Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-297REVISED SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 10 -297 RESOLUTION (CARRIED 5 -1 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN PURPOSE: APPROVE & EXECUTE RELOCATION ORDER; DETERMINATION OF NECESSITY TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY FOR JAMES ROAD DETENTION BASIN, GENERALLY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE ROAD 91 AT JAMES ROAD INITIATED BY: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WHEREAS, the Common Council has by Resolution 09 -420 on October 27, 2009 previously approved the Sawyer Creek Stormwater Management Plan which identified the need for a storm water detention basin in the area of James Road and State Trunk Hwy. 91; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works has completed further study of the area and is recommending the acquisition of property and acceptance of a permanent easement in the area of State Road 91 at James Road, on property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Wesley Radloff, more particularly described in the attached to -scale engineering drawing which is Exhibit A, pursuant to the recommendations contained in the Sawyer Creek Stormwater Management Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that the Common Council determines that it is necessary and a public purpose for the City to acquire the properties and easements described in Exhibit A for said purpose of construction of a storm water detention basin. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Common Council that this resolution constitutes a Relocation Order for acquisition of properties and easements described in attached Exhibit A in accordance with the title acquisition procedure set forth in Wisconsin Statutes, section 32.05, said property being in the area of State Road 91 at James Road. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officials are hereby authorized and directed to execute any and all documents necessary for implementation of this order and that a certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed with the Winnebago County Clerk within twenty (20) days of its adoption. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. tY Exhibit A Page 1 of 2 � PARCEL :' .._ . 60814 ........ . PARCEL .',': .... N 4. I .- i - -' .. :,. '".... .. .:.r.... .. ..:: . ....- .. ... ..........:......... . :........ .... .. .......... ... ..:.. i.... S ............ . ... PARCEL #002039302 r .� r EASEMENT 20x50 FT. STRIP OF PARCEL 0002039302 ' a LL " - F t s= V7 STATE ROAD 91 EASEMENT " p 469.09 FT, STRIP OF PARCEL ' 0002039303 x W Q CITY OF OSHKOSH Relocation Order ENGINEERING DIVISION FILE NAME DRAWN Sawyer Creek Basin James Road Co90 9 -10 -2010 9-10 -2010 Future �/�� Storm Water GRAPHIC 0 50 100 400 SCALE: (IN FEET) 1 INCH 400 FE ET Detention Area Exhibit A / Page 2 of 2 Fee Acquisition Parcels All of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 0160814, described as the E1 /2 of N2/3 of E 30 acres of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Section 36, T18N, R15E. Said parcel contains 10.0 acres more or less. The westerly 942 feet of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 0020392, described as the NW1 /4 of the SW1 /4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E except lands described in Document No. 1052513. Said parcel contains 28.7 acres more or less. All that part of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 002039302, located in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 and the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E, (also known as Lot 2 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) lying west of a line 942 feet easterly of and parallel with the west line of said Parcel and lying northerly and easterly of the west bank of a branch of Sawyer Creek; also including a strip of land more further described as that part of the southerly 30 feet of said Parcel ID No. 002039302 (Lot 2 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E, lying northerly and easterly of the aforesaid branch of Sawyer Creek, and lying easterly of the westerly 942 feet of said parcel. Said 30 -foot strip is adjacent to and north of Lot 1 of said CSM 4255. Said parcels contain 16.0 acres more or less. Permanent Easement Parcels The southerly 469.09 ft of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 002039303 (also known as Outlot 1 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) in the SW 114 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E. Said parcel contains 0.25 acres more or less. The northerly 20 ft of the southerly 50 ft of the easterly 50 ft of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 002039302 (also known as Lot 2 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E., containing 0.02 acres more or less. C:1Documents and SettingsldaveplLocal SettingslTemporary Internet Files1OLK4A1Relocation Order description 091010.docx RELOCATION ORDER Project Number Name of Project Highway County Contract 10 -23 STN 91 -James Road Area Stormwater NIA Winnebago Detention Basin Right of Way Plat Date Plat Sheet Numbers Date of Previously Approved Relocation Order 09/15/2010 Resolution No. 10 -297 N/A Description of Termini of Project Fee Acquisition Parcels All of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 0160814, described as the E112 of N2 /3 of E 30 acres of NE 1/4 of SE 114 of Section 36, T18N, R15E. Said parcel contains 10.0 acres more or less. The westerly 942 feet of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 0020392, described as the NW1 /4 of the SW1 /4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E except lands described in Document No. 1052513. Said parcel contains 28.7 acres more or less. All that part of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 002039302, located in the NW 114 of the SW 1/4 and the SW 114 of the SW 114 of Section 31, T18N, R16E, (also known as Lot 2 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) lying west of a line 942 feet easterly of and parallel with the west line of said Parcel and lying northerly and easterly of the west bank of a branch of Sawyer Creek; also including a strip of land more further described as that part of the southerly 30 feet of said Parcel ID No. 002039302 (Lot 2 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) in the SW 1/4 of the SW 114 of Section 31, T18N, R16E, lying northerly and easterly of the aforesaid branch of Sawyer Creek, and lying easterly of the westerly 942 feet of said parcel. Said 30 -foot strip is adjacent to and north of Lot 1 of said CSM 4255. Said parcels contain 16.0 acres more or less. Permanent Easement Parcels The southerly 469.09 ft of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 002039303 (also known as Outlot 1 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) in the SW 114 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E. Said parcel contains 0.25 acres more or less. The northerly 20 ft of the southerly 50 ft of the easterly 50 ft of Winnebago County Parcel ID No. 002039302 (also known as Lot 2 of Winnebago County CSM No. 4255) in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, T18N, R16E., containing 0.02 acres more or less. To properly construct the stormwater detention basin designated above, it is necessary to acquire certain lands or interests in lands as shown on the right of way plat for the above project. To effect this change, pursuant to authority granted under Wisconsin Statutes, the City of Oshkosh orders that: 1. The said stormwater detention basin is laid out and established to the lines and widths as shown on the plat. 2. The required lands or interests in lands as shown on the plat shall be acquired by the City of Oshkosh. 3. This order supersedes and amends any previous order issued by the City of Oshkosh. Mark A. Rohloff / City Manager Date MIDWEST REAL ESTATE, INC. 2990 Universal Street • Suite C • Oshkosh, WI 54904 • Phone (920) 426 -2045 • Fax (920) 426 -2494 p��'TE SEP 13 2010 September 9, 2010 Mr. Alan Davis 215 Church Avenue Oshkosh WI 54903 Re: Sawyer Creek Basin Dear Mr. Davis: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SEP 14 zm Cj CLERKS f0FACE I am writing to you to ask for your support in the Planning Commissions unanimous approval of the purchase of the 55 acres of land to create a storm water detention basin at State Road 91 and James Road. Our company has experienced devastating damage to some of our apartment communities along Robin Avenue, Taft Avenue and Westfield Street in the floods of 2004 and 2008. The flood of 2004 damaged 47 apartments displacing an equal amount of residents and families at a cost of approximately $1,000,000.00 to rebuild. The flood of 2008 damaged 53 apartments displacing 53 residents and families and cost approximately $1,100,000.00. Insurance never really covers all the costs not to mention the extremely high deductibles we have to pay. Additionally we lost a large amount of rental income on those flooded apartments. The Loss of Rent insurance only covers rent up to the point the apartment unit has been rebuilt. Once the unit is completed it takes months for our staff to find new renter. The flooded apartment units in 2008 were not fully rented until a year later. Some of you may not know but since 2004 Midwest has been lobbying the City to purchase such a parcel of land to build a detention basin that would help alleviate the Sawyer Creek basin flooding. Additionally we supported the implementation of a storm water run -off fee. I ask for your support in approving the purchase of the 55 acres of land and for you to move it to the top of the priority list of the City's capital improvements. It is my opinion that passing. this will greatly reduce our exposure to future flooding and not rM only protect our company's investment but the hundreds of single family homeowners downstream who were flooded also. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. Sincerely, Rodney R. Oilschlager President RRO/ cmm ( 0 7 H - KOf H ON THE WATER MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council FROM: Steven M. Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works DATE: September 9, 2010 RE: Determination of Necessity for the James Road Detention Basin BACKGROUND The Sawyer Creek Watershed consists of an area of approximately 9,400 acres. The watershed is predominantly a fully developed urban land use in the northeastern third and predominantly rural /agricultural in the southwest two thirds. The Sawyer Creek Watershed experiences frequent flooding in numerous areas. Presidential Disaster Declarations have been issued for the City of Oshkosh because of flooding in 1990, 1993, 2001, 2004 and 2008. There have been other flooding instances in 1996, 1999 (two), 2000, 2008 and 2010. During flood events, Mercy Medical Center and numerous residential and commercial properties are impacted. Direct access to Mercy Medical Center is impeded and sandbagging the facility is often required. Strand and Associates, Inc. (Strand), of Madison, WI, was hired to study the Sawyer Creek Watershed and develop a Stormwater Management Plan for the watershed. Consistent with that plan, the Common Council officially mapped approximately 46 acres for a future stormwater basin near James Road and STH 91 in January 2010. The first proposal presented to the Common Council during the Official Mapping request impacted three property owners. The owners brought forward several concerns, including wetland issues. Upon review of wetland information from multiple state agencies, it was determined that a portion of the original basin location would impact mapped wetlands. As a result, the Department of Public Works worked with Strand to revise the basin location. The proposed basin location has been shifted to the East. The new location only requires land acquisition from one property owner. ANALYSIS Per the recommendations of the Sawyer Creek Stormwater Management Plan, the Department of Public Works is recommending the acquisition of approximately 55 acres of land west of the City of Oshkosh limits. The land is proposed to be used for a stormwater detention basin. Minor impacts to wetlands will need to be coordinated with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The location for the proposed detention basin was selected because of the surrounding topography and existing creek layout. This location allows for water to enter the detention basin at the south end and discharge into the main branch of Sawyer Creek at the north end. The curved geometry of the creek and elevation differences in the creek bed allows the detention basin to function properly. The proposed detention basin will be able to hold a maximum of 294 acre -feet of water. During a 100 year storm event the basin will hold 253 acre -feet of flood water. The new design will detain approximately 23% more stormwater than the initial layout. The proposed stormwater detention basin will detain water from approximately one third of the entire Sawyer Creek watershed. The stormwater will be released from the detention basin at a slower rate for a longer period of time helping to lower the flooding elevation to downstream properties along Sawyer Creek. I:\ Engineering \Correspondence \Steve Gohde \council memosUames rd basin det of nec.doc Lowering the flood elevation removes properties from the flood plain and prevents flood damage. Lowering the water elevation in areas that remain in the flood plain will allow emergency services to provide better response during flood events and reduce the amount of damage caused by flood waters. This stormwater detention will be one flood control improvement of several projects needed within the watershed. It is anticipated additional detention basins will be built and other improvements made within the watershed. Other improvements proposed at this time include dredging a portion of Sawyer Creek near Westfield St. and the Oakwood Road detention basin currently under construction. RECOMMENDATIONS I recommend the acquisition of approximately 55 acres of land for the purpose of constructing a stormwater detention basin to serve the Sawyer Creek watershed. Respectfully Submitted, Steven M. Gohde Asst. Director of Public Works Approved: City Manager 1:1 Engineering \Correspondence\Steve Gohde \council memosVames rd basin det of nec.doc ITEM: AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 91 AT JAMES ROAD Plan Commission meeting of September 7, 2010 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: City of Oshkosh- Department of Public Works Property Owner: Wesley & Shirley Radloff Action(s) Requested: The City of Oshkosh Department of Public Works is requesting approval to acquire approximately 55 acres of land from the subject property owners for construction of a storm drainage detention area. Applicable Ordinance Provisions: Suhiect Site Existing Land Use Zonin Agricultural/Vacant Land A -2ETZ (Algoma Extraterritorial) and A -2 (County) Adiacent Land Use and Lonin Existing Uses 10 Year Land Use Recommendation Zoning 20 Year Land Use Recommendation Rural Preservation/ Residential /Industrial A -2ETZ (Algoma Extraterritorial) and North Agricultural/Vacant _. South ..... Agricultural /Vacant Land .. ......... A -1 (County) _ ....... ........... .... ...... . East ...... _ .... ..................... . .......... ... . . Agricultural/Vacant Land ............. ... A -2ETZ (Algoma Extraterritorial) ........ . ..... ........ ....... _............ West ....._ .. ......... Agricultural /Vacant Land A -2 (County) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation - Land Use 10 Year Land Use Recommendation Rural Preservation 20 Year Land Use Recommendation Rural Preservation/ Residential /Industrial ANALYSIS Acquisition of land for James Road Detention Basin- The Sawyer Creek Watershed consists of approximately 9,400 acres of land. The watershed is predominantly a fully developed urban land use in the northeastern third and predominantly rural /agricultural in the southwest two thirds. The Sawyer Creek Watershed experiences frequent flooding in numerous areas. Presidential Disaster Declarations have been issued for the City of Oshkosh because of flooding in 1990, 1993, 2001, 2004 and 2008. There have been other "minor" flooding instances in 1996, 1999 (two) and 2000. Per the recommendations of the Sawyer Creek Stormwater Management Plan, the Department of Public Works is recommending the acquisition of approximately 55 acres of land west of the City of Oshkosh limits. The land is proposed to be used for a stormwater detention basin. The first proposal presented to the Plan Commission during an Official Mapping request impacted three property owners. The owners brought forward several concerns, including wetland issues. Upon review of wetland information from multiple state agencies, it was determined that a portion of the original basin location would impact mapped wetlands. As a result, the Department of Public Works worked with our consultant, Strand Associates, Inc. to revise the basin location. The proposed basin location has been shifted to the east. The new location only requires land acquisition from one property owner. The proposed detention basin is laid out to provide flood control. The City of Oshkosh cannot receive pollution control credit from this detention basin. There is a wet forebay included to provide for sediment collection from the upstream farm fields. The forebay will preserve the storage volume in the basin and allow for easier removal of the sediment in the future. The location for the proposed detention basin was selected because of the surrounding topography and existing creek layout. This location allows for water to enter the detention basin at the south end and discharge into the main branch of Sawyer Creek at the north end. The curved geometry of the creek and elevation differences in the creek bed allows the detention basin to function properly. The proposed detention basin will hold approximately 294 acre -feet of water during a 100 year storm event. The new design will detain approximately 23% more stormwater than the initial layout. The proposed detention basin will detain water from approximately one third of the entire Sawyer Creek watershed. The water will be released from the detention basin at a slower rate for a longer period of time helping to lower the flooding elevation to downstream properties. This detention basin is not the only flood control improvement needed within the watershed. It is anticipated additional detention basins will be built and other improvements made within the watershed. Other improvements proposed at this time include dredging a portion of Sawyer Creek near Westfield Street and the Oakwood Road detention basin currently under construction. RECOMMENDATION /CONDITIONS Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed land acquisition as requested. The Plan Commission approved of the land acquisition as requested. The following is the Plan Commission's discussion on this item. Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area, the current zoning classifications and existing land uses in said area, as well as a diagram of the proposed stormwater detention facility. He stated that the detention basin area had been revised since the official mapping request and now only includes one property owner. He also reviewed a map displaying the combined mitigation strategies for Sawyer Creek and Campbell Creek watersheds and the Sawyer Creek watershed map. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, gave a more detailed explanation of the various maps displayed and discussed the Sawyer Creek and Campbell Creek watersheds and the benefits Item — Land Acquisition —N. Side of James Road in the Taft Avenue and Westfield Street area that would be a result of this proposed detention basin. He also discussed some of the other projects either completed or in progress to help alleviate the flooding issues experienced by the City. He reviewed the map of the proposed detention basin area and explained the differences in the original layout of the area during the official mapping process and the current proposal. He stated that this proposed detention basin will only impact one property owner whereas the initial proposal was impacting three landowners. He noted that there were some wetland areas indicated on the map for the detention basin and stated that they would be working with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to mitigate any wetland area issues. He also commented that the revised design will detain 23% more stormwater than the initial layout by enlarging the size of the basin and that no water quality credit would be obtained from this basin. Ms. Propp inquired if a larger area was officially mapped than required. Mr. Gohde responded negatively and stated that the area was similar in size but a slightly different area than what was officially mapped and this could be adjusted to reflect the revised design. Mr. Thorns questioned if we need to expand the officially mapped area to accommodate the revision before we move forward with the land acquisition request. Mr. Gohde replied that it would not be necessary as the official mapping was not required to acquire the land. Mr. Burich added that the official mapping of an area is usually done years in advance as a place holder to ensure that the property is not developed, however in this case, the project is moving forward shortly after the official mapping process. Mr. Thorns asked for clarification of which detention basins were in the process of being constructed or planned to be built. Mr. Gohde replied that the detention basin at Perry Tipler School was already constructed and the basin in the Oakwood Road area was in progress. He explained the mitigation strategies map for the Sawyer Creek and Campbell Creek watersheds in greater detail and how the development of the detention basin in this area would benefit the city by removing areas from the 100 year flood plain. Ms. Propp questioned if the detention basin in the Westhaven area will contribute some benefit to this situation. Mr. Gohde responded that it would have a minor impact on the watershed as a whole and that the City is continuing to pursue more studies on the matter. Mark Steichen, Boardman Law Firm, 1 South Pinckney Street, Madison, representing Wes and Shirley Radloff the property owners, stated that he was there to voice their opposition to the proposed land acquisition. He stated that this was prime agricultural land which the owners wished to continue to use as such and its use was consistent with both the rural preservation sections of the Comprehensive Plan and its current zoning classification. He felt that these factors should be taken into consideration as well as the fact that existing agricultural lands are shrinking Item — Land Acquisition — N. Side of James Road as cities are expanding. He also stated that he felt that staff was understating the DNR and Corp of Engineer's involvement as both agencies will be required to approve the project and referenced the staff report that indicated that there were wetlands in the proposed basin location. He discussed the initial proposal that impacted three separate property owners and the City's delineation of the wetland areas and noted the location of wetland areas within the proposed detention basin area. He stated that the Radloff's had written a letter to the DNR in May inquiring if the City had obtained permits for the proposed basin as if the basin would be located in an area that included wetlands, a permit would be required. He distributed a copy of a response letter from the DNR that indicated that the City had not yet applied for a permit to construct the detention basin. He also distributed copies of an email from the DNR last week that indicated that the City had submitted a wetland delineation report however it has not yet been reviewed as it was not submitted with an application. He commented that there was no mention of discussions with the City regarding the matter and no application had been submitted to the Corp of Engineers as yet. He further commented that wetland areas were taken very seriously and the DNR will look at if there are alternatives to this location that do not affect wetlands. He has not yet seen plans and specifications for this project and commented that it was easier to acquire land from one property owner than three; however a determination of necessity needs to be completed first to conclude the City's need to take this specific property. He commented that the City needs to find out from the DNR and Corp of Engineers if permits would be issued for this project before proceeding with the land acquisition as property may be acquired that the City does not have a need for if the detention basin could not be constructed at this location. No costs are currently noted in the City's budget for the detention basin and fees would be due to the Radloffs if the acquired land is not used for its intended purpose. He further stated that this action would be contested in court and the Court of Appeals will have the final decision on the matter. The detention basin may be substantially different than proposed after review by the DNR and Corp of Engineers and the land could not be returned to the property owner at a later date. The costs to acquire this land will not be the current assessed value but would be based on the highest and best use of the land when it comes to negotiating the sale. Mr. Borsuk stated that he would like to hear the City's response to this presentation before proceeding with further discussion on the matter. Mr. Gohde stated that studies have been completed and established the need to address flooding issues in the City. The determination of necessity has already been met however the application to the DNR & Corp of Engineers can not be submitted until the City owns the land. He further stated that there were pockets of wetlands in this location however they were small and can be avoided while still constructing the detention basin. Mr. Thorns inquired if the City has seen any precedent set by the DNR where they allow detention ponds or developments in wetland areas. Mr. Gohde responded that wetland mitigation is a known process that the City and State is familiar with and was most recently addressed for the Highway 41 reconstruction process. Mr. Borsuk asked for clarification of what the Commission members should be evaluating when considering this request as to what is relevant discussion for the Plan Commission and what should be addressed at the Common Council level. Item — Land Acquisition — N. Side of James Road Mr. Burich replied that the land use issue was what should be considered at this level and is the request consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and related documents for stormwater management planning. Mr. Thorns questioned if alternative sites were considered concerning the placement of the detention basin. Mr. Gohde responded that two branches of Sawyer Creek come together at this point and displayed on the map where this area was located. He also explained the elevation of this area and how it would increase the amount of volume of water that could be stored in the proposed detention basin at this location. Mr. Thorns inquired if this basin was planned in addition to the detention basin to be constructed in the Westhaven area. Mr. Gohde replied affirmatively. Mr. Borsuk questioned how much of the area on the mitigation strategies map would be directly addressed by the construction of this basin. Mr. Gohde responded that a vast majority could be attributed to the detention basin at this location. Mr. Palmeri commented that he understood that it was premature to have permits issued at this point but questioned if the information could be obtained informally as far as the potential of getting a permit to construct the detention basin in this location prior to the land acquisition. Mr. Gohde replied that the pockets of wetlands were very small and could be worked around and he did not feel there would be any problems with obtaining the permit once the land is acquired. Mr. Palmeri then asked if the DNR and Corp of Engineers would provide a verbal indication of their intent to approve a permit prior to the formal application being submitted. Mr. Gohde responded that pre - concurrences can no longer be obtained from these agencies due to budget cuts. Mr. Borsuk stated that the detention basin would have a substantial affect on flooding in the city and it is a consistent land use and is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He further commented that the worst case scenario would be if the land was acquired and could not be used for this purpose, the industrial park development was expanding in this general direction and the land could be utilized for this purpose instead. Mr. Thorns commented that the Plan Commission is not responsible for considering the cost of the land acquisition just the land use issue itself and detention ponds are proven to be necessary even if they are not included in the Comprehensive Plan now. There is a necessity to alleviate the flooding concerns and the legal aspects of the land acquisition should not be addressed at this level as the application process is something to be considered at the Common Council level. Item — Land Acquisition — N. Side of James Road Mr. Palmeri questioned if using the land for industrial park development if the detention basin project would not be approved meets the criteria for eminent domain standards. Mr. Burich responded that the industrial park development suggestion would be an end use for the property only if something would fall through with the detention basin project. He commented that the issue at hand was if a detention basin at this location would be appropriate land use. Mr. Palmeri stated that he felt we needed to be 99.9% certain that the detention basin could be constructed at this location as the public good was the justification for the eminent domain action. He further stated that he had concerns about the wetland issues raised however other alternatives do not appear to be feasible. Mr. Thoms commented that a portion of the property may contain wetlands however it was not the entire site and it was an issue that would not be answered today. He felt that there was a substantial amount of area available to construct the detention basin while avoiding the pockets of wetlands. Ms. Propp stated that she was confident that there was a high probability that City staff and the consultants working on this project expect to achieve success with the permitting process for the detention basin construction. Mr. Palmeri commented that in the original proposal no wetlands were mentioned and based on the change in the proposal that is being presented today, there was a possibility that a problem exists. Mr. Thoms questioned if the areas marked on the detention facility map were the only wetlands on the property to be acquired. Mr. Gohde responded that the City hired a wetlands specialist who walked the entire property to ascertain the location of any wetlands which have been noted on the map. Motion by Thoms to approve the authorization to acquire property located north of State Highway 91 at James Road. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 6 -0. Item — Land Acquisition — N. Side of James Road ' 17 wr v �I -I JL ZA h! ..r' �� � ��i F• ---- � �j! � l;. } 1 f ; � � � ' f /� ., I "�j'�'- :3+'.x 1 I I C p %t '7, 1s wor o lit J. �»�� V August 31, 2010 Acquisition of land for James Road Detention Basin The Sawyer Creek Watershed consists of approximately 9,400 acres of land. The watershed is predominantly a fully developed urban land use in the northeastern third and predominantly rural /agricultural in the southwest two thirds. The Sawyer Creek Watershed experiences frequent flooding in numerous areas. Presidential Disaster Declarations have been issued for the City of Oshkosh because of flooding in 1990, 1993, 2001, 2004 and 2008. There have been other "minor" flooding instances in 1996, 1999 (two), 2000, 2008 and 2010. During flood events Mercy Medical Center and numerous residential and commercial properties are impacted. Direct access to Mercy Medical Center is impeded and sandbagging the facility is often required. Per the recommendations of the Sawyer Creek Stormwater Management Plan, the Department of Public Works is recommending the acquisition of approximately 55 acres of land west of the City of Oshkosh limits. The land is proposed to be used for a stormwater detention basin. The first proposal presented to the Plan Commission during an Official Mapping request impacted three property owners. The owners brought forward several concerns, including wetland issues. Upon review of wetland information from multiple state agencies, it was determined that a portion of the original basin location would impact mapped wetlands. As a result, the Department of Public Works worked with our consultant, Strand Associates, Inc. to revise the basin location. The proposed basin location has been shifted to the East. The new location only requires land acquisition from one property owner. Minor impacts to wetlands will need to be coordinated with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The proposed stormwater detention basin is laid out to provide flood control. The City of Oshkosh cannot receive pollution control credit from this detention basin. There are two small wet forebays included to provide for sediment collection from the upstream farm fields. The forebays will preserve the storage volume in the basin and allow for easier removal of the sediment in the future. The location for the proposed detention basin was selected because of the surrounding topography and existing creek layout. This location allows for water to enter the detention basin at the south end and discharge into the main branch of Sawyer Creek at the north end. The curved geometry of the creek and elevation differences in the creek bed allows the detention basin to function properly. The proposed detention basin will be able to hold approximately 294 acre -feet of water, during a 100 year storm event the basin will hold 253 acre -feet. The new design will detain approximately 23% more stormwater than the initial layout. The proposed stormwater detention basin will detain water from approximately one third of the entire Sawyer Creek watershed. The stormwater will be released from the detention basin at a slower rate for a longer period of time helping to lower the flooding elevation to downstream properties. This stormwater detention basin is not the only flood control improvement needed within the watershed. It is anticipated additional detention basins will be built and other improvements made within the watershed. Other improvements proposed at this time include dredging a portion of Sawyer Creek near Westfield St. and the Oakwood Road detention basin currently under construction. CADocuments and Settingsldeboraht\Local Seftings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKCDWcquisition of land for James Road Detention Basin.doc 9 LAND ACQUISITION RADLOFF WESLEY /SHIRLEY POTRATZ ETAL ROBERT JAMES RD & STATE RD 91 2061 JAMES RD 2477 JAMES RD PC: 09 -07 -10 OSHKOSH WI 549040000 OSHKOSH WI 549040000 STOFLET JASON /NANCY 4760 STATE RD 91 OSHKOSH WI 549040000 WIND RIDGE FARM INC 4909 COUNTY RD K OSHKOSH WI 549040000 KUMBIER DONALD /BEVERLY 4936 STATE RD 91 OSHKOSH WI 549040000 GLATZ JENNIFER 4812 STATE RD 91 OSHKOSH WI 549040000 BEVERLY SEARVOGEL KIDWILER CLERK TOWN OF OMRO 4205 RIVERMOOR RD OMRO WI 54963 RADLOFF DENNIS 2370 JAMES RD OSHKOSH WI 549040000 CHARLOTTE NELSON CLERK TOWN OF ALGOMA 15 N OAKWOOD RD OSHKOSH WI 54904 10 /Y/ 6 © 4e o DISCLAIMER LAND ACQUISITIO This map Is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and it Is not intended to be used as one. JAMES R D N O.I HKOlH data This drawing is a compilation of records, and information located In various city, county STATE RD 91 ON THE WATER sources affecting and state offices and other City of Oshkosh the area shown and It Is to be used for reference Is re- Department Of purposes only. The City of Oshkosh not sponsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Community Development If discrepancies are found, please contact the Scale: 1 �� - 600' City of Oshkosh. 05/20/10 Created by - dfP li KNO -1 a This map Is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and It is not Intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, data and information located In various city, county and state offices and other sources affecting the area shown and It Is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Oshkosh Is not re- sponsibie for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Oshkosh. Created by - dff JAMES RD & N Of HKOlH STATE RD 91 ON THE warm City of Oshkosh Department of Scale: 1" = 600° Community Development 05/19/10 /3 DISCLAIMER LAND ACQUISITION -- i n a97 CITY OF OSHKOSH COMMON COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 AGENDA ITEM #20, PROPOSED TAKING OF WESLEY AND SHIRLEY RADLOFF PROPERTY Mark J. Steichen Boardman Law Firm 1 S. Pinckney St. Madison, WI 53701 608 - 283 -1767 Mark J. Steichen From: Schiefelbein, Crystal L - DNR [Crystal.Schiefelbein @wisconsin.gov] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 8:21 AM To: Mark J. Steichen Subject: RE: Radloff /Oshkosh: Proposed Detention Pond Mark, Next Monday (Sept 13) or Thurs (Sept 16) would work but I am in the field Tues and Wed next week. I am busy on Monday at 1030am- 1130am and at 2pm -3pm. If Mon or Thurs work, please let me know what date and time. Wetlands and detention basins? I'm not sure what questions you might have but just to start with, storm water treatment facilities should not be planned or proposed within wetland boundaries. An application to place a storm water facility in a wetland would not be approved. You can also read about wetlands at our website hftp://dnr.wi.gov/waterways/shoreline habitat/wetlands.html and about ponds at http: / /dnr wi gov /waterwa rys /construction /ponds.html Thanks, `WA c rysta. zs , Water Management specialist Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 625 E. County Road Y, Suite 700 Oshkosh, WI 54901 -9731 () phone: (920) 424 -7885 () fax: (920) 424 -4404 e-mail: �stal .Schiefelbein @wisconsin.aov Waterway & Wetlands Regulations website: http://dnr.wi.gov/waterways From: Mark J. Steichen [ mailto :msteichen @boardmanlawfirm.com] Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 2:33 PM To: Schiefelbein, Crystal L - DNR Subject: Radloff /Oshkosh: Proposed Detention Pond Dear Ms. Schiefelbein, I would like to set up a time to talk with you by phone about background on wetland permits as they might pertain to a proposed detention pond on James Road in the Town of Algoma. I will be receiving some additional information from the City of Oshkosh, hopefully tomorrow. I would like to discuss this with you after I have had a chance to digest it. I will forward some information to you by email to make it easier to discuss. Would you be available next Tuesday, sometime between 9 and noon? Mark J. Steichen Boardman, Suhr, Curry & Field, LLP 1 S. Pinckney Street P.O. Box 927 Madison, Wisconsin 53701 -0927 (608) 283 -1767 (608) 327 -1467 (direct fax) Insteichcn@boardmanlawfi nn. coin NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) WATERWAY& WETLAND PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE PREPARATION& ADVICE WORKSHEET Date: Attendees: Preparation: To make the best use of the time spent in a pre -a pplication meeting and to get the best tentative determination, you'll want to bring as many of the following resources as possible and provide them to the Water Management Specialist in advance of your meeting if possible. The following items will assyoyou ttr"alhffnfy& - TMb ~IIr*s -prow below will assist you in locating the item you are interested in obtaining. The DNR Surface Waters Data Viewer < http: / /dnr.wi.gov /orq /water /data viewer.htm is also a location that contains several of the map resources listed below: ➢ Preliminary plans, sketches or similar items describing the tentative proposal, including likely dimensions ➢ Air Photo of site and surrounding arg, p_ J%ttp : / /dnr.wi.gov /cfwg/Wlte "� dafa viewer htm ➢ Topographic Map including site and surrounding area http: / /dnr.wi.gov /orq /water /data viewer.htm ➢ Soils Map http: / /websoilsurvey.nres. usda.gov /appfWebSoilSurvey.aspx ➢ Wisconsin Wetland Inventory map httP://www.dnr.state.wi.usJggWW g l er/fh /wetlands /ma in .shtmI ➢ Wetland Delineation Repo if avails e ' µ , ➢ FEMA Floodplain Map http• / /gis1 msc fema - govfWebsite /newstore /viewer.htm ➢ Designated Waters http: /Idnr.wi.gov /orgtwater /data viewer.htm Plat map (if available may be purchased at local map store or county) ➢ Natural Heritage Inventory Endangered Resources Review Request hftp: //dn r.wi.ciov /org/land/er/forms/ Outcome: 1. Basic project purpose 2. Potential impacts to address (check &briefly describe) ❑ Navigation' ❑ Fish & wildlife habitat including rare species ❑ Water quality ❑ Natural scenic beauty ❑ Flooding & drainage ❑ Wetlands REVIEW OF ACTIVITIES UNDER NR 103 Does the activity affect wetland'? No NR 103 does not apply. Yes Is the activity -- water or wetland dependent, OR -- a cranberry operation, OR Is the impact 0.1 - aQre r less' No Does a practicable alternative exist that will not harm wetlands or cause other significant No harm to the environment? Yes ggiwy6ne how the project affects wetland functions — nclude cumulative impacts, secondary impacts, and effects on wetlands in areas of special natural resource interest. Examine alternatives that avoid or minimize adverse effects to Yes wetland functions and values. Considering the alternatives that avoid or minimize adverse effects, is this level of impact significant? No NR 103 standards ARE NOT meta I I NR 103 standards ARE met. 'The following artificial wetlands (created wetlands with no prior wetland or stream history) are EXEMPT from NR 103 ONLY IF they provide no significant aquatic or wildlife habitat function, or recreational, cultural, educational, scientific or natural aesthetic value: • Sedimentation and stormwater detention basins and associated conveyance features operated and maintained only for sediment detention or flood storage purposes • Active sewage lagoons, cooling ponds, waste disposal pits, fish rearing ponds and landscape ponds • Actively maintained farm drainage or roadside ditches • Artificial wetlands within active non - metallic mining operations 2 For landfill expansions, alternatives MAY be limited to areas adjacent to or on the same property. For expansions of existing cranberry operations (existing prior to June 1, 1998), alternatives are limited to areas adjacent to or on the same property. PUBL -FH- 025 -OOREV 1 0 - a C ) -) _ 2 U) � L Lo � E _ � k 2 .2 C � E � 0 2 Lo 0 2 2a �2 0 ¢ k o 0 0 c 0 . 2_ < c 17 « § @ § 7 / v J 2° C 2 E E £ cu q ® 2 q k k © 0> 0 0' c 2 k k 0 £ E■ k D 7 @ �_ %« 0 § -_ o f ƒ o o o a M o/@ a co 0>§ E © a@ = > E - £° ■ E ° t 9 § �� 0$ k a ■ E (,D - c m £ k 2 E o f t > 2 D m � 2 ° S 2 2 x$ © £ 7 E 7 a k @ 2 q a E_ m E - _ CO _ (D (D m or E R_ k k m>� k k 2 k k co 7 2 2 o m _ 2� 2 0 $ 2 2 a E- �: o wc/ 2 F 3 $ &< S° b q c 2 k c _ o _ @ e . . » & o m 7' 'D o L6 / m c U w¢ C E E yE 2g kk < »E or- L) Ek 3-0 $F- � § � 2 c k k - o co a f / k S $ % a 0- - t / / = J } I cL M C / fo 2 E § 2 o a 0 CL 2 « c a e _ i V ƒ o e < Mn u � � $ �_� O 0 C O m ( ( m a) Q E o N L , ,Q O a) ca m O C a) y .�' a= d O C O a) '«r C O fA > v . N L C ` L O C O) N p E a ca '.�. C a) O L a) cn O N +' O O L 0 (a .. E _ +- C C .cn C m O 0 a) U m a) a) m E a >, �- C O O X �, O O C E O V ( a ) j m U w� N O U) a O a) E Q O r- 0 C- 0 E o 4- c c. a) o Q o c o a a a c s ° c c r- c c M Q c 0 m c ° 0 O c c �° 'c u ++ c O a) c ° > E° Q o fl. m a� m eo ° M c) O a) °� E a �' B o a a) rn a o �' c ° c L c � c ca v N o m c a c ° a c c 0 .5 m c E c � }' m 3 -° d cn O c w s ° g o m v c U o ° ,o m m O o �' ° c ` `o c�a O !�• o a) a (D 3 c c c c � c c� o� :� .>-. M y a) (n L �° ° o� c L S a a) c .S m :? a) o o m m U) tM u a (D c N cn E c. O C) c`� ` c a ° a o .c = ° ° m c E c� ° oo>. 3 cn °O 3H- ccnai � ��°� Q Y m o a L O Q D °� o. E 's m = s m ( °• c c 0 m o ° -° v a) Q > L s I - E =a � .� ca (a o m v 2 D ° (n W L- o. H �° c�i C-; c 0 ' o E (n c w� _ L //�'� E A, CD .O C1 ( Q Q -� N O LL (� W a- M a ) c �• tm ~ m g c uj m Q �' m 3 Q v CA ° a �. s m t5 cA a) eQ c c c� c � c m m m E c a) .� vi c N N ` N c m '�' v a N O a) cc �.s cn 3.r `ma��i c > Q N O •� m 3 c CC 0 m 0 °° ° m cc a ° rn cn m O •' L Cl !n C to v- r E 4w 0 • a) O O a) a) E Q -a C a 0 ( m O �, a) O �, E > L p C p O m cn a L - 4 w L C CL (_ O O O m Cfl " V M a) O CO N CO) cn a N `�' C .-. ` Q a) c ((a c O m �O `. N �_ a -� > L •V O E O O a m N m a) 7 �. M '� C -0 a a) > M o U) i C a' os a E Q U y m 0 (n 0) m O° L Q C 7 E C U O Q) O - F- C E — CL o c :°. M cm c m co o ° Q a 0 3= ( E '- 4) a M O o ++ c 'E E LL o- o o .N (n m E ° o s cc ° m m E c c >, >, o o N a) E ° c- Q >, Ca Q m CL p O M° S N O v 0 .� Q m a 0 `a I F L - Q - Q �- cn = 0 3 C L 0 + c6 E cn C1. U Cl O a a) >' m ° c 0 C N E CL C t: s m CL - O C ° C N > a C L m �• 3. Q o 0 ° o CD � a� � Cc � v 0 a ° a O >. t m� rn c c rn m c o c ° a) ° a? .. o cca a U a m m Z° E cn (n ,�. o C c = E H c a? o ` ° c o a) ca o V o a Z' m ♦+ °� ° F ° ` o U O a ° c > a o Q. a) ° C* ca t Q o- CL .N o 'vi o m w m cv m s o ° (`a V = co �` m a) E ,N ° a) 4-- U) c c 3 c •• E o ,c E o w ` o m ° m m cn • L a .� 0 n �j °> c L c N a� c a = � N ° cn c w °- ° o o- `a) ai 3 a) ca m o c c N o m 0 m m :? c o cn _ c c0 *; o EmQa�m�? ° w = E aE a) a c a O >,m a) L o m a _ c a��i o 0 0 0� c CD o o a) a� E a) c G. M c ;° a m >, 0 (cc cv a m}, .c o� a) a 4 w. o E o� ca c -, t. to �+ a a) v_) c ( ;°. c E c 0 ° .. c`a N o o = c c 0 0 ca w .c 4) ° }, V a E E a) o c m o a) o CL w N 0 0 0 Q .N 3: c N m a o o O 2 �' cQ a) E m C13 cn a) =° Q o .N m c c U) E Q m a o c m a 'o (n .0 c o aai 0 .w' v o o x ° c c 'c a� s a a t L c N o w aci ca m 'c E cm Q o12 m C) - 0 a) H m Qi m 0 3 H U� a m An Open Letter to those interested in the runoff from the Sawyer Creek Watershed From W. Doral Kemper On the basis of 60 years of personal study and reading results of research by others on water movement and retention in soil, I believe that there is a more cost - effective and environmentally beneficial alternative to basin retention of water for reducing runoff, erosion and flooding in the Sawyer Creek Watershed. This alternative would also abate the current feeling that city and country residents are at cross purposes and demonstrate how we can work together for our common benefit. Sawyer Creek is fed by a watershed of about 10,000 acres, most of which is farm land, but it discharges into the Fox River, within the city limits of Oshkosh. Normally this creek carries only a few cubic feet of water per second. This sustained flow comes primarily from a few farmers fields via drain tile installed at 3 or 4 feet below the surface. When the creek level is low, the outlets of these tile lines are generally exposed and the water emerging from them is crystal clear. Generally the soil filters out the harmful bacteria as water passes through on its way to the tile. However, when rainfall exceeds the capacity of the soil to hold this water, it comes flushing over the surface of this soil and when the soil is bare, it often picks up sediment and harmful bacteria which "muddy" the water and make it unfit for human consumption. One inch of runoff from this watershed amounts to over 36 million cubic feet of water. If this comes down the creek in two hours, the average flow rate will be over five thousand cubic feet of water per second, which constitutes a raging torrent with its surface rising 10 to 12 feet above its normal level in many areas, flooding homes, businesses and utilities, resulting in millions of dollars of damage in the city. Following such runoff, farmers find gullies where topsoil has been eroded from their fields. Flooded city dwellers find much of this sediment on their streets, sidewalks, lawns and gardens when the flood water recedes. Damage to structures is extensive. Recognizing these damages in the city, the council, elected by the city residents, has authorized planning and development of retention basins in the Sawyer Creek watershed, into which storm water runoff can be diverted and retained during peak flows. Cost of purchasing the land and constructing these water retention basins is about $13 million which amounts to over $ 600 per household in the city. The land that has been identified as the best place to build the major retention basin has been productive cropland and the owners are reluctant to part with it, even though they are being offered a price that is considered fair by assessors. Most of the farmers and other residents of this rural portion of the watershed are negative toward the project and often describe it as "destructive and a waste of tax dollars ". They have appeared at city council meetings arguing that it cuts off natural drainage and traffic patterns in the area, that it takes irreplaceable land out of production and leaves the remaining portion of the farm as an unviable economic unit. However the city deems the project necessary and plans to undertake it as soon as the necessary county and state approvals can be obtained. This appears to be another case where the interests of the parties involved conflict and there is not an alternative, which will be satisfactory to all parties involved, so the welfare of the majority (the city dwellers) will over ride the wishes of the minority (the farmers). However, there is an alternative, which could achieve the needed increased retention of water in this watershed. At the time when these intense rainfall events occur (usually in June) the water tables in a large part of this area are less than 2 feet below the soil surface. The farmers dislike this condition because it keeps the surface soil wet and difficult to cultivate, seed, or spray and generally keeps crop yields substantially lower than those of crops on soils with deeper water tables. Some farmers have successfully drained such soils with corrugated and perforated polyethylene tile lines 3 to 4 feet below the surface and about 40 feet apart. This costs about $500 per acre, lowers the water table about a foot and drains an average of about one inch more water out of these soils. This makes room for retaining about one more inch of water in these drained soils, before their retention capacity is full and the water begins to run off during storm events. While the total area of the watershed is about 10,000 acres, the cultivated area is about 6,000 acres, and about 1,000 acres of this is already properly drained, leaving about 5,000 acres whose water retention potential could be increased by about an inch by such drainage. Drainage of this 5,000 acres of land would increase its retention capacity by about 5,000x 43,560x1/12 =18 million cubic feet of water. Cost of increasing the retention capacity of this land by this amount would be 5,000x500= 2,500,000 dollars. A prominent farmer in this watershed, who has already drained part of his land, and is evaluating the benefits of the drainage, believes that most of the farmers would respond to an offer by the city to pay half the cost of such drainage, by agreeing to pay the other half and initiating the needed drainage. Information from Minnesota studies on economics of farmland drainage indicate that increased production and lowered operational costs enable drainage systems to repay their costs within 3 to 10 years, depending on climate variations and the crops grown. If a cooperative effort of this type could be developed between the farmers and the city, the cost to the city would be about 1.25 million dollars, which would allow the city to gain 18 million cubic feet of water retention on this watershed. While an equivalent amount of water will come to the creek from the tile lines in the weeks following the intense rainfall event, the water coming out of those tile lines will be clear and will probably increase the base flow of the creek to about 5 times its present flow which will add to its potential for fishing and boating recreation. By intercepting this portion of the peak runoff at its source, its pickup of sediment would be avoided, and much less sediment would be delivered to flooded lands and to the Fox River and Lake Winnebago. There would also be major benefits to the farmers who install this drainage. For their combined investment of 1.25 million dollars they would receive increases in crop yields, which would enable them to repay their drainage costs in 2 to 5 years. It would eliminate wet spots in their fields, where it has often been difficult or impossible to drive their tractors and equipment, which wastes time, fuel, seed and fertilizer. There are also some operations such as seeding, spraying for weed and pest control and harvest, which cannot be postponed for many days without suffering substantial crop loss. Having drained their land, the farmers are able to get on it with the needed equipment much more of the time and avoid many of those losses. Recent studies in this area have shown that keeping the water table below freezing depths during the winter months is one of the prerequisites for developing significant populations of night crawlers. These earthworms, construct vertical burrows that facilitate downward growth of roots through these tough clays. Deeper rooting helps crops obtain the water that they need to continue their growth during drought, which leads to the surprising conclusion that drainage can, under some circumstances, improve the ability of crops to continue to grow during drought. To compare costs of increasing flood water retention in constructed basins with the cost of achieving this retention with improved drainage, the following figures are pertinent. The planned retention basin near James Road and Highway 91 is designed to hold about 12 million cubic feet of water and the cost estimate is about 8 million dollars, resulting in a cost estimate of about $0.67 per cubic foot of retention. Draining 5,000 acres of land at a cost of $500 /acre would cost 2.5 million dollars and would probably increase retention by 18 million cubic feet of water. This would be a cost of about $0.14 /cubic foot of retention. If farmers recognize the benefits accruing to them of this drainage and are willing to pay half the cost, the cost to the city will be reduced to $0.07 /cubic foot of increased retention. One prerequisite for the soil pore space to provide for the retention of the rain water is that it enters the soil where it falls and does not run off the surface, when there is still open pore space in the underlying soil. Our studies on these soils indicate that infiltration rates will remain high enough to absorb the water from rates of precipitation such as those which occurred in the June 2008 flood if there is sufficient crop residue left on the surface if the soil is tilled, or no -till management has built a healthy population of night crawlers or the crop is hay or pasture. Most of the runoff that occurred from the 2008 flood event occurred after the soil profiles filled with water as a result of several inches of rainfall in successive events. Additional room for water in the soil profile would have stored more of the precipitation and moderated the peak flood flow in the same manner as the planned retention basin is designed to do. In summary this drainage alternative for reducing cost of flood water retention to the city to about one eighth of the constructed basin cost, and substantial benefits to the environment and the farmers, are based on physical principles that have been well documented. I urge the city decision makers and managers to meet with some of the major land holders and discuss the potential of this alternative to provide a flood water retention plan which will be more cost effective and environmentally beneficial. If the basin retention plan has gone so far that it cannot be stopped, such a meeting would still be beneficial to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the drainage alternative, if more retention is needed.