilities plans.)
4. The acreage allocations of future development areas should approximate residential,
commercial, industrial and institutional growth projections. Once final acreage is determined a
March 8, 2011
69
20% "market factor" of developable acreage will be added to adjust for land development
flexibility, unless otherwise noted.
5. Environmentally sensitive areas shall be excluded from the sewer service area.
6. Holding tank service areas shall be designated for existing large holding tanks defined in NR113
and for areas of existing development where no cost-effective alternative to the installation of a
large holding tank is available. The cost-effective analysis is to be prepared by the owner. All
large and individual holding tank wastes are disposed of in accordance with NR113.
The standards and criteria for allocating future growth areas are policy based. These considerations
are:
1. Urban development patterns should incorporate planned areas of mixed use and density that
are clustered and compatible with adjacent uses.
2. The allocation of future urban development should maximize the use of existing urban facilities
and services.
3. Future urban development should be encouraged to infill vacant developable lands within
communities and then staged outward adjacent to existing development limits.
4. Future commercial and industrial development should expand upon existing areas and be
readily accessible to major transportation systems.
5. The boundaries of urban development should consider natural and man-made features such as
ridge lines, streams and major highways.
6. Residential land use patterns should maximize their accessibility to public and private supporting
facilities.
7. Urban development should be directed to land suitable for development and discouraged on
unsuitable land, such as floodplains, areas of high bedrock, and areas of high groundwater.
8. Environmentally sensitive areas shall be excluded from the sewer service area to protect water
quality.
9. Future urban development should pose no significant adverse impacts to surface or groundwater.
10. Urban development should be located in areas which can be conveniently and economically
served by public facilities.
11. The waiver of acreage allocations based on density standards for large lot developments will be
considered if the installation of sewers is cost-effective and the community adopts a specific site
development plan and subdivision plat for the area specifying no smaller subdivision of parcels
will be allowed.
March 8, 2011
70
12. The allocations should be consistent with adopted local comprehensive plans within the
planning area.
Combined with the policy-based criteria for allocating future development areas are various
considerations involving the direction of growth trends and short term "market" factors. These
considerations primarily involve experienced judgments by planning staff and consultations with
local planning and development officials.
Early in the service area planning process, a policy decision was made that the total allocated
growth acreage for individual sewer service areas as delineated in the 1995 adopted plans and
subsequent amendments would not be reduced in quantity. This policy was applied to all sewer
service areas which have a sewerage system or which have WDNR approved wastewater facilities
plans for a sewerage system. The impact of this policy is that the areas available for future growth
in various sewer service areas sometimes are greater than the updated forecast growth which is to
be allocated. The result of this policy is that there are fewer service areas where the existing
service area boundaries need to be expanded.
PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Citizen participation during the update of the service area plans has been and is encouraged
throughout the process. In this service area planning update, Goals, Objectives and Policies were
refined in conjunction with the Transportation/Land Use Plan update process. Ad hoc Technical
Advisory Committees (TACs) were formed and refined the policies during 2004 and 2005.
General public participation is sought from communities and counties during the plan update
process through individual meetings with the entities. Public information meetings were held for
each sewer service area once draft maps were completed. The purpose of sewer service area
planning, the planning process, existing conditions of the service area and growth forecasts are
explained. As a follow-up to these meetings (in smaller communities these meetings are combined) additional meetings are held for communities within each sewer service area to address
specific issues. The designated service area boundaries are reviewed as part of these meetings.
Public information meetings are listed in Appendix A of the service area plan. A final public hearing
is noticed and held as part of the Community Facilities Committee meeting and approval.
ADOPTION AND PUBLICATION OF FINAL PLANS
Each individual sewer service area is adopted by the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission as an element of the Commission's regional land use plan. After adoption, the plans are
submitted to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for certification as an element of the
Fox River Water Quality Management Plan or appropriate river basin plan. After WDNR certification
the plan becomes effective and copies of the final plans are distributed to the affected communities.
March 8, 2011
71
SEWER SERVICE AREA AMENDMENT AND UPDATE PROCESS – August, 2004
BACKGROUND
The East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission has adopted "An Amendment Policy and
Procedure For Sewer Service Areas" to enable sewer service area plans to be amended in response
to changing conditions and community plans. This procedure provides a flexible, yet equitable and
uniform basis for revising sewer service area boundaries. This chapter was updated, with input
from the Land Use Advisory Committee, during 1999/2000 as part of addressing policy issues
related to the Long-Range Fox Cities, Oshkosh, and Fond du Lac Transportation/Land Use Plan
Addendum and certain provisions will apply to the communities illustrated in Exhibit 10.
When an amendment is requested, East Central recommends that a representative from the
government entity with Designated Management Agency (DMA) status meet with East Central staff
to discuss the proposal prior to submission. Most documentation and questions needed for the
evaluation of the amendment can be addressed at that time.
EAST CENTRAL REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION
East Central's Community Facilities Committee will review the proposed amendment within
approximately 30 days of receipt of the request. The review will include a staff evaluation of the
consistency of the proposal with East Central's amendment policies and criteria. The review will
also include an evaluation of comments and recommendations received from local units of
government and agencies notified of the proposal by East Central. The applicant may be requested
to appear at the Community Facilities Committee meeting if there are significant issues involved.
The Community Facilities Committee shall recommend approval or disapproval of the amendment.
Upon approval, the amendment request and Commission recommendation(s) shall be submitted to
the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to request revision of the applicable Water Quality
Management Plan.
WDNR REVIEW AND APPROVAL
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources will review the East Central recommendations for
the service area amendment. If the service area amendment does not involve an area greater than
1,000 acres or greater than 5 percent of the total service area the Department should approve the
amendment and certify the applicable Water Quality Management Plan within approximately 45
days after submittal. If the proposal is over 1,000 acres or 5 percent of the total service area,
and/or if the project involves the development of an Environmentally Sensitive Area the Department
may require the preparation of an environmental assessment statement under NR-150 with public
comment period on Type 2 Actions. This may lengthen the approval period to three months or
greater. Once WDNR decision is made, and if approved, East Central can review sewer extensions
and submit comments to the WDNR for sewer extension plan approval.
March 8, 2011
72
Exhibit 10– Sewer Service Area Amendment Standards And Update Procedures
Application Area
T. KAUKAUNA
T. VANDENBROEK
GREENVILLE
T. GRAND
CHUTE
LITTLE CHUTE
C. KAUKAUNA
KIMBERLY
BUCHANAN
V. COMB.
LOCKS
APPLETON
T. MENASHA
HARRISON
C. MENASHA
T. CLAYTON
V. SHERWOOD
C. NEENAH
NEENAH
T. VINLAND
OSHKOSH
ALGOMA
C. OSHKOSH
BROTHERTOWN
NEKIMI
BLACK WOLF
CALUMET
FRIENDSHIP
TAYCHEEDAH
V. N FOND DU LAC
C. FOND DU LAC
T. FOND DU LAC
EMPIRE
March 8, 2011
73
The formal Sewer Service Area amendment process includes the following elements:
Section I: Amendment Policies
A. Sewer service area boundaries may be modified (acreage swap) provided no increase in
the total acreage of the specific sewer service area occurs. The newly added area shall
have Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) delineated prior to the amendment
approval. The land comprised of an ESA will not require a swap for and equal amount
of acreage. Acreage swaps may occur on a regional basis within the same sewer
service area. (i.e., added and deleted acreage does not have to be within the same
community). Swap amendments less than 100 acres in size which do not have
designated ESAs within, or immediately adjacent to, the area to be added may be
approved by the Community Facilities Committee only and shall not require the approval
of the WDNR so long as they are non-controversial and are consistent with the
community’s adopted comprehensive plan. The WDNR will be notified of all Commission
approved swaps and will allow 14 days for any voluntary WDNR review and comment
prior to Commission staff sending out approval letters. All review procedures and
criteria still apply to such amendments (policy amendment approved by WDNR on
08/26/04).
B. Sewer service area boundaries may be swapped on an acre for acre basis (vacant,
developable lands only) provided a documented need for a sanitary sewer collection
system exists for areas of existing urban development. Newly added area will have
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) delineated prior to the amendment approval.
The land comprised of an ESA will not require a swap for and equal amount of acreage.
Acreage swaps may occur on a regional basis within the same sewer service area (i.e.,
added and deleted acreage does not have to be within the same community).
C. Sewer service area boundaries may be expanded (overall increase in net developable
acreage) provided a documented need for sanitary sewers to serve a proposed unique
facility or development exists.
D. Sewer service areas may be expanded (overall increase in net developable acreage) to
provide the flexibility to accommodate unanticipated short-term development based
upon accelerated growth which exceeds the forecasted total service area growth rate in
the plan. The requesting DMA shall have the community(ies) certify that the proposed
amendment area is required for reason-able community growth and is consistent with
locally adopted land use plans.
E. Sewer service area boundaries may be modified by the re-designation of previously
identified environmentally sensitive areas consistent with all the following standards:
1. The environmentally sensitive area is immediately adjacent to an existing
sewer service area.
2. Appropriate local, state and federal environmental permits are granted for the
proposed development prior to the final approval of the amendment request.
March 8, 2011
74
3. Major re-designations shall pose no significant adverse water quality impacts.
Major re-designations include:
a. removal of any mapped wetland area for sewered development unless
resulting from an activity exempted by state administrative rules governing
wetland protection [NR 117.05(2)] or state approved rezoning of wetlands.
b. any change which would reduce a delineated floodway of any navigable
stream or river, or which would remove any area below the ordinary high
water mark of a navigable stream, pond or lake.
c. any change resulting in the total removal or in the continuity of any corridor
segment including floodways, wetlands, shoreland buffer strips or steep
slopes adjacent to water bodies. The water quality benefit that was
associated with the portion of the corridor removed must be provided for in
the development.
4. The re-designated acreage will be added to the Sewer Service Area’s total
acreage.
F. Sewer service area boundaries may be modified or expanded to correct an error in the
maps, data, projections or allocations of the adopted Sewer Service Area Plan.
Section II: Amendment Criteria
Any proposed amendment shall be reviewed according to the following criteria:
A.
The cost-effectiveness of the proposed amendment will be compared to other
alternatives. East Central may require this determination from the applicant.
Amendments submitted under Policy B shall require such a determination from the
applicant, and;
B.
The environmental impacts of the proposed amendment shall be assessed in
accordance with the criteria established in the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources environmental assessment checklist. The Commission will evaluate the
ability of the existing sewerage facilities to transport and treat the projected flows and
will provide a water quality evaluation statement. East Central may also prescribe
safeguards or impose additional conditions deemed necessary to protect the water
quality in the area.
C.
Amendments within the Urbanized Area SSA’s (see Exhibit 10) should be consistent
with East Central's Long-Range Transportation/Land Use Plan Addendum’s goals,
objectives and policies, particularly for density standards, as follows:
March 8, 2011
75
Policy 1.3 conformance:
a) The average net residential density of the buildable plat area is more than or
equal to 1 unit per acre; or
b) The community has illustrated that development proposal meets the density
requirements by being part of an overall “mixed density” concept documented
in its local land use plan which meets the policy intent. (Note: Should
amendments occur over time primarily for low density development which
does not meet the one acre requirement, and no higher density development
occurs, Section V, Urbanized Area Standard (1)(d) will apply at the next
scheduled plan update).
c) If an amendment takes place which includes lands planned for residential
development, without being platted prior to the amendment, ECWRPC will
require an assurance from the community in the form of a resolution stating
that the development will meet these requirements. At the time of platting,
ECWRPC will require that a copy of the preliminary plat be submitted for
review.
D.
Amendment areas under Section I Policy A And D shall have a common boundary with
the current sewer service area and shall not create a void within the service area.
E.
Policy B (existing development) amendments must be contained within an approved
SSA Planning Area. This boundary can be reviewed and considered for modification as
a separate process if necessary.
F.
Amendment areas under Section I Policy A and B involving the "swap" of land acreage
shall, to the extent possible, utilize consistent land use areas on an acre for acre basis,
based on the community’s locally adopted and Commission certified Comprehensive
Plan (for Urbanized Area communities). Should the community not have enough of a
particular type of land designated in its locally adopted Comprehensive Plan to allow
for a swap, the community should consider utilizing the “regional swap” policy prior to
submitting the amendment under Policy D. Any community affected by a “regional
swap” shall be notified and given an opportunity to comment prior to Commission
approval of the amendment.
G.
Amendments submitted under Policy C – Unique Facilities, not only fit the definition
contained in this plan, but the applicant must also submit additional information
which illustrates that all impacts, including secondary land use impacts, and their
effects on water quality, transportation, and public service provision be addressed
prior to the Commission recommending approval of the amendment.
Such
amendment requests must also be consistent with locally adopted Comprehensive
Plans. Amendments under this policy may be approved conditionally by the
Commission so that other necessary approvals can occur concurrently.
March 8, 2011
76
Section III: Amendment Procedures
Proposed sewer service area amendments shall be reviewed according to the following procedure:
A.
Requests for sewer service area amendments should be made by the governmental
entity that has received Designated Management Agency (DMA) status and that will be
expected to serve the area. Units of government seeking an amendment to the sewer
service area boundary should transmit a letter requesting the amendment to East
Central along with the following documentation:
1.
A map of the proposed expansion area and, if required, any area to be deleted
(swapped) which affects the boundary modification;
2.
Estimates of existing and anticipated population, wastewater generation and
means of collection from the area;
3.
A description of the type of existing development and/or the type of
development expected to occur;
4.
Ability of the treatment facility to treat the anticipated wastewater;
5.
Methods of stormwater management and regulation for the added service area
and surrounding areas which may be impacted; and
6.
Documentation that all property owners in areas proposed to be deleted
(swapped) were notified of this request by the unit of government seeking the
amendment. Any landowner potentially affected by the removal of property
from the SSA shall be notified by the requesting entity at least 14 days prior to
the scheduled Community Facilities Committee meeting at which the
amendment will be addressed. Failure to do so will result in the tabling of the
amendment request until the next regularly scheduled meeting (policy
amendment approved by WDNR on 08/26/04).
7.
Plan Commission or Board action as required under Section I - Policy D.
8.
Amendments submitted under Section 1 – Policy B, for Urbanized Area
communities (see Exhibit) will require that additional information be submitted
and criteria be met as follows:
future
a) Documentation that the community’s locally adopted Comprehensive Plan
illustrates the area as a future urban growth area which will be provided a
full range of services as spelled out in the Urbanized Area Long-Range
Transportation/Land Use Plan Addendum’s density standards, and;
March 8, 2011
77
b) A determination of the cost-effectiveness of providing public sanitary sewer
versus on-site system replacement.
This determination should be
consistent with NR-110 requirements, and;
c) Documentation that approximately 30% of the existing on-site systems
within the proposed amendment area be considered failing (direct need),
and;
d) Documentation that approximately 30% or more of the balance of existing
on-site systems within the proposed amendment area are subject to failure
based on the physical condition of the on-site system itself and / or the
physical characteristics of the subject site (indirect need);
Documentation for c) and d) above can be in the form of: copies of County or
State orders for on-site system replacement; copies of existing on-site system
inspection reports; letters from the County Sanitarian indicating that the
systems are failing or have the potential to fail; or documentation of recent
private well tests which show bacterial contamination likely resulting from onsite system failure.
B.
Based on this information the Community Facilities Committee, designated as the
review committee by the East Central's bylaws, will review the proposed amendment
to determine whether it meets the standards set forth in the Sewer Service Area
Amendment Process. If no significant adverse water quality impacts are involved, the
East Central shall recommend approval of the Plan amendment and submit it to the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for State plan certification.
C.
Requests for amendments under Policy F pertaining strictly to the addition of
‘transporting sewers’ (i.e. interceptors and forcemains which do not directly service
new development) may be initiated by East Central staff upon written request of the
DMA and would be submitted directly the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
for review and certification without the need for Community Facilities Committee
approval. The Department would review and certify such amendments within 5 to 10
working days from receipt of staff’s submittal. Please note that the information needs,
as noted above, as well as the conformance with existing review criteria are still
required for East Central and the Department to process such amendments (policy
amendment approved by WDNR on 08/26/04).
Section IV: Appeal
If an applicant feels that a hardship exists in the strict interpretation and application of the
amendment standards and criteria, consideration may be given to providing relief through a
variance subject to the following requirements:
A. The hardship to the community is significant and widespread owing to substantial
pre-existing financial or legal commitments for sanitary sewer service.
March 8, 2011
78
B. The major objectives of the sewer service area plans can be met.
C.
The appeal shall be submitted to the Chairman of East Central for action at a regularly
scheduled meeting of the Commission. Further appeals may be submitted to
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
Section V: SSA Plan Update Procedures and Standards
Even though local, regional, and state levels of government engage in planning activities to
direct their future, individual or multiple conditions can change over time. Some can be
predicted and handled proactively (Comm. 83, demographics, etc.), while some occur rapidly
and generally without much warning (economic conditions, regional growth patterns and rates,
market demands, etc.). Sewer Service Area Plans are meant to be a proactive type of plan
which identifies future sewered growth areas based on cost-effectiveness service provision,
water quality, and regional cooperation/coordination. When conditions change, these plans
need to be updated to reflect those changes. This section describes the conditions under which
Sewer Service Area Plans are updated and how previously developed and approved regional
goals, objectives, and policies (i.e. Urbanized Area Long Range Transportation/Land Use Plan
Addendum) will apply prior to, during, or after the Update process.
Minimum Update Procedures and Standards (for all Sewer Service Areas)
SSA Plans will be updated on an approximate 5-year interval. Funding, staff availability, urban
growth demands, and regional/state policy changes/proposals may alter this time interval.
When updated, the following items will be addressed:
1) A review and update of population, housing, and employment trends and projections;
2) A review and update of land use demands based on socio-economic conditions and
projections;
3) A review and update of existing physical conditions, including:
(a) Existing land uses
(b) Proposed land uses (based on local, county, regional, and state plans)
(c) Water quality and natural resource (ESA) characteristics, changes, and issues;
4) A description of relevant events since the last plan update pertaining to sanitary sewer or
having an impact on future sewer service, including:
(a) Major WWTF improvements or changes;
(b) Major collection system improvements or changes;
(c) Local governmental changes (i.e., sanitary district formations, intergovernmental
boundary / service agreements, Comprehensive Plan updates, regulations and
requirements, etc.)
(d) SSA Plan amendments and acreage consumption since the last plan update
5) A review and modification of mapping elements, if necessary, to accommodate future
sewered growth and development, including:
March 8, 2011
79
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Proposed major sewer system improvements and/or regional connections
A revised twenty-year Sewer Service Area Boundary;
A revised forty-fifty year Planning Area Boundary;
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
6) A review of local governmental actions and regulations which have implemented the Sewer
Service Area Plan;
7) An update of citizen information/education and participation efforts;
8) A review of the institutional structure for plan update and amendment review and approval
and for plan implementation;
9) A review / revision of goals, objectives, and policies, if necessary;
10) The development of recommendations and strategies for plan implementation.
Urbanized Area Procedures And Standards
The Urbanized Area Procedures and Standards will apply to the following communities: City of
Appleton, City of Kaukauna, Village of Combined Locks, Village of Kimberly, Village of Little
Chute, Town of Buchanan, Town of Grand Chute, Town of Greenville, Town of Kaukauna, Town
of Vandenbroek, City of Menasha, Village of Sherwood, Town of Harrison, City of Fond du Lac,
Village of North Fond du Lac, Town of Calumet, Town of Empire, Town of Fond du Lac, Town of
Friendship, Town of Taycheedah, City of Neenah, City of Oshkosh, Town of Algoma, Town of
Black Wolf, Town of Menasha, Town of Neenah, Town of Nekimi, Town of Oshkosh, Town of
Vinland.
The Urbanized Area Standards and Procedures include the above listed “Minimum” items, plus
the following reviews of local conformance with policies and requirements as spelled out in the
Urbanized Area Long-Range Transportation/Land Use Plan Addendum, including:
1)
Addendum Policy 1.3 Conformance - A review of local development densities within the
SSA occurring between plan updates and their conformance with the minimum residential
density requirement will need to be met as follows:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Areas within the SSA prior to WDNR certification date of the 1997 (or subsequent)
Sewer Service Area Plan Update are not required to meet this policy, however;
ECWRPC staff will consider new residential developments which have occurred
after this date as part of the overall density calculation (therefore this will not
penalize communities for recent development meeting the criteria and being
“banked” for lower densities elsewhere within the SSA).
Areas allocated and approved as part of the 1997 (or subsequent) Plan Update
are required to meet policy
Areas amended to SSA after 1997 update are required to meet policy (see SSA
Plan Amendment Policies and Procedures section for additional information)
March 8, 2011
80
(d)
If an individual community does not meet the density requirements spelled out in
the Transportation/Land Use Plan Addendum it will not be eligible for additional
Sewer Service Area acreage allocations in subsequent plan updates.
2) Addendum Policy 1.4 – A review of local unsewered development patterns and locations and
advisory recommendations pertaining to such information;
3) Comprehensive Plan Guidelines – A review of local land use plan for conformance with the
Guidelines and the communities’ plan certification status.
Section VI: Definitions
Sewer Service Area:
An area defined and approved by the WDNR under Wisconsin
Administrative Code, NR-121 with the assistance, and recommendation from, the East Central
Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission and input from the communities involved and the
general public. This boundary delineates areas which can be provided public sanitary sewer
more cost-effectively than on-site treatment methods over a 20-year period. ECWRPC
determines this boundary based on the following information (all of which are not necessarily
listed in NR-121):
1) Definition and mapping of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs);
2) Justified acreage allocations based on projected 20-year growth and development using
ECWRPC accepted methodologies;
3) Projected available 20-year capacity of wastewater treatment plant from publicly sewered
development and established holding tank receiving areas;
4) Facilities Plan listed projects and improvements;
5) Projected available 20-year capacity of interceptor sewers, force-mains, and lift stations;
6) Location of existing sanitary sewer lines;
7) Existing and projected 20-year development patterns (based on local land use plan and
zoning maps;
8) Proximity to development with known failing privately owned treatment works (POTWs)
(also referred to as on-site wastewater treatment systems);
9) Ability to provide recommended levels of urban service per the Addendum matrices. (This
would be addressed further as criteria for future allocations and amendments to the SSA);
10) Intergovernmental growth / service agreements (advisory only); and
March 8, 2011
81
11) The boundary itself is located, for administrative use, on the location of:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs);
Watershed, sub-watershed, and drainage basin boundaries;
One lot depth (200-foot) buffer from existing sewer line locations;
Quarter-section lines based on the Public Land Survey System (PLSS);
MCD and Sanitary District Boundaries;
Road centerlines;
Lift station service areas (topography and depth); and
Gravity and interceptor sewer service areas (topography and depth)
Sewer Service Area Planning Area:
An area defined and approved by the WDNR under
Wisconsin Administrative Code, NR-121 with the assistance, and recommendation from, the East
Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission and input from the communities involved and
the general public. This is an area where urban growth is anticipated to occur over a longer
period of time (40 to 50 years) where short-term conflicting land use development should be
discouraged. This boundary serves the purpose of delineating long-term (40-50 year), costeffective, urban growth areas. ECWRPC determines this boundary based on the following
information (all of which are not necessarily listed in NR-121):
1) Definition and mapping of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs);
2) Justified acreage allocations based on projected 50-year growth and development using
ECWRPC accepted methodologies;
3) Projected available 50-year capacity of wastewater treatment plant from publicly sewered
development and establish holding tank receiving areas;
4) Projected available 50-year capacity of interceptor sewers, forcemains, and lift stations;
5) Existing and projected 20-year development patterns (based on local land use plan and
zoning maps);
6) Location of existing development with known problems, or potential risk for on-site system
failures;
7) Intergovernmental growth / service agreements; and
8) The boundary itself is located, for administrative use, on the location of:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs);
Watershed, sub-watershed, and drainage area boundaries;
Nearest quarter-section line of the Public Land Survey System (PLSS);
MCD and Sanitary District boundaries;
Wastewater treatment plant service areas (when multiple plants available);
Road centerlines;
March 8, 2011
82
g) Lift station service areas (topography and depth);
h) Interceptor sewer service areas (topography and depth); and
i) Extraterritorial review jurisdiction of involved incorporated communities (this
would be utilized only at the discretion of all affected communities).
Existing Urban Development: A geographic area with densities of development suitable for the
efficient and economic provision of urban services such as sanitary sewer, water, transportation and
storm drainage (e.g. single family residential development greater than two units per gross acre).
Unique Facility:
A proposed facility that, regardless of location, is considered to be
“unanticipated”; and is of “regional importance”. “Unanticipated” is defined as not being
illustrated in a local community’s or county’s Comprehensive Plan, and was not anticipated or
projected in the Sewer Service Area Plan during the previous update. “Regional importance” is
defined as facility which, if constructed, will provide a widespread benefit to multiple local
governmental jurisdictions within the Sewer Service Area. Examples of facilities fitting this
criteria include state prisons, county landfills, regional public specialty facilities such as EAA,
public museums or performing arts centers, churches, private (commercial) specialty facilities
such as the Kaukauna dog track, opportunistic park/recreation/open space acquisitions, public
golf courses, other state or federal facilities as deemed appropriate. Not eligible are any type of
school facility, local government administrative office or facility, residential golf course
developments, local parks, private campgrounds, local airports or related facilities. These types
and locations of future facilities should be addressed, and their needs quantified, in the
communities local land use plans and the sewer service area plan update process.
These
listings may be added to from time to time based on individual SSA Plan Amendment proposals.
Those specific facilities not listed above would be reviewed based on their merits and
conformance with the intent of this definition.
Expansion Area: The geographic area proposed to be added to the existing sewer service area
through the amendment process.
Cost-effectiveness: Analysis of the long term costs for providing sanitary sewerage system
alternatives. The analysis shall include monetary costs, environmental costs, as well as other nonmonetary costs consistent with NR-110.
Environmentally Sensitive Area: Geographic areas consisting of all lakes and streams shown on
USGS quadrangle maps and their adjacent shoreland buffer areas. Also all wetlands shown on the
state Wisconsin Wetland Inventory Maps and floodways as delineated on the official Federal
Emergency Management Administration Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps.
March 8, 2011
I
Appendix A – Plan Development & Approval Documentation
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS
Quarterly Commission Meeting
ECWRPC Offices
April 30, 2010
The meeting of the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission was called to order by Chair
Dick Koeppen at 10:05 A.M.
I.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II.
MOMENT OF SILENT MEDITATION
III.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken showing the following attendance:
Commission Members Present
Bill Barribeau ................................................................................................. Calumet County
Patrick Laughrin ............................................................................................. Calumet County
Bob Hermes .............................................................................................. Menominee County
Robert “Toby” Paltzer ................................................................................. Outagamie County
Clifford Sanderfoot ..................................................................................... Outagamie County
Tim Hanna ................................................................................................ Outagamie County
Helen Nagler .............................................................................................. Outagamie County
Paul Hirte .................................................................................................. Outagamie County
Ken Capelle .................................................................................................. Shawano County
M. Eugene Zeuske ......................................................................................... Shawano County
Dick Koeppen ................................................................................................Waupaca County
Duane Brown ................................................................................................Waupaca County
Norman Weiss ............................................................................................ Waushara County
Neal Strehlow ............................................................................................ Waushara County
Mark Harris ............................................................................................... Winnebago County
David Albrecht ........................................................................................... Winnebago County
Mark Rohloff (Alt. for Paul Esslinger) ............................................................ Winnebago County
Ernie Bellin .................................................................................................Winnebago County
Jim Erdman ...............................................................................................Winnebago County
Ken Robl ................................................................................................... Winnebago County
Commission Members Excused
Clarence Wolf ................................................................................................ Calumet County
Ruth Winter .............................................................................................. Menominee County
Jeremy Johnson (Alt. for Elizabeth Moses) ................................................... Menominee County
Marshal Giese ............................................................................................... Shawano County
DuWayne Federwitz ......................................................................................Waupaca County
Brian Smith....................................................................................................Waupaca County
Robert Maloney ........................................................................................... Waushara County
Commission Members Absent
Jim Steineke .............................................................................................. Outagamie County
March 8, 2011
VIII
Staff Members Present
Eric Fowle ................................................................................................... Executive Director
Walt Raith ................................................................................................... Assistant Director
Kara Homan ................................................................................................ Associate Planner
Dave Moesch ............................................................................................... Associate Planner
Kathy Thunes ............................................................................................... Principal Planner
Todd Verboomen ....................................................................................................... Planner
Tom Baron ................................................................................................................ Planner
Nick Musson .............................................................................................................. Planner
Trish Nau ....................................................................................................... GIS Coordinator
Mike Zuege .................................................................................................... GIS Specialist II
Vicky Johnson .................................................................................Administrative Coordinator
Angie Cottrell ........................................................................................................... Controller
Others Present
Alice Connors ................................................................................................. Calumet County
Larry Timm ................................................................................................. Waushara County
Mike King ................................................................................................................. WisDOT
Matt Halada .............................................................................................................. WisDOT
Joe Galarowicz ................................................................................. Kerber, Rose & Associates
Chair Koeppen noted that a quorum was present.
A. Introduction of alternates and guests.
Chair Koeppen introduced the new commissioners Alice Connors, Calumet County and Larry
Timm, Waushara County. He noted that Jerry Erdmann, Shawano County is also a new
commissioner and will be arriving late.
Chair Koeppen introduced Mike King and Matt Halada from WisDOT.
IV.
Statement of Compliance with Wis. Stats. Sec. 19.84 Regarding Open Meetings Requirements
Compliance with Wisconsin’s open meeting requirements was acknowledged.
V.
Public Comment
There being none made Chair Koeppen moved on to item VI.
VI.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Barribeau motioned to approve the agenda, seconded by Mr. Paltzer. The motion passed
with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
VII.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE January 29, 2010 QUARTERLY MEETING
Mr. Brown moved to approve the summary of proceedings from the January 29, 2010 Quarterly
meetings, seconded by Mr. Weiss. Motion passed with 20 ayes and 0 nays.
VIII.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
a. Introduction of New Staff Member, Nick Musson/Other Staff News
Mr. Fowle introduced the Commission’s new transportation planner, Nick Musson.
March 8, 2011
IX
Mr. Fowle informed the Commissioners that Melissa Kramer Badtke, Transportation
Planner/SRTS Program Coordinator, who just returned from maternity leave, will be going to
a part time position or 30 hours per week May 1. He also noted that Kara Homan who is
expecting her first child will be going on maternity leave in June.
b. Commissioner News
Mr. Fowle noted that there have been some Commissioner changes due to the elections.
The most notable is Vice-Chair, Marshal Giese from Shawano County, losing his seat on the
County Board. Mr. Giese was in line to be appointed Commission Chair at this year’s Annual
Meeting. Jerry Erdmann was appointed to succeed Mr. Giese as the Shawano County Board
Chair.
c.
Recent Awards & Regulations (WLIA, WAPA, United Way)
Mr. Fowle announced that the Commission received an award from the Wisconsin Chapter of
the American Planning Association (WAPA) recognizing the Commission for its extraordinary
efforts in comprehensive planning within the region.
At the Wisconsin Land Information Association (WLIA) Conference, Mike Zuege of the
Commission staff was awarded the President’s Choice Award and first place award in the
poster category for the Menominee County/Town comprehensive plan map that he
submitted.
Mr. Fowle said that for the second year, the Commission has won the silver award from
United Way.
d. Media Reports
Mr. Fowle briefly explained the newspaper articles that were included in the Commissioner’s
packets.
IX.
PRESENTATION ON USH 41 PLANNING & EXPANSION – Mike King, WisDOT
Mr. King handed out a schedule of projects for USH 41 and stated that USH 41 will be under
construction until 2016/2017. He continued by explaining some of the various projects.
WisDOT is committed to keeping four lanes open at all times except at non-peak times like at
night in Winnebago County. Seventeen miles in Winnebago County will be reconstructed, along
with the addition of new lanes, reconstruction of seven interchanges and the addition of
roundabouts. Other projects in Winnebago County involve the closing of the HWY 21
interchange in 2012; the three week closure of the north bound ramps in 2011; eight lanes
across Lake Butte des Morts; USH 45 interchange reconstruction; and the construction of a
twelve foot wide trail adjacent to 41 from 21 to Lake Butte des Morts Drive.
Mr. King highlighted some of the projects that are underway at present, such as the construction
at Washburn and Witzel and the construction of roundabouts on either side of the Witzel Avenue
overpass with a completion date of September; the Snell Road overpass; new construction just
north of HWY 45 for a new east to west connection which should be open by July; and the
construction of one of the three roundabouts at the 45 interchange with a completion date of late
August. He noted that there are incentives written into the contracts to encourage contractors to
completed projects on time or ahead of schedule.
Mr. King explained in more detail some of the future projects that will be impacting HWY 41 such
as the reconstruction of 45/41 interchange which will result in the temporary closure of HWY 45;
March 8, 2011
X
and the reconstruction of the Breezewood interchange ramps with roundabouts and the alternate
routes the trucks will be using temporarily during reconstruction.
Mr. King said that research on roundabouts have shown that they are much safer than the
traditional intersections. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety states that there are 39
percent less crashes, injuries decrease by 76 percent and fatalities decrease by about 90 percent
in roundabouts. The capacity of a traffic signal is lower than a roundabout with traffic speeds
being slower in a roundabout in order to maneuver thru. Mr. King stressed it is important to
educate individuals on the use of roundabouts and reminded them that the same traffic laws
apply as at a traffic signal regarding pedestrians.
Mr. Harris asked how much of these projects were funded with ARRA funds? Mr. King responded
he estimates that for the four major projects that were started last year it is in the $20 or $30
million range. The question was also asked how many people were employed for these projects?
Mr. King was not sure, but said that possibly a 1,000, some for a day, others longer.
X.
BUSINESS
A. Steering Committee
1. Acceptance of the Summary of Proceedings for the January 22 and March 12, 2010
Meetings.
Mr. Weiss motioned to approve the summary of Proceedings for the January 22 and
March 12 meetings, seconded by Mr. Sanderfoot. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0
nays.
2. Review and Acceptance of the CY 2009 Audit Report – Kerber, Rose & Associates, S.C.
Mr. Fowle introduced Joe Galarowicz from Kerber, Rose & Associates, the Commission’s
new auditor.
Mr. Galarowicz briefing explained the 2009 Audit and stated that 2009 financial
statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the
Commission as of December 31, 2008, and the changes in net assets and its cash flows
for the year ended in conformity with accounting principles. Referring to the State of
Net Assets he commented the item to note is the long term obligations, the unfunded
pension liability, which will be addressed in 2010 and paid off, therefore saving the
Commission interest costs. He noted that the budget to actual statement shows that the
Commission is operating close to budget.
Mr. Rohloff motioned to approve the CY 2009 Audit Report, seconded by Mr. Brown.
The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
3. 1st Quarter, 2010 Financial Report
Ms. Cottrell referred to and explained the Income Statement she handed out prior to the
meeting.
Mr. Weiss motioned to approve the 1st Quarter 2010 Financial Report, seconded by Mr.
Capelle. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
4. Proposed Resolution No. 05-10: Authorizing Commission Staff to Destroy Public
Records According to the Adopted “Records Retention Policy and Destruction
Schedule”
March 8, 2011
XI
Mr. Fowle explained that when the Commission moved two years ago, a resolution was
adopted to get on course to destroy records in a timely manner. This was not done last
year and there are two years of records to be destroyed. He requested the adoption of
Proposed Resolution No. 05-10 to authorize the Commission to move forward and
destroy the records as indicated.
Mr. Sanderfoot motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 05-10, seconded by Mr.
Harris. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
5. Proposed Resolution No. 10-10: Adopting a Public Records Access Policy to Ensure
Compliance with Wisconsin State Statutes 19.34
Mr. Fowle stated that the Commission did not have a Public Records Access Policy.
Proposed Resolution No. 10-10 adopts a public records access policy and spells out the
conditions and items that are required by the state statutes and has the proper forms and
attachments. He noted that in the event that the Commission receives a public record
request the Commission will be prepared. This will be posted in order to be in compliance.
Mr. Robl motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 10-10, seconded by Mr. Capelle.
6. Ratify Resolution No. 12-10: Authorizing the Commission to Enter into a Contract
for the Economic Development Administration (EDA) Grant Administration
Services Between the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
and City of Omro, Wisconsin
Ms. Homan explained that Resolution No. 12-10 has been preapproved and authorized by
the Steering Committee in order to meet the April 26, 2010 EDA requirement. This
resolution authorizes the Commission to contract with the City of Omro to provide grant
administration services for the EDA grant that the City received to expand their industrial
park. The resolution needs to be ratified by the full Commission.
Mr. Sanderfoot motioned to approve Resolution No. 12-10, seconded by Ms. Nagler. The
motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
B. Economic Development Committee
1. Chairman's Report (Eugene Zeuske)
2. Acceptance of the Summary of Proceedings for the January 13, 2010 meeting.
Mr. Zeuske motioned to approve the Chairman’s Report and the Summary of
Proceedings for the January 13 meeting, seconded by Mr. Brown. The motion passed
with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
3.
Proposed Resolution No. 06-10: Supporting an Independent Study of Wisconsin’s
Economic Development Competitiveness and Positioning, Conducted by the
Wisconsin Economic Development Association (WEDA), Competitive Wisconsin
Inc. (CWI), Wisconsin Counties Association (WCA), and Wisconsin Economic
Development Institute (WEDI)
Ms. Homan said that Proposed Resolution 06-10 states that the Commission supports
and endorses the preparation of the Wisconsin Economic Development Competitiveness
and Positioning Study conducted by the Wisconsin Economic Development Association
March 8, 2011
XII
(WEDA), Competitive Wisconsin Inc. (CWI), Wisconsin Counties Association (WCA), and
Wisconsin Economic Development Institute (WEDI).
Mr. Hanna motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 06-10, seconded by Mr. Brown.
4.
Proposed Resolution No. 07-10: Authorizing the Commission as an Economic
Development District to formally apply for a Second Supplemental Grant
Increase from the Economic Development Administration for its 2009-2011
Planning Partnership Grant, Commit the Required Local Share, and to Execute
the Necessary Agreements
Ms. Homan said that the Economic Development Administration indicated that there was
an additional $20,000 available that could be added to the Commission’s existing threeyear grant. Proposed Resolution No. 07-10 authorizes the Commission to commit the
required matching funds.
Ms. Nagler motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 07-10, seconded by Mr.
Hermes. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
5.
Proposed Resolution No. 11-10: Authorizing the Commission as an Economic
Development District to Formally Co-apply for an Economic Development
Administration (EDA) Community Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Grant in
Cooperation with the Bay-Lake Regional Planning Commission, and to Execute
the Necessary Agreements
Ms. Homan stated that Proposed Resolution No. 11-10 authorizes the Commission to
assist the Northeast Wisconsin International Business Development Program apply for
the EDA Community Trade Adjustment Assistance grant. The Northeast Wisconsin
International Business Development Program is a program of the Green Bay Area
Chamber of Commerce which covers multiple counties that expand the East Central
Regional Planning Commission and the Bay-Lake Regional Planning Commission areas.
EDA’s grant structure does not allow non-profits to be applicants. Bay-Lake RPC and
East Central RPC have applied as co-applicants on behalf of the Northeast Wisconsin
International Business Development Program. The total amount of the grant is $133,500
with a matched amount of $66,500 by the Northeast Wisconsin International Business
Development Program. She noted that it is written into the grant the East Central will be
receiving $5,000 to administer the grant and act as a pass through agency.
Mr. Capelle motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 11-10, seconded by Mr.
Hermes. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
6. Economic Development Activities
Mr. Fowle noted that Ms. Homan is working on a grant to USDA for funds that is not only
economic development but also includes the Fox River Heritage Parkway Project. Kathy
Thunes of the Commission staff has been working with a representative from Foth and
several communities in the area to examine the possibility that some DNR monies that
are available for abandoned plant rehabilitation or a brownfields type of program would
be suitable.
C. Open Space and Environmental Management Committee
1. Chairman's Report (Toby Paltzer)
March 8, 2011
XIII
Mr. Paltzer motioned to approve the Chairman’s Report and Summary of Proceedings of
January 12 meeting, seconded by Mr. Robl. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
3.
Open Space and Environmental Committee Activities
Mr. Fowle stated that the Commission did not receive the EPA Regional Brownfield
Assessment grant. The majority of the awarded projects were municipal level projects
not regional or collaborate type projects, which was assumed to be the focus of the
grant. The City of Oshkosh received $200,000.
Mr. Fowle said that the Commission will be apply for funding through a new program, a
joint effort from HUD, DOT and EPA on a livability initiative and grant program that lends
to the sustainability type of aspects.
Mr. Fowle said that a couple of bills that are of importance to groundwater issues were
introduced in the legislation session, but the legislation has ended its session and the
bills were not passed. One of the bills would establish provisions for groundwater
protection within designated Karst Management Areas, which would include Calumet
County. He noted that the nature of the highly susceptible fractured bedrock geology
shows the need for this legislation, but suspects that the agricultural community will be
opposed.
The second bill establishes standards and a process for designating areas in the state as
groundwater management areas. The standards vary depending on whether an area has
a confined aquifer or an unconfined aquifer. This bill would put the RPCs in a position to
develop the plans and implement them for the groundwater management area although
there does not appear to be any money involved.
D. Community Facilities Committee
1. Chairman's Report (Cliff Sanderfoot)
Mr. Sanderfoot motioned to approve the Chairman’s Report and the Summary of
Proceedings of the January 29, 2010 meeting, seconded by Mr. Brown. The motion
passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
3. Status of Darboy S.D. Sewer Service Area Amendment Appeal
Mr. Fowle stated that there has been no formal word as of this date.
4. Proposed Resolution No. 13-10: Approving the Updated Shawano Lake 2030
Sewer Service Area Plan
Mr. Verboomen said that the Shawano Lake update added 3,000 acres to the planning
area and removed approximately 1,000 acres of planning area that were associated with
wetlands and a lake management area that will never be developed. One key area that
was added to the planning area was the County’s Maple Lane Health Facility that was
identified as a long term need. Interest for public services to the facility subsided;
therefore, it was not included in the plan. After the public hearing and after the approval
of all the DMAs, interest resurfaced, therefore, if interest continues, this issue will be
handled as a SSA amendment.
March 8, 2011
XIV
The proposed plan added approximately 1,500 acres to the sewer service area, just over
350 acres is considered developed and about 1,000 acres are considered vacant. There
was a large portion of the Village of Cecil that was not served by the sewer service area
boundary; therefore that acreage was added along with a large portion of the Town of
Waukechon.
Mr. Bellin motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 13-10, seconded by Mr. Capelle.
E. Transportation Committee
1. Chairman's Report (Ken Robl)
Mr. Robl motioned to approve the Chairman’s Report and the Summary of Proceedings
of the January 19 meeting, seconded by Mr. Hirte. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0
nays.
3. Ratify Resolution No. 04-10: Amending the Transportation Improvement Program
for the Fox Cities and Oshkosh Urbanized Areas – 2010
Mr. Moesch said that Resolution No. 04-10 was approved by the Steering Committee in
March. He explained that WisDOT awarded a New Freedom grant, which is a transit
grant for the disabled to get to and from work, to the “Make The Ride Happen” Program
in Appleton. They were awarded operating funds and funds for mobility management.
The second portion of the resolution deals with amended funding changes for the
Oshkosh Transit System.
Mr. Moesch noted that both these changes were required to be included in the TIP
document.
Mr. Robl motioned to ratify Resolution No. 04-10, seconded by Mr. Strehlow. The
motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
4. Proposed Resolution No. 08-10: Amending the Transportation Improvement
Program for the Fox Cities and Oshkosh Urbanized Areas - 2010
Mr. Moesch explained that two highway projects that were in the 2007 TIP and were
delayed have now been split into two projects, USH 10/WIS 441 – E Junction WIS 114
and WIS 114/E Junction USH 10 – S Junction WIS 55. These projects are required to be
included in the TIP in order to receive funding. The projects are slated to start this year.
Mr. Robl motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 08-10, seconded by Mr. Albrecht.
5. Proposed Resolution No. 09-10: Supporting a Constitutional Amendment to
Protect the State of Wisconsin Segregated Transportation Fund
Mr. Raith said that the State has been transferring money out of the Segregated
Transportation Fund and using it for unrelated transportation projects. The money has
been replaced with bonding. This affects the bonding rate for the State. He explained
that Proposed Resolution No. 09-10 shows support from the Commission for an
March 8, 2011
XV
amendment to the State of Wisconsin Constitution that all funding from the Segregated
Transportation Fund be used only for transportation.
Ms. Nagler stated her opposition to Proposed Resolution No. 09-10.
Mr. Bellin motioned to approve Proposed Resolution No. 09-10, seconded by Mr. Robl.
The motion passed with 18 ayes, 2 nays (Ms. Nagler and Mr. Rohloff).
F.
Regional Comprehensive Planning Committee
1.
Chairman’s Report (Norm Weiss)
2. Approval of the Summary of Proceedings for the January 29, 2010 Meeting
Mr. Weiss motioned to approve the Chairman’s Report and the Summary of Proceedings
for the January 29 meeting, seconded by Mr. Brown. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0
nays.
XI.
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Nominating Committee Report and Recommendations
Chair Koeppen stated that the Nominating Committee recommended Ken Capelle, Shawano
County for Chair for a one year term and Bob Hermes, Menominee County for Vice-Chair for
a one year term.
Mr. Fowle said that because Shawano County was next in succession for the Chair position
on the Commission, the Nominating Committee decided to keep to the order and elect Ken
Capelle from Shawano County to the Chair position. He noted that he had discussed this
situation with the new Shawano County Chair, Jerry Erdmann.
Mr. Barribeau motioned to approve the recommendations of the Nominating Committee,
seconded by Mr. Strehlow. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0 nays.
Chair Koeppen said he was very honored and humbled to be the Chair of the Commission for the past
two years. The experience has enlightened his knowledge of planning and it gave him the opportunity
to work with a great group of individuals for the various counties along with the knowledgeable staff of
the Commission.
XII.
ESTABLISH TIME AND PLACE FOR NEXT COMMISSION MEETING
Annual Commission Meeting, Friday April 30, 2010 at ECWRPC Offices (immediately following
Quarter Meeting, approximately 11:30 A.M.)
Quarterly Commission Meeting, 10:00 A.M., Friday July 30, 2010 at New London City Hall, New
London, Wisconsin (this important meeting includes adoption of the Year 2011 preliminary budget
and 2011 final tax levy rate – please put this meeting on your calendar!)
XIII.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Barribeau motioned to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Bellin. The motion passed with 20 ayes, 0
nays. Meeting adjourned at 11.25 A.M.
March 8, 2011
XVI
SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS
Community Facilities Committee
April 30, 2010 – 9:00 A.M.
Committee members present:
Clifford Sanderfoot .................................................................................................. Outagamie County
Ken Capelle. .............................................................................................................. Shawano County
Ernie Bellin……………………………………………………………………………………………………………Winnebago County
Bob Hermes . ........................................................................................................ Menominee County
Patrick Laughrin .......................................................................................................... Calumet County
Committee members absent, (excused):
Others in attendance:
Todd Verboomen. ..................................................................................... Executive Director, ECWRPC
Kathy Thunes. ...............................................................................................................ECWRPC Staff
Joe Huffman . ................................................................................................................ECWRPC Staff
1.
Welcome & Introductions
Mr. Cliff Sanderfoot welcomed everyone and introductions were made.
2.
Statement of Compliance/Wis. Stats. Ch. 19, Subchapter V, Sec. 19.84 regarding Open
Meetings.
The open meeting law was recognized.
3.
Approval of the January 29, 2010 Community Facilities Committee Meeting Summary of
Proceedings.
There were no adjustments or edits made to the January 29, 2010 summary whereby Ernie Bellin
moved to approve with Bob Hermes making the second. Motion carried unanimously.
4.
Public Comment
There were no public comments.
5.
Communications
There were no communication items to present for the Committee.
6.
Action Item: Resolution No. 13-10; Approval of the Draft Shawano Lake 2030 SSA Plan
Update.
Mr. Todd Verboomen reminded committee members of the materials sent to them with regards to
the Shawano Lake 2030 Sewer Service Area Plan Update specifically noting the tables and data
calculations with respect to the allocation of additional sewer service area acreage. Mr. Verboomen
called out Table 4 as the key component in assessing the final update allocations. This table
detailed the land use characteristics and breakdown of development within the proposed new
allocation areas. Mr. Verboomen then detailed the additions and removals and justifications for the
March 8, 2011
XVII
decisions that were made. The Maple Lane Health Center was mentioned, as a planning area
addition, in light of the on-going debate on the potential of eventually providing sewer service to
the facility. Mr. Verboomen outlined the approval process for the allocation areas with each
affected DMA within the service area. As the process neared the end, Shawano County personnel
interjected the Maple Lane Health Center as a potential service area. Coupled with this request,
the County provided a feasibility study for the Maple Lane facility that offered alternatives for sewer
routing and projections regarding land use and development potential. Mr. Verboomen, however,
cited deficiencies within the report relative to the true cost-effectiveness of sewer routing to the
site. It was East Central’s position to move forward with the plan update and subsequently handle
the Maple Lane Health Center as a SSA amendment request in the future. As for the feasibility
study, East Central has requested clarification on some key cost issues. Mr. Verboomen then made
the justifications for allocating additional sewer service area acreage. The Village of Cecil, based
on its on-site septic policies, was allocated acreage to reflect the Village’s corporate limit boundary.
Questions remained regarding the Village of Cecil and their stance on on-site systems within the
sewer service area and Village corporate limits. Mr. Verboomen explained that the Village was
resistant to any government intervention; however it seemed that East Central was able to relieve
any concerns about policy being dictated to the Village.
Based on the support letters from the DMA’s within this update, Mr. Verboomen requested that
Resolution 13-10 be approved by committee thereby adopting the 2030 Shawano Lake Sewer
Service Area Plan update. There being no further discussion, Mr. Bellin moved to adopt Resolution
13-10 and approve the 2030 Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area update. Mr. Capelle made the
second. Motion passed unanimously.
7.
Staff Activity Update
Mr. Verboomen began by stating that the passage of the 2030 Shawano Lake Sewer Service Area
Plan allows East Central to submit the plan and its draft mapping to the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources for certification. Other plans in progress include the Sherwood Sewer Service
Area Plan Update. This plan has stalled due to planning area configurations on the service area’s
west side. The Village intends on performing a study for service near the Neenah-Menasha
Planning Area Boundary. In addition, the Village has begun the installation of a large water main
from Appleton which will provide a new water source for the Village. Planning, starting with a land
use inventory has begun for the Fond du Lac sewer service area update. Mr. Verboomen also
mentioned that the Freedom Sewer Service Area Plan Update will resume now that the new
sanitary district president has had time to settle in.
Mr. Huffman gave a status report on the Maple Lane Health Center issue, based on a meeting with
the Shawano County Administrator, a WDNR Regional official, Ayers Consulting and an official from
the Maple Lane Health Center. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss earlier comments
submitted by East Central based on the provided sewer feasibility study. East Central had
reservations on development assumptions made in this report. Additionally there were no costs
associated with/or provided for in the feasibility study for the upgrade/replacement of the existing
system at Maple Lane Health Center. The end result of the meeting was that Ayers would take a
cursory look at costs for the lagoon upgrade and provide a comparable analysis relative to the
other alternatives being presented. Mr. Huffman did reiterate the possibility of an amendment to
the service area should Maple Lane Health Center need sewer service. Mr. Capelle then recapped
the County Board’s position and the reason for the sale of the facility. Mr. Capelle cited cost
overruns and expensive maintenance expenditures as the driving factor in selling the facility. The
Town of Belle Plaine’s resistance to this proposed plan was based on two factors, 1) the
assumptions made in the feasibility report, in terms of proposed development conflicts with the
Town’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and, 2) the Sanitary District is unsure of the loss, if any,
purchased capacity at the Wolf River Plant. Mr. Huffman then informed the Committee that
updates, when available, would be presented to the Community Facilities Committee.
March 8, 2011
XVIII
Ms. Thunes mentioned that the Community Facilities Committee would have an expanded role in
other issues other than sewer service area work. For example, Ms. Thunes explained a
sustainability group’s effort to educate the public on sustainability practices and developments. Ms.
Thunes provided a schedule of activities that ECOS was offering and welcomed the Committee to
participate. Ms. Thunes also mentioned East Central’s association with the Associated Recyclers of
Wisconsin (AROW) and its’ function in community development and sustainability on a regional
level.
8.
Next Meeting
Ms. Thunes stated that a May 12, 2010 meeting would not be an efficient use of time based on the
agenda items, (or lack thereof), for that date. A discussion ensued on a July meeting date. Mr.
Sanderfoot preferred waiting until there were substantial items for which to meet. After some
discussion it was decided that the next meeting would materialize when there were sufficient
agenda items to address.
9.
Adjourn
A motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Bellin with Mr. Capelle making the second. Motion passed.
March 8, 2011
XIX
XX
XXI
XXII
XXIII
XXIV
XXV
Appendix B – Demographic and Acreage Projection Tables
XXVI
TABLE B-1: EXISTING YEAR 2020 SSA ACREAGE CHARACTERISTICS (BASED ON 2009 LAND USE)
Total
2050 SSA Planning Area (acres)
Square Miles
2020 Sewer Service Area Total
Single Family & Duplex Residential (including mobile homes)
Commercial
Industrial
Public/Institutional (includes park & recreation)
Utilities
Transportation/Roads/Railroads
Existing/Planned Stormwater Detention Ponds
Vacant, Undevelopable (75' wetland buffer)
Vacant, Developable (includes woodlands, agric. or undeveloped uses)
ESA - Stream Buffer
ESA - W etland
Open W ater
Total SSA Developed Acres
Total SSA ESA/Water Acres
SF Residential
MF Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Public/Institutional (include parks/churches/utilities/roads)
Agriculture, W oodlands or Unplanned
TOTALS
Source: ECWRPC 6/2009, Shawano Co. 2030 Comp. Plans
V. of Bonduel
V. of Cecil
T. Washington
T. Wescott
T. Richmond
T. Belle Plaine
T. Waukechon
Total
SSA
C. of Shawano
SSA
Acres
%
1,214.0
99.5
344.7
411.6
216.2
638.0
2,923.9
41.5%
3.4%
11.8%
14.1%
7.4%
21.8%
100.0%
Acres
% of
267.6
27.0%
51.2
5.2%
181.6
18.3%
330.0
33.3%
73.3
7.4%
87.0
8.8%
990.7 100.0%
V. of Bonduel
SSA
Acres
% of
174.4
45.1%
37.4
9.7%
84.2
21.8%
57.4
14.8%
33.5
8.7%
0.0
0.0%
386.9 100.0%
V. of Cecil
SSA
Acres
% of
35.1
58.7%
0.2
0.4%
21.1
35.2%
0.4
0.7%
1.4
2.4%
1.6
2.6%
59.9 100.0%
T. Washington
T. Wescott
T. Richmond
Shawano Lk. S.D. SSA
Richmond S.D. SSA
Acres
% of
161.5
67.4%
0.6
0.3%
0.6
0.3%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
77.0
32.1%
239.7 100.0%
Acres
% of
368.9
54.5%
0.2
0.0%
10.1
1.5%
0.4
0.1%
98.9
14.6%
198.1
29.3%
676.7 100.0%
Acres
% of
75.1
0.0
0.9
15.2
0.0
239.6
330.8
11.1%
0.0%
0.1%
2.2%
0.0%
35.4%
48.9%
T. Belle Plaine
T. Waukechon
BPW Utility Dist. SSA BPW Utility Dist. SSA
Acres
12.7
0.0
1.9
0.0
0.0
19.7
34.3
% of
1.9%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
2.9%
5.1%
Acres
% of
102.9
0.0
44.2
8.2
9.0
15.0
179.3
15.2%
0.0%
6.5%
1.2%
1.3%
2.2%
26.5%
T. Hartland
(V. of Bonduel)
Acres
%
1,267.7
2.0
40.7 100.0%
11.3
27.6%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
3.1
7.6%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
25.6
63.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.7
1.8%
14.3
35.2%
0.7
1.8%
T. Hartland
V. of Bonduel
Acres
15.7
9.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.6
% of
2.3%
1.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.8%
XXVII
Year 2020 SSA Vacant Acres by
C. of Shawano
SSA
SSA
SSA
SSA
Shawano Lk. S.D. SSA Shawano Lk. S.D. SSA
Richmond S.D. SSA BPW Utility Dist. SSA BPW Utility Dist. SSA
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
33,733.8
4,252.4
1,317.3
1,039.9
5,948.2
13,314.9
3,789.7
1,489.9
1,313.9
52.7
6.6
2.1
1.6
9.3
20.8
5.9
2.3
2.1
8,938.6 100.0% 3,548.6 100.0%
899.3 100.0%
442.8 100.0%
722.5 100.0%
1,988.1 100.0%
889.5 100.0%
128.2 100.0%
279 100.0%
2,074.6 23.2%
711.1
20.0%
168.9
18.8%
93.4
21.1%
305.5
42.3%
573.5
28.8%
169.8
19.1%
18.0
14.0%
23.2
8.3%
114.8
1.3%
94.7
2.7%
6.2
0.7%
6.3
1.4%
0.6
0.1%
5.5
0.3%
1.5
0.2%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
300.4
3.4%
167.7
4.7%
41.9
4.7%
19.1
4.3%
5.2
0.7%
44.6
2.2%
14.4
1.6%
7.1
5.5%
0.5
0.2%
320.6
3.6%
225.4
6.4%
54.4
6.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
20.7
1.0%
20.0
2.3%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
868.7
9.7%
427.1
12.0%
74.3
8.3%
183.3
41.4%
4.4
0.6%
120.5
6.1%
34.7
3.9%
10.9
8.5%
13.5
4.8%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
1,293.5 14.5%
539.5
15.2%
138.1
15.4%
65.3
14.8%
112.5
15.6%
252.5
12.7%
84.0
9.4%
46.1
36.0%
52.4
18.8%
8.4
0.1%
8.0
0.2%
0.0
0.0%
0.3
0.1%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
86.6
1.0%
34.4
1.0%
4.1
0.5%
2.3
0.5%
6.9
1.0%
22.4
1.1%
15.7
1.8%
0.3
0.3%
0.6
0.2%
2,923.7 32.7%
990.6
27.9%
386.8
43.0%
59.9
13.5%
239.7
33.2%
676.7
34.0%
330.8
37.2%
34.3
26.8%
179.3
64.3%
58.0
0.6%
12.0
0.3%
13.5
1.5%
0.4
0.1%
7.4
1.0%
10.6
0.5%
11.6
1.3%
0.0
0.0%
2.5
0.9%
386.2
4.3%
200.8
5.7%
8.2
0.9%
8.9
2.0%
37.2
5.1%
104.4
5.2%
25.0
2.8%
1.2
0.9%
0.5
0.2%
503.3
5.6%
137.4
3.9%
2.8
0.3%
3.6
0.8%
3.2
0.4%
156.8
7.9%
182.1
20.5%
10.2
8.0%
6.5
2.3%
4,980.9 55.7% 2,173.5 61.2%
483.8
53.8%
367.9
83.1%
428.1
59.2%
1,017.4
51.2%
324.3
36.5%
82.1
64.0%
89.7
32.1%
947.4 10.6%
350.2
9.9%
24.6
2.7%
12.8
2.9%
47.8
6.6%
271.7
13.7%
218.8 24.6%
11.4
8.9%
9.5
3.4%
Table B-2 : SHAWANO LAKE AREA, PROJECTED POPULATION , 2005 -2030
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Difference
Difference '05-'30
'05-'30
w/10% increase
C. Shawano
8,515
8,704
8,874
9,019
9,153
9,223
708
779
V. Bonduel
1,460
1,506
1,550
1,590
1,629
1,657
197
217
V. Cecil
525
561
597
632
668
700
175
193
T. Hartland
885
911
936
958
980
994
109
120
T. Washington
1,999
2,101
2,201
2,298
2,394
2,476
477
525
T. Wescott
3,815
3,951
4,081
4,203
4,321
4,411
596
656
T. Richmond
1,872
1,958
2,041
2,121
2,201
2,266
394
433
T. Belle Plaine
1,931
1,969
2,004
2,032
2,058
2,069
138
152
T. Waukechon
1,015
1,059
1,101
1,142
1,182
1,215
200
220
2,994
3,293
Totals 22,017
22,720
23,385
23,995
24,586
25,011
XXVIII
ECWRPC Projections
MCD
Source: U.S. Census:, 2000; ECWRPC, 1997 & 2004.
Table B-3: SHAWANO LAKE AREA SSA, PROJECTED SEWERED POPULATION , 2005 -2030
ECWRPC Projections*
MCD
2005
2010**
2015
2020
2025
2030
Difference
Difference '05-'30
2030
SSA Population
'05-'30
w/10% increase
(incl. additional 10% of '05-'30 increase)
March 8, 2011
C. Shawano
8,515
8,704
8,874
9,019
9,153
9,223
708
779
9,294
V. Bonduel
1,460
1,506
1,550
1,590
1,629
1,657
197
217
1,677
V. Cecil
525
561
597
632
668
700
175
193
718
T. Hartland
885
911
936
958
980
994
109
120
1,005
Shawano Lake S.D.
4,951
5,149
5,355
5,516
5,681
5,851
900
990
5,941
BPW Utility District
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
3
Richmond S.D.
603
633
658
684
712
733
130
143
746
Totals
16,942
17,467
17,973
18,402
18,826
19,161
*Sanitary District Projections based on same 'rate' of growth experienced for each MCD as a whole.
**Projections are based on 2009 connections
2,219
2,441
19,383
Table B-4: ESTIMATED SHAWANO LAKE SSA AREA HOUSEHOLDS, 2005-2030
2005
2010
Persons
No. HH per HH
MCD
2015
Persons
per HH
No. HH
2020
Persons
per HH
No. HH
2025
Persons
per HH
No. HH
2030
Persons
per HH
No. HH
Persons
per HH
No. HH
Difference
Difference '05-'30
'05-'30
w/10% increase
(incl. additional 10% of
'05-'30 increase)
SSA Households
C. Shawano
3,550
2.26
3,666
2.32
3,771
2.21
3,909
2.20
3,922
2.20
3,956
2.19
406
446.6
3996.6
V. Bonduel
602
2.41
628
2.38
653
2.35
692
2.34
695
2.32
710
2.32
108
118.8
720.8
V. Cecil
226
2.33
243
2.31
260
2.30
292
2.29
292
2.28
307
2.28
81
89
314.8
T. Hartland
302
2.93
318
2.87
334
2.80
356
2.75
362
2.71
373
2.67
71
78
380.1
850
2.35
913
2.30
976
2.26
1,079
2.22
1,094
2.19
1,146
2.16
296
325
1175.4
2.21
1,984
2.18
2,009
2.15
2,073
2.13
409
449
2113.9
T. Washington
T. Wescott
1,664
2.29
1,757
2.25
1,848
T. Richmond
733
2.55
782
2.50
830
2.46
908
2.42
919
2.39
957
2.37
223
246
979
T. Belle Plaine
768
2.39
801
2.34
834
2.29
872
2.24
887
2.21
905
2.17
137
151
919
T. Waukechon
371
2.74
392
2.70
413
2.67
447
2.64
450
2.63
465
2.61
94
104
9,066
2.47
9,499
2.44
9,917
2.39
10,539
2.37
2.34
10,891
2.32
Totals / Average
10,632
1,825
475
2,008
11,074
XXIX
Table B-5: PROJECTED SEWERED HOUSEHOLDS, 2005-2030
ECWRPC Projections*
2005
2010**
Persons
MCD
No. HH per HH
2015
Persons
No. HH
per HH
2020
Persons
No. HH
per HH
2025
Persons
No. HH
per HH
2030
Persons
No. HH
per HH
Persons
No. HH
per HH
Difference
Difference '05-'30
'05-'30
w/10% increase
No. HH
No. HH
SSA Households
(incl. additional 10% of
'05-'30 increase)
C. Shawano
3,550
2.26
3,666
2.32
3,771
2.21
3,909
2.20
3,922
2.20
3,956
2.19
406
447
3,997
V. Bonduel
602
2.41
628
2.38
653
2.35
692
2.34
695
2.32
710
2.32
108
119
721
V. Cecil
226
2.33
243
2.31
260
2.30
292
2.29
292
2.28
307
2.28
81
89
315
T. Hartland
302
2.93
318
2.87
334
2.80
356
2.75
362
2.71
373
2.67
71
78
380.1
Shawano Lake S.D.
2,134
2.32
2,258
2.28
2,401
2.23
2,507
2.20
2,618
2.17
2,734
2.14
600
660
2,794
1
2.60
1
2.50
1
2.50
1
2.40
1
2.40
1
2.40
0
0
1
Richmond S.D.
241
2.50
253
2.50
267
2.46
283
2.42
298
2.39
309
2.37
68
75
316
7,056
2.48
7,367
2.45
7,687
2.41
8,040
2.37
8,189
2.35
8,390
2.34
1,334
1,468
8,523
Totals / Average
*Sanitary District Projections are based on the same 'rate' of growth experienced for each MCD as a whole based on 2009 connections
TABLE B-6: Shawano Lake SSA COMMUNITIES - UNITS IN STRUCTURE, 2000
Municipality
Housing units: 1; Housing units: 1;
detached units in attached units in
structure
structure
Housing units: Housing units: Housing units: Housing units:
Housing units: Boat, RV,
2 units in 3 or 4 units in 5 to 9 units in 10 to 19 units
20 or more Van, etc.
structure
structure
structure
in structure
Mobil Home
Housing
units:
Total
Occupied
housing
units:
Total
Percent
Occupied in
2000
C. Shawano
2,350
64
61
390
143
340
131
126
0
3,605
3,450
95.70%
V. Bonduel
399
10
0
68
16
85
5
14
0
597
580
97.15%
V. Cecil
213
6
0
14
7
11
0
0
0
251
72
28.69%
T. Hartland
260
5
12
8
3
0
0
0
0
288
284
98.61%
T. Washington
782
11
361
14
11
2
0
26
8
1,215
801
65.93%
T. Wescott
1,911
22
318
17
14
12
15
0
6
2,315
1,555
67.17%
T. Richmond
627
7
58
9
7
7
2
0
0
717
666
92.89%
T. Belle Plaine
858
4
96
6
4
0
0
0
0
968
742
76.65%
T. Waukechon
356
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
364
339
93.13%
7,756
129
914
526
205
457
153
166
14
10,320
8,489
79.5%
TOTALS
Source: U.S. Census:, 2000
Waupaca Area - Residential Splits
Municipality
Single Family
Total
Duplex
% of Total
Total
Multi-Family
% of Total
Total
% of Total
2,475
68.7%
390
10.8%
740
20.5%
V. Bonduel
409
68.5%
68
11.4%
120
20.1%
V. Cecil
219
87.3%
14
5.6%
18
7.2%
T. Hartland
277
96.2%
8
2.8%
3
1.0%
T. Washington
1,154
95.0%
14
1.2%
39
3.2%
T. Wescott
2,251
97.2%
17
0.7%
41
1.8%
T. Richmond
692
96.5%
9
1.3%
16
2.2%
T. Belle Plaine
958
99.0%
6
0.6%
4
0.4%
T. Waukechon
364
100.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
8,799
85.3%
526
5.1%
981
9.5%
TOTALS
TABLE B-7: SHAWANO LAKE SSA COMMUNITIES - LAND USE DENSITY*
SF Units
du/acre
Duplex Units
du/acre
MF Units
du/acre
C. Shawano
4.0
8.0
16
V. Bonduel
2.5
5.0
10
V. Cecil
2.5
5.0
10
T. Hartland
2.5
5.0
10
Municipality
March 8, 2011
Shawano Lake S.D.
2.5
5.0
10
2.5
5.0
10
Richmond S.D.
Shawano Lake SSA
Average
2.5
5.0
10
2.7
5.4
10.9
*Ageed sewered land density standards
Source: Shawano Co. Comp. Plan
XXX
C. Shawano
Table B-8: SHAWANO LAKE SSA - RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE PROJECTION METHODOLOGY (YEAR 2030)
2,441 2005-2030 population increase with 10% increase
1,468 2005-2030 household increase with 10% increase
1) Total Households (Dwelling Units) Needed x Percentage Split of Unit Type (based on 2000 Census Units splits) = Projected Units by Type
FORMULA
1,468
1,468
1,468
x
x
x
85.3%
5.1%
9.5%
=
=
=
1,252 Single Family Units
75 Duplex Units
139 Multi-Family Units
2) Projected Units by Type Development Densities = SSA Acreage Needs for Residential Uses
1,252
75
139
Single Family Units
Duplex Units
Multi-Family Units
/
2.7
units/acre
=
464
/
5.4
units/acre
=
14
/
10.9
units/acre
=
Total Shawano Lake SSA Vacant Acres Needed
13
490
XXXI
3) Application of 15% Infrastructure Factor = Gross Acreage Needs for Residential Uses
464 Acres Single Family Units
14 Acres Duplex Units
13 Acres Multi-Family Units
X
X
X
1.15
1.15
1.15
=
=
=
534
16
15
565 TOTAL ACRES
4)
Application of 20% Market Factor = Adjusted Gross Acreage Needs for Residential Uses
534 Acres Single Family Units
X
1.2
=
640
16 Acres Duplex Units
X
1.2
=
19
15 Acres Multi-Family Units
X
1.2
=
18
March 8, 2011
678 TOTAL ACRES
Source:
ECWRPC, 2009
XXXII
Table B-9: SHAWANO LAKE SSA - COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ACREAGE PROJECTIONS (YEAR 2030)
EXISTING SSA (2005)
C. Shawano
393 Acres of existing commercial/industrial (C/I) development
8,515 2005 Population estimate
0.05 2005 C/I Per Capita
V. Bonduel
V. Cecil
525 2005 Population estimate
Shawno Lake S.D., Richmond S.D., BPW U.D.
2030 - PROJECTED SSA (2030 projected minus 2005 existing)
C. Shawano
9,223
708
0.05
33
2030 Population projection
Population Increase (2030-2005)
2005 C/I Per Capita
Projected Need* (2005 C/I Per Capita * Pop. Increase)
V. Bonduel
1,657
197
0.07
13
2005 C/I Per Capita
V. Cecil
700
175
0.04
6
Shawno Lake
6,587
1,030
0.02
21
2005 C/I Per Capita
S.D., Richmond S.D., BPW U.D.
2005 C/I Per Capita
ESTIMATED ACREAGE NEEDS
Shawano Lake 2030 SSA C/I Projection
73
C/I Acres Needed
Application of 15% Infrastructure Factor = Gross Acreage Needs for C/I Uses
73
*
1.15
=
83.8
Application of 20% Market Factor = Adjusted Gross Acreage Needs for C/I Uses
84
*
1.2
=
101
Note: This figure to be used as
a guide for 2030 SSA allocations
Note: C/I acreage amounts w ere calculated w ithin the current SSA boundary line
* C/I Projection Formula: Projected C/I Need = (2005 C/I Per Capita)(Population Increase)
March 8, 2011
TABLE B-10: EXISTING YEAR 2030 SSA ACREAGE CHARACTERISTICS (BASED ON 2009 LAND USE)
Total
Square Miles
2030 Sewer Service A rea Total
Commercial
Industrial
Utilities
ESA - Stream Buffer
ESA - W etland
Open W ater
Year 2030 SSA Vacant Acres by
SF Residential
MF Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Agriculture, W oodlands or Unplanned
V. of Bonduel
V. of Cecil
T. Washington
T. Wescott
T. Richmond
T. Belle Plaine
T. Waukechon
C. of Shawano
SSA
Total
SSA
Acres
1,790.6
145.8
453.4
451.5
239.4
840.8
3,921.4
%
Acres
% of
45.7%
297.6
29.1%
3.7%
51.2
5.0%
11.6%
181.6
17.8%
11.5%
330.9
32.4%
6.1%
73.3
7.2%
21.4%
86.8
8.5%
100.0% 1,021.4 100.0%
V. of Bonduel
SSA
Acres
% of
174.4
37.5%
88.3
19.0%
109.7
23.6%
59.8
12.8%
33.5
7.2%
0.0
0.0%
465.7 100.0%
V. of Cecil
SSA
Acres
% of
268.9
91.6%
0.2
0.1%
21.1
7.2%
0.4
0.1%
1.4
0.5%
1.6
0.5%
293.7 100.0%
T. Washington
T. Wescott
T. Richmond
Richmond S.D. SSA
Acres
% of
255.8
75.4%
5.9
1.7%
0.6
0.2%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
77.0
22.7%
339.3 100.0%
Acres
% of
373.1
45.9%
0.2
0.0%
10.1
1.2%
35.8
4.4%
98.9
12.2%
294.3
36.2%
812.5 100.0%
Acres
% of
84.8
0.0
0.9
15.2
0.0
328.3
429.2
10.4%
0.0%
0.1%
1.9%
0.0%
40.4%
52.8%
T. Belle Plaine
T. Waukechon
BPW Utility Dist. SSA BPW Utility Dist. SSA
Acres
13.2
0.0
35.4
0.0
22.4
19.7
90.7
% of
Acres
% of
1.6%
0.0%
4.4%
0.0%
2.8%
2.4%
11.2%
307.0
0.0
93.9
9.4
9.8
15.0
435.1
37.8%
0.0%
11.6%
1.2%
1.2%
1.9%
53.6%
T. Hartland
(V. of Bonduel)
Acres
%
1,786.2
2.8
53.4 100.0%
11.3
21.1%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
2.2
4.1%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
4.7
8.8%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
33.9
63.6%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
1.3
2.5%
18.1
34.0%
1.3
2.5%
T. Hartland
V. of Bonduel
Acres
15.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.2
33.9
% of
1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.2%
4.2%
XXXIII
TOTALS
C. of Shawano
SSA
SSA
SSA
SSA
Shawano Lk. S.D. SSA Shawano Lk. S.D. SSA
Richmond S.D. SSA BPW Utility Dist. SSA BPW Utility Dist. SSA
A cres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
Acres
%
35,746.1
4,304.9
1,317.3
1,039.9
6,364.0
13,010.2
4,235.1
1,893.6
1,795.0
55.9
6.7
2.1
1.6
9.9
20.3
6.6
3.0
2.8
10,375.0 100.0% 3,681.5 100.0%
991.7 100.0%
711.9 100.0%
867.2 100.0%
2,145.7 100.0%
1010.4 100.0%
225.3 100.0%
688 100.0%
2,116.9 20.4%
711.1
19.3%
168.9
17.0%
105.6
14.8%
318.4
36.7%
582.1
27.1%
170.9
16.9%
19.7
8.7%
29.0
4.2%
114.8
1.1%
94.7
2.6%
6.2
0.6%
6.3
0.9%
0.6
0.1%
5.5
0.3%
1.5
0.1%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
309.2
3.0%
167.7
4.6%
41.9
4.2%
19.1
2.7%
5.2
0.6%
44.6
2.1%
15.0
1.5%
15.3
6.8%
0.5
0.1%
322.8
3.1%
225.4
6.1%
54.4
5.5%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
20.7
1.0%
20.0
2.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
869.3
8.4%
427.1
11.6%
74.3
7.5%
183.9
25.8%
4.4
0.5%
120.5
5.6%
34.7
3.4%
10.9
4.8%
13.5
2.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
1,602.5 15.4%
640.8
17.4%
151.6
15.3%
74.9
10.5%
142.8
16.5%
263.6
12.3%
94.1
9.3%
74.9
33.3%
155.2
22.6%
9.1
0.1%
8.0
0.2%
0.0
0.0%
0.3
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0%
0.7
0.3%
0.0
0.0%
100.0
1.0%
35.2
1.0%
4.1
0.4%
2.3
0.3%
8.8
1.0%
22.4
1.0%
19.0
1.9%
1.6
0.7%
6.7
1.0%
3,921.5 37.8%
1,021.4
27.7%
465.7
47.0%
293.7
41.2%
339.3
39.1%
812.5
37.9%
429.2
42.5%
90.7
40.3%
435.1
63.2%
70.4
0.7%
12.0
0.3%
13.5
1.4%
12.8
1.8%
7.4
0.9%
10.6
0.5%
11.6
1.1%
0.0
0.0%
2.5
0.4%
432.1
4.2%
200.8
5.5%
8.2
0.8%
8.9
1.2%
37.2
4.3%
104.4
4.9%
32.4
3.2%
1.2
0.5%
39.0
5.7%
506.6
4.9%
137.4
3.7%
2.8
0.3%
4.2
0.6%
3.2
0.4%
158.9
7.4%
182.1
18.0%
10.2
4.5%
6.5
0.9%
5,344.6 51.5% 2,274.8 61.8%
497.3
50.2%
390.2
54.8%
471.3
54.3%
1,037.1
48.3%
336.1
33.3%
121.5
53.9%
198.3
28.8%
1,009.0
9.7%
350.2
9.5%
24.6
2.5%
25.8
3.6%
47.8
5.5%
273.8
12.8%
226.2 22.4%
11.4
5.1%
48.0
7.0%
TABLE B-11: Summary of SSA Acreage Modifications (Table 1 minus Table 2)
Total
SSA
C. of Shawano
SSA
Added Removed
Square Miles
2030 Sewer Service Area Total (EX.)
Commercial
Industrial
Utilities
ESA - Stream Buffer
ESA - Wetland
Open Water
Vacant Acres
by Proposed Land Use Type
SF Residential
MF Residential
Commercial
Industrial
968.2
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
Total
SSA
Added Removed
576.6
0.0
56.2
9.9
108.7
0.0
39.9
0.0
23.2
0.0
203.1
0.0
1007.6
9.9
Added
V. of Cecil
SSA
T. Washington
T. Wescott
T. Richmond
T. Belle Plaine
T. Waukechon
Richmond S.D. SSA
BPW Utility Dist. SSA
Removed Added Removed Added Removed Added
52.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
132.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
101.3
0.0
0.8
30.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
101.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
92.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.5
0.0
0.0
78.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
269.6
12.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
9.5
0.0
0.0
233.8
12.3
0.0
0.6
22.8
12.9
C. of Shawano
SSA
V. of Bonduel
SSA
V. of Cecil
SSA
0.0
Removed
Added
Removed
Added
Removed
Added
Removed
Added
Removed
T. Hartland
(V. of Bonduel)
Added
Removed
642.0
226.2
278.2
582.9
604.5
159.1
403.7
0.0
481.1
0.0
518.5
0.0
0.0 144.6
0.0
12.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
30.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
0.0
99.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
43.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
157.7
8.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.1
0.0
0.0
135.8
0.0
0.0
2.1
19.7
2.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
120.8
1.1
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.1
0.0
3.3
98.4
0.0
7.4
0.0
11.8
7.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
97.1
1.7
0.0
8.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.8
0.7
1.3
56.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
408.9
5.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
102.8
0.0
6.1
255.8
0.0
38.5
0.0
108.5
38.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
22.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.2
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.0
0.0
18.2
0.0
0.0
0.6
3.8
0.6
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
T. Washington
T. Wescot
T. Richmond
T. Belle Plaine
T. Waukechon
Richmond S.D. SSA
Added
Removed Added Removed Added Removed Added Removed
30.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 233.8
0.0
94.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.0
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
30.8
0.0
78.9
0.0 233.8
0.0
99.6
0.0
Added Removed
4.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
35.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
96.2
0.0
135.8
0.0
Added Removed
9.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
88.7
0.0
98.4
0.0
Added Removed Added Removed
0.5
0.0
204.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.5
0.0
49.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.0
22.4
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
56.4
0.0
255.8
0.0
T. Hartland
(V. of Bonduel)
A dded Removed
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.2
0.0
18.2
9.9
XXXIV
Agriculture or Unplanned
TOTALS
Source: ECWRPC, Shawano Co. 2030 Comp. Plans
2980.5
4.7
1446.4
42.7
0.0
8.9
2.2
0.6
0.0
308.8
0.7
13.4
1007.6
12.3
45.9
3.4
363.9
61.6
V. of Bonduel
SSA
XXXV
TABLE B-12 : WOLF TREATMENT PLANT 2008 PERFORMANCE/CAPACITY ANALY SIS
INFLUENT
Month
Total
Average
Average
Monthly
(C)BOD
Loading
(lbs/day)
Average Mo.
(C)BOD
Concentration
(mg/l)
Average
Monthly Flow
(mgd)
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
EFFLUENT
2.068
2.009
2.208
2.748
2.456
2.281
2.213
1.879
1.748
1.698
1.722
1.784
24.81
2.07
160
161
158
136
157
159
168
186
188
190
190
187
2,040
170
Average
Monthly
(C)BOD
(mg/l)
2,764
2,705
2,908
3,123
3,220
3,032
3,097
2,918
2,740
2,685
2,725
2,779
34,696
2,891
BOD
Average
Removal
(mg/l)
5
5
5
5
5
6
7
5
5
6
7
7
68.00
5.67
4
4
5
5
3
4
4
2
3
4
5
6
49.00
4.08
96.88%
96.89%
96.84%
96.32%
96.82%
96.23%
95.83%
97.31%
97.34%
96.84%
96.32%
96.26%
11.60
96.66%
Source: Wolf Treatment Plan, 2009
Max Month Design Flow (mgd)
90% of Design
Design (C)BOD (lb/day)
90% of Design
=
=
=
=
3.71
3.339
3,984
3,586
Note: Average of Monthly Avg. Flow is
Capacity Used (% of Design Flow)
55.7%
Capacity Remaining (% of Design Flow)
44.3%
BOD Capacity Used (% of Design BOD)
72.6%
BOD Capacity Remaining (% of Design BOD)
27.4%
55.7%
Total Plant Capacity (Max Mo. Desin)
3,710,000 gallons per day
Total Monthly Flows (12 mo. avg.) =
Total Remaining Capacity =
1,684,000 gal/day =
30
27
30
27
of design flow.
20,527 more population equivalent (at 80 gpcpd)
8,553 more SF dwelling units (at a 2008 pph of 2.4)
3,421 more acres of SF residential development (at 2.5 units per acre gross density)
Source: Wolf Treatment Plant CMAR, 2008 and ECWRPC, 2009
March 8, 2011
XXXVI
TABLE B-13: WOLF TREATMENT PLANT 2007 PERFORMANCE/CAPACITY ANALYSIS
INFLUENT
Month
Total
Average
2.119
2.085
2.298
2.309
2.087
1.938
1.917
1.874
1.826
1.998
1.916
1.945
24.31
2.03
Max Month Design Flow (mgd)
90% of Design
Design (C)BOD (lb/day)
90% of Design
Average
Monthly
(C)BOD
Loading
(lbs/day)
Average Mo.
(C)BOD
Concentration
(mg/l)
Average
Monthly Flow
(mgd)
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
EFFLUENT
=
=
=
=
149
156
150
154
175
184
186
189
186
165
169
173
2,036
170
2,627
2,718
2,877
2,967
3,039
2,971
2,976
2,951
2,839
2,754
2,708
2,811
34,238
2,853
Capacity Used (% of Design Flow)
54.6%
Capacity Remaining (% of Design Flow)
45.4%
BOD Capacity Used (% of Design BOD)
71.6%
BOD Capacity Remaining (% of Design BOD)
28.4%
54.6%
Total Plant Capacity (Max Mo. Desin)
Total Monthly Flows (12 mo. avg.) =
Total Remaining Capacity =
BOD
Average
Removal
(mg/l)
6
6
6
6
5
5
6
7
5
5
6
5
68
5.67
3.71
3.339
3,984
3,586
Note: Average of Monthly Avg. Flow is
1,684,000 gal/day =
Average
Monthly
(C)BOD
(mg/l)
5
6
7
7
5
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
55
4.58
95.97%
96.15%
96.00%
96.10%
97.14%
97.28%
96.77%
96.30%
97.31%
96.97%
96.45%
97.11%
96.63%
30
27
30
27
of design flow.
21,050 more population equivalent (at 80 gpcpd)
8,771 more SF dwelling units (at a 2008 pph of 2.4)
3,508 more acres of SF residential development (at 2.5 units per acre gross density)
Source: Wolf Treatment Plant CMAR, 2007 and ECWRPC, 2009
March 8, 2011
Table B-14: Shawano County Population Estimates by MCD, 1970 to 2030
Census Census Census Census ECWRPC ECWRPC ECWRPC ECWRPC ECWRPC ECWRPC
1970
1980
1990
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
6,488
7,013
7,598
8,298
8,515
8,704
8,874
9,019
9,153
9,223
0
0
0
1
12
18
24
30
36
42
233
273
249
272
271
270
269
266
263
258
632
688
687
785
805
824
841
857
871
879
995
1,160
1,210
1,416
1,460
1,506
1,550
1,590
1,629
1,657
272
339
279
343
347
354
359
363
367
368
369
445
373
466
525
561
597
632
668
700
229
230
247
251
246
243
240
235
230
223
448
534
515
575
604
623
640
656
671
682
377
382
431
466
465
469
472
473
474
471
0
0
0
45
122
167
213
261
310
359
742
865
815
764
740
712
680
644
605
560
895
997
1,145
1,177
1,178
1,185
1,189
1,189
1,186
1,174
505
632
557
591
597
596
593
588
582
571
1,433
1,522
1,417
1,635
1,763
1,842
1,919
1,992
2,065
2,124
598
612
601
586
614
621
625
628
629
626
399
583
618
700
796
853
909
965
1,022
1,073
1,636
1,626
1,792
1,867
1,931
1,969
2,004
2,032
2,058
2,069
484
570
632
711
758
792
825
857
888
914
631
608
600
687
715
736
757
775
793
805
389
392
410
339
351
344
336
326
315
301
912
976
946
974
993
998
1,000
998
994
983
984
1,054
984
1,024
1,038
1,039
1,037
1,031
1,023
1,007
820
872
764
825
885
911
936
958
980
994
759
834
739
741
766
768
767
763
758
746
409
467
523
539
564
578
591
603
614
620
911
955
892
1,112
1,244
1,330
1,418
1,504
1,591
1,669
1,258
1,271
1,159
1,045
1,033
1,005
972
934
893
843
411
447
453
485
502
512
521
529
536
539
440
456
439
422
416
406
394
380
365
347
734
788
885
877
915
931
946
957
967
970
474
524
614
981
1,046
1,134
1,222
1,311
1,400
1,482
1,397
1,543
1,587
1,719
1,872
1,958
2,041
2,121
2,201
2,266
532
525
538
567
589
601
611
620
628
632
974
1,374
1,620
1,903
1,999
2,101
2,201
2,298
2,394
2,476
906
874
876
928
1,015
1,059
1,101
1,142
1,182
1,215
2,251
2,668
3,085
3,653
3,815
3,951
4,081
4,203
4,321
4,411
723
829
877
894
933
959
983
1,004
1,025
1,038
32,650 35,928 37,157 40,664 42,442
43,631 44,738 45,733
46,687 47,320
Source: U.S. Census: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000; ECW RPC.
10/18/04
DOA
2003
8,334
11
272
801
1,434
342
496
247
590
463
76
743
1,172
595
1,692
601
755
1,898
745
693
346
980
1,028
859
757
551
1,193
1,036
500
414
897
1,003
1,789
577
1,942
982
3,727
913
41,454
DOA
2004
8,425
11
269
796
1,442
344
515
245
597
461
113
741
1,169
593
1,737
609
780
1,911
747
706
350
986
1,031
874
761
558
1,219
1,032
497
415
906
1,023
1,844
583
1,967
1,000
3,765
922
41,944
XXXVII
March 8, 2011
Jurisdiction
C. Shawano
C. Marion (pt.)
V. Aniwa
V. Birnamwood (pt.)
V. Bonduel
V. Bowler
V. Cecil
V. Eland
V. Gresham
V. Mattoon
V. Pulaski (pt.)
V. Tigerton
V. Wittenberg
T. Almon
T. Angelica
T. Aniwa
T. Bartelme
T. Belle Plaine
T. Birnamwood
T. Fairbanks
T. Germania
T. Grant
T. Green Valley
T. Hartland
T. Herman
T. Hutchins
T. Lessor
T. Maple Grove
T. Morris
T. Navarino
T. Pella
T. Red Springs
T. Richmond
T. Seneca
T. Washington
T. Waukechon
T. Wescott
T. Wittenberg
Shawano County
Table B-15: Estimated Households by MCD, Shawano County, 2000 to 2030
XXXVIII
March 8, 2011
Minor Civil Division
C. Shawano
C. Marion (pt)
V. Aniwa
V. Birnamwood (pt.)
V. Bonduel
V. Bowler
V. Cecil
V. Eland
V. Gresham
V. Mattoon
V. Pulaski (pt)
V. Tigerton
V. Wittenberg
T. Almon
T. Angelica
T. Aniwa
T. Bartelme
T. Belle Plaine
T. Birnamwood
T. Fairbanks
T. Germania
T. Grant
T. Green Valley
T. Hartland
T. Herman
T. Hutchins
T. Lessor
T. Maple Grove
T. Morris
T. Navarino
T. Pella
T. Red Springs
T. Richmond
T. Seneca
T. Washington
T. Waukechon
T. Wescott
T. Wittenberg
Shawano County
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Persons
Persons
Persons
Persons
Persons
Persons
Persons
No. HH per HH No. HH per HH No. HH per HH No. HH per HH No. HH per HH No. HH per HH No. HH per HH
3,432
2.27
3,550
2.26
3,666
2.23
3,771
2.21
3,909
2.20
3,922
2.20
3,956
2.19
1
1.00
12
0.98
19
0.96
25
0.94
39
0.93
39
0.92
46
0.91
114
2.39
114
2.37
116
2.33
117
2.30
116
2.27
117
2.25
116
2.23
306
2.47
317
2.45
331
2.40
345
2.35
363
2.31
369
2.28
377
2.25
581
2.42
602
2.41
628
2.38
653
2.35
692
2.34
695
2.32
710
2.32
126
2.62
128
2.61
132
2.57
136
2.54
140
2.52
141
2.51
142
2.50
199
2.34
226
2.33
243
2.31
260
2.30
292
2.29
292
2.28
307
2.28
93
2.70
92
2.68
92
2.64
92
2.60
90
2.56
91
2.54
88
2.51
233
2.47
246
2.46
255
2.45
263
2.44
276
2.43
275
2.44
279
2.44
177
2.63
178
2.62
181
2.59
184
2.57
186
2.55
186
2.55
185
2.55
15
3.00
41
2.99
57
2.93
74
2.88
109
2.85
110
2.81
129
2.79
349
2.19
341
2.17
337
2.12
330
2.06
300
2.02
307
1.97
290
1.93
436
2.37
439
2.36
447
2.33
452
2.31
453
2.30
454
2.29
450
2.29
224
2.64
228
2.62
232
2.56
237
2.51
236
2.46
240
2.42
239
2.38
585
2.79
636
2.77
678
2.72
721
2.66
788
2.62
800
2.58
833
2.55
202
2.90
213
2.88
221
2.80
229
2.73
236
2.67
241
2.62
244
2.57
253
2.74
290
2.72
317
2.67
345
2.61
394
2.57
400
2.53
425
2.50
738
2.41
768
2.39
801
2.34
834
2.29
872
2.24
887
2.21
905
2.17
259
2.75
278
2.73
296
2.67
315
2.62
345
2.57
350
2.53
365
2.50
235
2.92
245
2.91
254
2.90
262
2.89
274
2.89
274
2.90
277
2.91
134
2.53
140
2.50
144
2.39
147
2.28
144
2.19
151
2.09
151
2.00
340
2.86
349
2.85
356
2.80
362
2.76
364
2.73
367
2.71
365
2.69
380
2.69
389
2.67
399
2.61
407
2.55
410
2.50
417
2.45
418
2.41
280
2.95
302
2.93
318
2.87
334
2.80
356
2.75
362
2.71
373
2.67
269
2.75
280
2.73
288
2.66
296
2.59
299
2.53
305
2.48
307
2.43
195
2.76
206
2.74
216
2.67
227
2.61
240
2.56
244
2.51
251
2.47
378
2.94
426
2.92
465
2.86
507
2.80
578
2.75
587
2.71
624
2.68
360
2.90
359
2.88
362
2.78
363
2.68
344
2.59
356
2.51
348
2.42
181
2.68
188
2.67
194
2.64
199
2.62
205
2.61
205
2.61
206
2.61
177
2.38
177
2.35
180
2.25
183
2.16
177
2.07
185
1.98
183
1.89
348
2.52
366
2.50
384
2.42
402
2.35
422
2.29
432
2.24
443
2.19
324
2.94
347
2.93
379
2.91
412
2.88
474
2.87
476
2.86
505
2.85
668
2.57
733
2.55
782
2.50
830
2.46
908
2.42
919
2.39
957
2.37
204
2.78
213
2.77
219
2.74
225
2.72
232
2.70
233
2.70
235
2.69
803
2.37
850
2.35
913
2.30
976
2.26
1,079
2.22
1,094
2.19
1,146
2.16
337
2.75
371
2.74
392
2.70
413
2.67
447
2.64
450
2.63
465
2.61
1,581
2.31
1,664
2.29
1,757
2.25
1,848
2.21
1,984
2.18
2,009
2.15
2,073
2.13
298
2.72
313
2.70
328
2.65
343
2.60
363
2.56
368
2.52
377
2.49
15,815
2.51 16,615
2.50 17,378
2.46 18,113
2.42 19,135
2.34 19,352
2.36 19,790
2.34
XXXIX
Appendix C – Environmental Assessment of 2030 SSA Allocations
XL
XLI
Environmental Assessment of 2030 SSA Allocations
The Shawano Lake 2030 SSA acreage allocations can be divided into two areas. Area 1 is located
adjacent to the City of Shawano and Area 2 are allocation areas located adjacent to the Villages of
Bonduel and Cecil.
Shawano Lake 2030 SSA Allocation Area: 1
Location
General Physical Features
SSA allocations for Area 1 fall within areas adjacent to the City of
Shawano in the Towns of Richmond, Belle Plaine, Wescott, Waukechon,
and Washington.
This area falls within the western limits of the Northern Lake Michigan
Coastal and Northeast Sands ecological landscapes1. This portion of the
Northern Lake Michigan Coastal landforms is made up of a lacustrine
plain and ground moraines. Soils are very diverse; in some areas,
lacustrine sands are found overlying clays or bedrock with only a few feet
of the surface. Within this allocation area, soils are composed of
moderately well drained, rocky sandy loams, interspersed with lacustrine
sands, clays, peat and muck.
The Northeast Sands areas were formed by glacial outwash plains that
have steep outcropping Precambrian bedrock knolls of basalt, rhyolite, or
granite. Sandy ground moraines and end moraines are also interspersed in
the landscape.
1
Current Development
The majority of SSA allocations (vacant/developable areas) in this area are
currently being utilized for agricultural purposes.
Some existing
commercial development is located along the major highway corridors.
Existing and future land use acreage totals for each community can be
found in Appendix B.
Planed or Proposed
Development
The majority of vacant developable lands within this area are slated for
residential uses. Commercial and industrial uses will be primarily located
south of CTH B, south of the City of Shawano.
WDNR Ecological Landscapes of Wisconsin - http://dnr.wi.gov/landscapes/
March 8, 2011
XLII
Limiting Environmental
Conditions*
Water Features
Small portions of the vacant/developable areas have step slopes (greater
than 12%) or groundwater within two feet from the surface. Development
of these areas may require alternative construction methods to protect the
area’s surface and ground water quality and quantity.
This area’s allocations are within close proximity of Shawano Lake and the
Wolf River. The majority of the Shawano Lake shoreline is developed,
however the lake’s tributaries should be protected from development with
the use 75 foot stream buffers which are established in this plan.
A number of small wetland areas are scatted throughout this area’s SSA
allocations. These wetland areas and the 50 foot buffers are mapped in
Exhibit 4.
The following endangered (END), threatened (THR), or special concern
(SC) species may exist within portions of the Area 1 SSA allocations:
Common
State
Group
Name
Status
Name
Lake Sturgeon
SC
Fish
WDNR Natural Heritage
Inventory
Elktoe
Slippersshell Mussel
Deam’s Rockcress
A Tiger Beetle
Snuffbox
Wood Turtle
Bald Eagle
A Perlodid Stonefly
Indian Cucumber-root
River Redhorse
Northern Dry-mesic Forest
Pygmy Snaketail
Round Pigtoe
Buckhorn
Henslow’s Sparrow
Red-shouldered Hawk
A Land Snail
Appalachain Pillar
Northern Yellow Lady’s-slipper
Showy Lady’s-slipper
Baldings’s Turtle
Western Sand Dater
Floodplain Forest
SC
THR
SC
SC
END
THR
SC
SC
SC
THR
NA
THR
SC
THR
THR
THR
SC
SC
SC
SC
THR
SC
NA
Mussel
Mussel
Plant
Beetle
Mussel
Turtle
Bird
Stonefly
Plant
Fish
Community
Dragonfly
Mussel
Mussel
Bird
Bird
Snail
Snail
Plant
Plant
Turtle
Fish
Community
March 8, 2011
XLIII
Sculpted Glyph
Wood Turtle
A Velvet Water Bug
Dark Rubyspot
Northern Mesic Forest
Northern Sedge Meadow
Northern Wet-mesic Forest
A Small Minnow Mayfly
Prothonotary Wabler
Sand Prairie
Salamander Mussel
A Riffle Beetle
Canada Warbler
Slender Bullet
Lake—Deep, Soft, Seepage
Yellow Screwstem
Squarestem Spikerush
Banded Killfish
A Crawling Water Beetle
Leonard’s Skipper
Vasey Rush
American Shore-grass
Osprey
Pine Barrens
SC
THR
SC
SC
NA
NA
NA
SC
SC
NA
THR
SC
SC
SC
NA
SC
END
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
THR
NA
Snail
Turtle
Bug
Dragonfly
Community
Community
Community
Mayfly
Bird
Community
Mussel
Beetle
Bird
Dragonfly
Community
Plant
Plant
Fish
Beetle
Butterfly
Plant
Plant
Bird
Community
Source: WDNR Natural Heritage Inventory – Shawano County, 2009
Shawano Lake 2030 SSA Allocation Area: 2
Location
SSA allocations for Area 2 are located in areas surrounding both the
Village of Cecil and the Village of Bonduel, within the Towns of
Washington and Hartland.
General Physical Features
This area falls within the western limits of the Northern Lake Michigan
Coastal ecological landscape2. This portion of the Northern Lake
Michigan Coastal landforms is made up of a lacustrine plain and ground
moraines. Soils are very diverse; in some areas, lacustrine sands are found
overlying clays or bedrock with only a few feet of the surface. Within this
allocation area, soils are composed of moderately well drained, rocky
sandy loams, interspersed with lacustrine sands, clays, peat and muck.
Current Development
2
The majority of SSA allocations to this area are currently being utilized for
agricultural purposes and single family residential developments that
currently utilize private on-site wastewater systems. Existing and future
land use acreage totals for each community can be found in Appendix B.
WDNR Ecological Landscapes of Wisconsin - http://dnr.wi.gov/landscapes/
March 8, 2011
XLIV
Planed or Proposed
Development
A mix of residential, commercial, and industrial uses are planned for the
vacant/developable lands within this area. Commercial and industrial uses
are primarily located within the Village of Bonduel.
Limiting Environmental
Conditions*
High groundwater and mapped wetland areas are present in various
locations of this area’s SSA allocations. In general these limiting
environmental conditions are widespread. Development of these areas may
require alternative construction methods to protect the area’s surface and
groundwater quality and quantity. Exhibit 4 maps these features and
includes the 50 foot wetland buffers.
Water Features
This area’s allocations encompass or are adjacent mapped wetlands. A
large wetland complex surrounding Mud Lake is located south of the
Village of Cecil. Other small wetland areas are scattered throughout this
allocation area and are primarily associated with steam corridors.
The following endangered (END), threatened (THR), or special concern
(SC) species may exist within portions of the Area 1 SSA allocations:
Common
State
Group
Name
Status
Name
Lake Sturgeon
SC
Fish
WDNR Natural Heritage
Elktoe
Slippersshell Mussel
Deam’s Rockcress
A Tiger Beetle
Snuffbox
Wood Turtle
Bald Eagle
A Perlodid Stonefly
Indian Cucumber-root
River Redhorse
Northern Dry-mesic Forest
Lake Chubsucker
Least Darter
American Shore-grass
Pugnose Shiner
Weed Shiner
Spring Pond
Emergent Marsh
Longear Sunfish
Showy Lady’s-slipper
Redfin Shiner
SC
THR
SC
SC
END
THR
SC
SC
SC
THR
NA
SC
SC
SC
THR
SC
NA
NA
THR
SC
THR
Mussel
Mussel
Plant
Beetle
Mussel
Turtle
Bird
Stonefly
Plant
Fish
Community
Fish
Fish
Plant
Fish
Fish
Community
Community
Fish
Plant
Fish
March 8, 2011
XLV
Northern Mesic Forest
Lake—Deep, Soft, Seepage
Yellow Screwstem
Squarestem Spikerush
Banded Killfish
Osprey
NA
NA
SC
END
SC
THR
Community
Community
Plant
Plant
Fish
Bird
Source: WDNR Natural Heritage Inventory – Shawano County, 2009
*Natural occurring environmental conditions where development may not be suitable such as: groundwater within
1 foot of the surface, Slopes greater than 12%, and bedrock occurring within 5 feet of the surface.
Sources: ECWRPC, WDNR’s Ecological Landscapes of Wisconsin, Ecosystem Management Planning Hand Book,
WDNR’s 2006 Impaired Waters List (303d list), & WDNR’s Natural Heritage Inventory Working List.
March 8, 2011

Shawano Lake 2030 Sewer Service Area

Transcription

Similar documents

Red Hill Lakefront Retreat - CaliforniaOutdoorProperties.com

Fitger`s Lake View Office

Captain Geech

51 North Ryan Flier

Just Listed

Presented by:

Brant Lake Getaway

Fall Food Show 2015

County M Route Text

to the article. - The FUND for Lake George