Mullet River Corridor Study 2015 by MSA Professional Services

New st New stai airc rcas asee Dogg pa Do park rk Plaz Pl azaa

Orna Or name ment ntal al ttre rees es

Open Op en aair ir sshe helt lter er

Shadee tr Shad tree eess Publ Pu blic ic rres estr troo ooms ms Plan Pl anƟ Ɵn ngg ar area eass

Drea Dr eam m pa park rk Benc Be nch h Swin Sw ings gs

Gatewa Gate wayy fe feat atur uree Bike Bi ke sta taƟ Ɵo on n Ever Ev ergr gree een n sc scre reen en

MULLET RIVER CORRIDOR STUDY CITY OF PLYMOUTH, WI Prepared by MSA Professional Services, Inc. in coopera on with the City of Plymouth November, 2015

Contents and Acknowledgements Preface

Execu ve Summary ................................ iii

Chapter 1:

Regional Context...................................... 1 1.1 City of Plymouth 1.2 General Land Use 1.3 Mullet River

Chapter 2:

Chapter 3:

Chapter 4:

Mill Pond................................................ 11

A »ÄÊó½ ¦ Ã ÄãÝ The following people are responsible for the crea on, refinement, and adop on of this plan

Mayor Donald Pohlman

2.1 History of Mill Pond & Dam 2.2 Prior Mill Pond & Dam Studies 2.3 Summary of Key Issues 2.4 Design Alterna ves & Perspec ves 2.5 Design Alterna ves - Cost Es mates 2.6 Poten al Property Impacts 2.7 PIM Comments 2.8 Grant Funding Opportuni es 2.9 Study Summary Conclusions

Common Council

Plymouth River Trail............................... 25

Study Commi ee

3.1 Plymouth River Trail 3.2 Exis ng Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans 3.3 Summary of Key Issues 3.4 Design Alterna ves & Perspec ves 3.5 Design Alterna ves - Cost Es mates 3.6 Regulatory Permi ng Processes for Pedestrian Bridges over the Mullet River 3.7 PIM Comments 3.8 Grant Funding Opportuni es 3.9 Study Summary Conclusions

Charlie Hanson, Chairman Donald Pohlman Jim Sedlacek David Williams Terry Evans Jan Cecka Bill Zelm Mark Melcher Bill Barbieur

Downtown/Stayer Park.......................... 35 4.1 Plymouth River Trail 4.2 Exis ng Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans 4.3 Summary of Key Issues 4.4 Parking Occupancy Analysis 4.5 Design Alterna ves & Perspec ves 4.6 Design Alterna ves - Cost Es mates 4.7 Regulatory Permi ng Processes aﬀec ng River Wall Repair or Replacement 4.8 PIM Comments 4.9 Grant Funding Opportuni es 4.10 Study Summary Conclusions

Preface

Donald Pohlman, Mayor David Williams Greg Hildebrand John Nelson Jim Sedlacek Jack Fernsler James Faller Charles Hansen Shawn Marcom

City Staﬀ Brian Yerges, AICP/ICMA-CM, City Administrator/ U li es Manager William Immich, PE, Public Works Director/City Engineer Crystal Fieber, City A orney

MSA Professional Services, Inc. Andrew Bremer, AICP, Project Manager Steve Tremle , AICP, Urban Designer Sarah McDonald, PLA, Landscape Architect/Planner Becky Binz, Associate Planner Mike Laue, PE, Senior Project Engineer Eric Sorensen, PE, Senior Project Engineer Terri Velk, Engineer

MSA project number: 04047004

Mullet River Corridor Study

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PÙÊ¹ ã SçÃÃ Ùù This project studies the Mullet River corridor in the City of Plymouth, WI from STH 23, through Downtown, to CTH PP, as an aesthe c, recrea onal, and economic amenity that aﬀects or is enjoyed by all Plymouth residents and visitors. The project considers various projects and improvements that may enhance the use and health of this valuable community resource. The project includes three phases, or three sub-studies, connected by a common thread, the Mullet River.

P½ ÄÄ®Ä¦ O ¹ ã®ò Ý Phase I, studies Mill Pond, a 41-acre impoundment of the Mullet River, to evaluate and present two alterna ves for the future of the pond. The City is considering whether it should proceed with removal of the dam and pond or improvements to the dam and removal of sediment in some way to improve the pond. Each op on will have social, aesthe c, environmental, and economic

impacts. The purpose of this phase of the project is to evaluate the impacts and facilitate discussion about pond/dam improvement versus dam removal. The evalua on compared these two basic alterna ves in terms of es mated costs, impact on surrounding proper es and the community, opportuni es for public recrea on, and aesthe c outcomes. The final report does not include a recommenda on regarding a par cular course of ac on regarding the ques on of whether to remove the dam or proceed with dam improvement and sediment removal to maintain the pond. The purpose of the study and report is to describe the social, aesthe c, environmental, and economic impacts of proceeding with these two op ons, including developing concept plans and illustra ons or each op on. Phase II evaluates alterna ves for a connected system of bicycle and pedestrian trails along the Mullet River from the Old Plank Road Trail on STH 23 to CTH PP. The City currently has a network of on- and oﬀ-street

Planning Study Area

Mullet River Corridor Study

iii

Preface

Execu ve Summary

bicycle routes and trails, some of which have been branded as the “Plymouth River Trail.” The current network is incomplete. The purpose of this phase of the study is to evaluate the exis ng Plymouth River Trail network to iden fy gaps in infrastructure and signage and to iden fy short and long term improvement projects to bring the en re trail oﬀ-street to improve user experience and safety. Phase III evaluates the costs and benefits of implemen ng a number of infrastructure improvement projects along Mullet River in the Downtown, including evalua ng improvements to exis ng retaining walls and pedestrian bridges; studying the feasibility of burying overhead u lity lines; evalua ng removal of a public parking ramp (ramp not deck), and improvements to Stayer Park. This phase of the study includes conceptual designs, cost es mates, and descrip ons of permi ng processes.

K ù PÙÊ¹ ã A ã®ò®ã® Ý Ι P½ Ä CÊÃÖÊÄ ÄãÝ The plan is organized into the following chapters: Chapter 1, Regional Context: • This chapter describes the characteris cs of the planning area Chapter 2, Mill Pond Planning: • Review of exis ng plans and studies of the Mill Pond and Dam • Develop conceptual illustra ons for each alterna ve • Study poten al property impacts • Evaluate cost es mates for dam removal and sediment removal Chapter 3, Plymouth River Trail Planning: • Map exis ng bicycle routes & signage, iden fy key community des na ons • Map future trail and signage improvements • Develop cost es mates for short and long term improvement projects • Review regulatory permi ng processes aﬀec ng pedestrian bridges across the Mullet River Chapter 4, Downtown/Stayer Park Planning: • Evaluate costs and benefits of parking ramp removal • Assessment of traﬃc flow, parking needs, parking

City of Plymouth, WI

• • •

space configura on, etc. Conceptual drawings of future space without ramp, including Stayer Park improvements Costs es mates for burial of overhead u li es Review regulatory permi ng processes aﬀec ng river bank modifica ons

PÙÊ¹ ã Oò ÙÝ®¦«ã The City hired MSA Professional Services to assist with comple on of the planning study. The City formed a temporary ad hoc Mullet River Corridor Study Commi ee (MRCSC) to work with City Staﬀ and MSA on this project. The MRCSC included public oﬃcials and representa ves from stakeholder groups including the Mill Pond Lake Associa on, Chamber of Commerce, and local service clubs.

Pç ½® P Ùã® ®Ö ã®ÊÄ All MRCSC mee ngs for this project were open to the public. In addi on, a public involvement mee ng was held during the planning process to inform ci zens about the project objec ves and to collect input and feedback regarding dra design concepts. Approximately 50 people a ended the public involvement mee ng. The majority were property owners along Mill Pond.

P½ ÄÄ®Ä¦ S « ç½ The planning process spanned an eight month period in 2015 and included five mee ngs with the MRCSC and one public involvement mee ng. • • • • • • •

MRCSC Mee ng #1 – Project Kickoﬀ (March) MRCSC Mee ng #2 – Visioning (April) MRCSC Mee ng #3 – Concept Plans (May) MRCSC Mee ng #4 – Cost Es ma ng (July) Public Involvement Mee ng (August) MRCSC Mee ng #5 – Dra Plan Review (October) City Council - Final Report Acceptance (November)

P½ Ä PçÙÖÊÝ Ä Oçã ÊÃ Ý The report will serve to inform future decisions by the City Council regarding a course of ac on with dam or pond improvements, Plymouth River Trail improvements, Downtown/Stayer Park improvements, and other Mullet River corridor improvement projects.

CHAPTER 1 REGIONAL CONTEXT The following chapter broadly summarizes the study area. Chapters 2-4 include more specific descrip ons of each sub-planning area.

1.1 C®ãù Ê¥ P½ùÃÊçã« The City of Plymouth is located in Sheboygan County nestled in the gently rolling hills of the Ke le Moraine. The community is located 15 miles west of the City of Sheboygan, 25 miles east of the City of Fond du Lac, 50 miles north of the City of Milwaukee, and 60 miles south of the City of Green Bay. The popula on was 8,445 at the 2010 US Census. Like many other Wisconsin communi es, Plymouth started as a stagecoach stop on a Na ve American trail and wilderness road from Sheboygan to the interior of the state. Plymouth was surveyed in 1835 by United States Engineers. One of whom was named Mullet, and the Mullet river was subsequently named a er him. The Mullet River was what first a racted se lers from New England and New York, shortly followed by the Germans escaping the social upheaval in their homelands. The Smith family had named the area Quit Qui Oc, meaning “Crooked River,” while Henry and Thomas Davidson named it Plymouth, in reference to Plymouth, Massachuse s where the English Pilgrims landed in 1620. The State Legislature changed the name to Quit Qui Oc in 1851, but reversed itself, naming the whole se lement Plymouth a year later. The City was oﬃcially incorporated in 1877. The arrival of the Sheboygan and Mississippi Railroad in 1859, and the Milwaukee and Northern Railroad in 1871, made Plymouth a small railroad center with an underlying agricultural economy. Local cheese factories added to this economy in the 1860’s and 1870’s, bringing to downtown the Na onal Cheese Exchange, un l the late 1950’s.

Plymouth is known as the “Cheese Capital of the World.” Plymouth is home to many dairy and cheese related industries including Sargento Foods Inc., Sartori Cheese, Masters Gallery, and Great Lakes Cheese to name a few. A large Holstein cow named Antoine e is a local landmark. Erected in 1977 during the city’s centennial celebra on, it stands 20 feet (6.1 m) high and weighs over 1,000 pounds (450 kg). The monument observes the robust dairy industry in the area.

Black Bl B lac ack Ea E Earth arrtth Cr C Creek reek Antoine e cow statue in front of former City U lity Building

Mullet River Corridor Study

Chapter 1

Regional Context

1.2 G Ä Ù ½ L Ä UÝ

1.3 Mç½½ ã R®ò Ù

Plymouth is accessed primarily from STH 23, a four lane divided expressway running east-west along the north side of town from Fond du Lac to Sheboygan. State highways 57 and 67 also provide access from the south and north.

The Mullet River bisects the community flowing from the north to the south. The river runs parallel to Mill Street on the south side (or rear yard) of the proper es on the south side of Mill Street. The Mullet River is a tributary of the Sheboygan River, 40 miles long, in eastern Wisconsin. Via the Sheboygan, it is part of the watershed of Lake Michigan, draining an area of 88 square miles in a primarily agricultural area of the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands region of Wisconsin. FEMA designated floodplain areas line either side of the Mullet River through the City. Figure 1.3 illustrates the loca on of floodplains adjacent to

The Old Plank Road Trail parallels STH 23, a road originally built out of wooden planks in the 1800s, from the western edge of Sheboygan to the Village of Greenbush. The trail was one of the first in the country constructed in the same right-of-way as a divided 4-lane highway. In Plymouth, there is a trailhead at the intersec on of STH 57 and CTH C. Plymouth’s Historic Mill Street is the center of all town ac vity and is the historic Downtown area of the community. The remaining core of the City is comprised of tradi onal single-family development. Larger retail businesses and industrial parks are found along the major transporta on arterials on the outskirts of the Downtown. Refer to the City Zoning Map on page 3 for an illustra on of land uses by zoning classifica ons within the City. Figure 1.1 Planning Study Area

City of Plymouth, WI

Mullet River looking north from Youth Center pedestrian bridge

.+0&# .#

%6; 6- %

-; .' % 6

*#0%1. 4&

%#0&.'56+%- 4&

'..# .#

9*+52'4+0) .#

%6; 6- <

$4+#0 56

4756+% 4&

*#48'; &4

#+42#4- 4&

572'4+14 #8'

%*#2.+0 %6

4+8'48+'9 4&

%6; 6- %

%17064; #+4' 4&

2'450+%-'6; 2.

9+.510 56

$4 #0 %* 4 &

$47*; 4&

& &4 5 '0 .#0'

%.18'4&#.' .#

*+.. &#.' 4&

9 /+.. 56

(4'&'4+%- 56

9 /#+0 56

'.+<#$'6* 56

/#2.' &4

6'44#%' #8

'&0# 56

4+8'4 5+&' %+4

' %.+((14& 56

6 % 5 1 ) +. $

51 76* 4+8' 4 $. 8&

#00 &4

$'6* %+4

'#56/#0 56

6*#;'4 56

' /+.. 56

(14'56 #8

8+%614 %6

)418' 56

4756+% 56

6 % * % '' $ 5 17 6* * +. .5 % 5176* *+..5 &4 6

57//+6 56

5*#/41%- %6

5 %* 9# 46 < 5 6

9' 5 6' 40 #8 (4'/106 56

.1'$' &4

57*4-' 4&

0 2#4- 2.

(+4 .#

2#4- 8+'9 &4

-47/4'; 56

2#4- 56

*; 0 *;

0 /+.9 56

'./ .#

5/+6* 56

4+0)0'%- .#

5 2#4- 2.

-+/ %6

67/$.'4 4+&)' 9#;

56#((14& 56 *+.. %6

&1)911& .#

#5* %+4

&+8+5+10 56

*7510 %6

.# #% - 5 6

)4';5610' &4

6 # 5 0 & ' '

#.(4'& 56

/%%1./ 56

4''& 56

6 5 5 ..+0 %1

' /#+0 56

*1/' #8

/'#& #8

2.;/176* 56 &#.' 8+'9 &4 $''%* &4

&11.'; 4&

%6; 6- 1, $100+' %6

/1%+0)$+4 & .#

4''& 56

911&.#0& 4&

*7//+0 )$+4& .#

#&4+#0 %6

*+..612 .#

&17).#5 &4

6#..)4 #55 .# 510)$+4& %6

8#..'; 4&

'#56'40 #8

-'05+0)610 #8

21%* #8

4;#0 #8

&17).#5 &4

64#8+5 %6

$#$%1%- 56

-+.'; 9#;

70-0190

-+.'; 9#;

%1.7/$+# &4

%6; 6- 1

& ' 4 ) 6# 0 1 (4

ZONING MAP

City of Plymouth

-'05+0)610 #8

&4'+(7'456 4&

#0610 4&

5'./# 56

%*'44; .#

9 4+8'4$'0& &4

(#+48+'9 &4

.1.+' %6

64+'0'05 4&

*'+0 #8

# & . #. '4 '/

*+)* 56

0 /+.9 56

5 /+.9 56 *;

5 $4705 #8

$+5*12 #8

/7.$'44; .#

614-' 6'4 %.#4- 56

%#41.+0' 56 210; .#

#22.'610 56 '8'4)4''0 4&

5176* 56 5 *1 46 % 76 4 &

0 $4705 #8 5#.'/ &4 &'9'; .#

-+..&''4 .#

%6; 6- ' 0 *+)*.#0& #8

5 *+)*.#0& #8

$.7'$'44; .#

/110'; 4&

24#+4+' 4&

#0%*14 .#

%1//'4%' 56

2.'#5#06 8+'9 4&

0 2.'#5#06 8+'9 4&

#52'0 .#

2+%'66 56

$+4%* .#

'4+% %6

&#; .+.; %6

2.#<# .# (# +4 (+' .& . #

6 .' 5 /+&&

6 5 #0 ')

5 2.'#5#06 8+'9 4&

6 ; 5 4' 7/ -4

& 6 4 21 &'

%6 6#+. %#6

2.'#5#06 8+'9 4&

9#.610 &4

9'+5'4 %6

5274 .#

,#510 %6

%#44 4&

4 & '6 5 70 5

.+0&1'4('4 4&

#; ; 9 40 .# -+. %.18'4 .#

&4 *)*65 4+8'4 6 * 5 46 01

2+.)4+/ 4&

4 9 & 8+' '4 4+8

.7'; .#

911&.#0& 4&

%6; 6- %

JANUARY 2013

by: W. Immich

1 inch = 750 feet

9+..19 4&

LEGEND

%6; 6- 22

HI - Heavy Industrail

LI - Light Industrial

PO - Planned Office

B3 - Business Highway

B2 - Business General

B1 - Business Office

CB - Central Business

RMH - Mobile Home

PUD - Plan Unit Development

R4 - Multi Family

R3A - Two Family - zero setback

R3 - Two Family

R2 - Single Family

R1 - Single Family - rural

C - Conservancy

A - Agricultural

shebco_parcel 4+1 4& 5704+5' .#

911&.#0& 4&

Chapter 1

F®¦çÙ 1.2 C®ãù Ê¥ P½ùÃÊçã« ZÊÄ®Ä¦ M Ö

1.+' .#

/#4- &4

Mullet River Corridor Study

5#4614+ 9*';

4+8'45+&' .#

Chapter 1

Regional Context

Mill Pond and the Downtown. Note, that most of the proper es south of Mill Street in the Downtown are included within the 100-year floodplain area. The floodplain areas do not extend very far to the east of the pond or south of the river in the Downtown due to the steep topography of these areas. Chapters 2-4 include more specific descrip ons of environmental features in each sub-planning area.

Figure 1.3 Environmental Features, Mill Pond and Downtown Plymouth

856

856 872

870

860

2 86

832

848

HOME AVE

840

834

2-Foot

862

840

866

852

844

Contours

840

846

848

846 844

860

852

E AV

832

852

AE: 1% Annual Chance of Flooding, with BFE X: 0.2% Annual Chance of Flooding

MILL POND CT

DIVISION ST

N STAFFORD ST

854

ALFRED ST

Flood Zone Designations AE: Regulatory Floodway

844

85 2

CAROLINE ST

848

% ¾

852

866

N MILWAUKEE ST

0 87

850

SMITH ST

846

858

850

860

Parcels

830

852

862

LEGEND

ES TE

840

R NO

LE MIDD

ill

866

ELIZABETH ST

83 0

EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES

872

870

4 85

858

870

87 2 8 86 68 4

4 87

S EY

864

868

C ß

O ß

866

MR KRU

854

830 872

MARSHNER ST

N PLEASANT ST

870

874

868 6 86

858

FOREST AVE

834

E MAIN ST

W MAIN ST

840

836

844

840

85 8

834

850

882

87 6

870 874

876

872

2 87

874

876

O ß 874

878

872

City of Plymouth, WI

87 8

4 87

870

Printed By: abremer, File: P:\4000s\4040s\4047\04047004\GIS\4047004_ExistingEnvironmentalFeatures.mxd

872

DATA SOURCES: BASE DATA PROVIDED BY COUNTY. AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY WROC (2010). FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATIONS PROVIDED BY FEMA.

864

846

FREDERICK ST

AVE

876

842

824

NS COLLI

856

876 872

86 2

TERN

868

MEAD AVE

Rive r

862 866

838

ST RD AF FO ST S

824

lle t

2 85

THAYER ST

848

840 860

EAS

SOUTH ST

844

2 84

ION DIVIS

824

844

6 82 822

872

868

872

87 0

846 836

840

838

828

842

832

842

826

834

832

840

818

ßE MILL

C ß

E MILL ST

820

854

828

4 83

W MILL ST

ßE

836

834

838 6 83

874

SPRING ST

850

840

830

842

848 848

ßZ

864 2 86

872

870

4 84

VICTOR CT

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

150

Feet 300

Print Date: 10/19/2015

Stormw Sto rmwate aterr basi basin/I n/Ice ce Rin Rink k

Picnic Islan Picnic Island d Warmin War ming g hous house, e, par parkin king g lot an and d trai traill acce access ss

CHAPTER 2 MILL POND ExisƟng wa Exis warmi rming ng house hou se to remain remain Public Pub lic pa park rk Propos Pro posed ed parkin parking g lot lot

Picnic Pic nic nodes nodes Sha Shade de trees trees Orname Orn amenta ntall tree treess

Fishin Fis hing g node nodess

River Riv er trail trail Open Ope n lawn lawn/Ic /Ice e Habita Hab itatt hous houses es Pedestria Pedest rian nb brid ridge ge River Riv er tra trail il

The following chapter summarizes the por on of the planning study related to Mill Pond, specifically: • • • • • • •

A summary of the history of Mill Pond A review of exis ng plans and studies of the Mill Pond and Plymouth Dam. A review of design concepts developed during the planning process A summary of cost es mates for dam removal and sediment removal alterna ve concepts A review of poten al property impacts A summary of public input provided at the August 19th, 2015 public involvement mee ng A summary of poten al grant funding opportuni es

to this parcel of land containing the dam in 1949 by quit claim deed (Doc. No. 531787). This area comprises Anton Park which includes 166 feet of shoreline along the pond. The City owns another 0.25 acre parcel along the west side of the river just north of where the pond starts. This area comprises the City’s Youth Center. From the Youth Center north there is approximately 1,000 feet of shoreline on school property including a recrea onal trail along the west side of the river. A pedestrian foot bridge crosses the river from the Youth Center to E. Edna St.

2.1 H®ÝãÊÙù Ê¥ M®½½ PÊÄ Ι D Ã The Plymouth Mill Pond is a 41-acre impoundment of the Mullet River. The water body is maintained by a dam at the southern end of the pond and it extends north to WIS 23. The first dam was constructed some me around 1840. The present dam was constructed in the 1950s. There is specula on that the Mullet River was rerouted when the mill dam was built, but there is no suppor ng evidence for this. The dam and Mill Pond are shown in roughly their present configura on in both the 1875 and 1889 plat books found in the Plymouth Historical Society Museum. The Mill Pond was drained down in the late 1950s. During this drawdown the river was on the east side of the island.

Mill Pond, Plymouth Dam, and Mullet River, 2015.

Mill Pond is u lized for non-motorized boa ng, fishing, and public ice ska ng. The average water eleva on of the pond ranges between 831.40 and 831.45 feet and the water depth ranges between 1 and 4.3 feet, with an average water depth of 1.8 feet. The volume of the pond basin is approximately 88,390 cubic yards and the flushing rate is approximately 400 mes per year (residence me of 0.9 days).

The City of Plymouth owns approximately 0.75 acres of property adjacent to the dam on the southern end of the pond. The City obtained tle

Mullet River Corridor Study

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

F®¦çÙ 2.1 M®½½ PÊÄ , P½ùÃÊçã« D Ã Ι Mç½½ ã R®ò Ù H®ÝãÊÙù

1800 1900

1840 Original mill dam was constructed 1906 Dam washed out in flood 1950 Present dam constructed 1950 Mill Pond drained down 1957 Chemical fish kill to reduce carp in Mill Pond 1958 Trap netting removed 800-900 lbs. of carp 1959 Trap netting removed 2,300 lbs. of carp 1961 Trap netting removed 1,000 lbs. of carp 1963 Northern Pike restocked in Mill Pond 1966 Pond lowered and bypass tube installed 1966 Chemical fish kill to reduce carp in Mill Pond 1966 Game fish and panfish restocked in Mill Pond 1967 Pond treated with copper sulfate to kill algae 1969 Permit issued to chemically control algae and rooted plants 1971 First series of permits issued to control algae (and not rooted plants) in Millpond 1981 Mill Pond called “unsafe” after inspection by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

2000

2006 Mill Pond Future Directions Survey 2007 Alternatives Analysis completed 2008 Comprehensive Management Plan created 2008 Mill Pond draw down and weed harvest 2011 Sediment Sampling Activities Report 2012 Plymouth Mill Pond Association formed 2013 Dam Inspection Report filed 2014 WDNR memo in response to Dam Inspection Report 2015 Technical Report for Dam Break Study completed 2015 July letter from WDNR directing spillway improvement by 2025 2015 Dam mudjacking/repairs per WDNR requirements 2015 Mullet River Corridor Study Completed

Sources other than reports listed: Plymouth Millpond Historical Notes by John Nelson WDNR, June 2005

City of Plymouth, WI

Chapter 2 The impoundment has a so mud bo om and there is generally very li le rooted aqua c vegeta on. According to WDNR (WDNR, 1999), the Mill Pond supports a popula on of northern pike, largemouth bass, carp, and a variety of panfish. The Mill Pond a racts a variety of waterfowl and mammals, and mul ple pair of Canada geese nest on the pond each year. Large algal blooms and a growing carp popula on have become management concerns for the Mill Pond.

a need for stocking game fish in the Mill Pond, the general public and business owners didn’t know if there is a need.

2.2 PÙ®ÊÙ M®½½ PÊÄ Ι D Ã Sãç ® Ý

» Management Op ons – the long-term management op on preferred by the community is the removal of accumulated sediment in the Mill Pond (dredging).

The following sec on provides a summary of the previous environmental and planning reports that have been conducted for Mill Pond and Plymouth Dam since 2006. A brief summary of the purpose of each prior study and the work completed will be provided in chronological order, followed by a summary of findings and recommenda ons. Copies of these reports are on file with the City Administrator.

» Aesthe c Value – the scenic value of the Mill Pond is extremely important to the community and they consider it important for tourism. The community feels dredging removal of weeds/algae would improve the Pond’s aesthe c value.

» Cost/Funding – respondents felt grants and other government aid programs should fund costs associated with the Mill Pond and Dam. Use of tax dollars as funding for improvements to the Mill Pond was almost evenly split for and against.

M®½½ PÊÄ FçãçÙ D®Ù ã®ÊÄÝ SçÙò ù (2006)

A½ã ÙÄ ã®ò Ý AÄ ½ùÝ®Ý: M®½½ PÊÄ (2007)

In 2006, the University of Wisconsin-Extension Sheboygan County Oﬃce completed this survey to obtain opinions from Plymouth residents, property owners, and businesses about the Mill Pond’s future. The survey sought the community’s input on the topics of exis ng condi ons, pond uses, aesthe c values, management op ons, and cost/funding. The following is a summary of each of these topics:

In October of 2007, Earth Tech, Inc. performed an alterna ves analysis to evaluate six diﬀerent op ons to improve the water quality of Mill Pond. This report included an assessment of the feasibility and costbenefit of the six op ons to aid the City and Mill Pond Commi ee in making sound decisions related to management of the Pond. This analysis was used to inform the City of Plymouth and the Mill Pond Commi ee’s Mill Pond Comprehensive Planning project which was funded by a planning grant from the WDNR.

» Exis ng Condi ons – ci zens felt the overall quality of the Mill Pond is poor with the most cri cal threat to water quality is declining water depth due to silt/ sediment build-up. Aqua c plant/weed growth in the Mill Pond is described as heavy. While most survey par cipants have not gone fishing on the Mill Pond, those that have note the fishing is poor due to more rough fish than game fish. Geese and gulls are also considered a problem due to bird droppings. » Pond Uses – the Mill Pond is primarily used as scenic enjoyment. Its use as a ska ng arena is considered very important to the community. The community felt that access to Mill Pond is adequate and safety measures around the dam do not need to be improved. Enlargement of the island within the Mill Pond is not favored. Though most property owners said there is

The six op ons evaluated in the analysis are summarized in Table 2.1 on page 8. The report suggested that the best method to improve the water quality of Mill Pond was a combina on of pond drawdown and shoreline and stormwater management. Pond drawdown would increase water depth and bind some of the exis ng nutrients in the sediment, but it would not remove the nutrients or keep addi onal nutrients from entering the pond. For this reason, the recommenda on also included ins tu ng a process, with the assistance of the County Extension and the local WDNR oﬃces, to educate the public and City employees on how to be er manage the nutrients and sediments entering the pond in the immediate watershed of the Mill

Mullet River Corridor Study

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

Table 2.1. Summary of OpƟons for Mill Pond Future Alterna ve

Short-Term Long-Term Public Implementability Eﬀec veness Eﬀec veness Acceptability

Cost

Dam Removal

High

Low

$80,000

Dredging

High

Medium

High

$7,000,000

Aqua c Vegeta on Removal

Medium

$125,000/ me (3 mes or more per year)

Pond Drawdown

Medium

High

Medium

$500

Shoreline and Stormwater Management

Medium

Unknown

No Ac on

Low

High

Medium

Pond. The combina on of these two alterna ves is the least costly (with the excep on of no ac on) and can be implemented fairly quickly.

P½ùÃÊçã« M®½½ PÊÄ : CÊÃÖÙ « ÄÝ®ò M Ä ¦ Ã Äã P½ Ä (2008) Earth Tech, Inc. completed a comprehensive management plan in January 2008. The Management Plan is a long-term plan to improve the ecological, aesthe c, and recrea onal value of the Mill Pond. This plan is the final step in the City of Plymouth and the Mill Pond Commi ee’s Mill Pond Comprehensive Planning project which was funded by the WDNR grant. The Comprehensive Management Plan incorporates the Alterna ves Analysis from 2007 and informa on from the Mill Pond Watershed Assessment, Water Quality Assessment, and Macrophyte and Sediment Thickness Survey. The long-term management plan lays out water quality objec ves, best management prac ces, proposed ordinances, and other recommenda ons. The plan also includes specific implementa on informa on such as the agency responsible, details of what is needed, a me frame, and whether any ac vi es are eligible for a Lake Protec on Grant. Management objec ves for Mill Pond are split into recommenda ons within City of Plymouth, where most of the land is residen al and commercial, and recommenda ons outside of City limits, where most

City of Plymouth, WI

of the land is undeveloped and agricultural in nature. Management objec ves within the City include: » Draw down Mill Pond water levels to the baseline flow of the Mullet River (suggested every two years) ($500/ me) » Implement an educa onal series for local residents in the City of Plymouth to prevent introduc on of exo c species, promote the establishment of buffer strips, and reduce phosphorus inputs. » Con nue to monitor lake water quality to measure progress. » Adopt an ordinance to limit phosphorus applica ons through reduced lawn fer lizer use in order to prevent excess nutrients from entering the Mill Pond and the Mullet River. » Consider u lizing alterna ves to road salt to improve the water quality of the Mill Pond. Road salt alterna ves may include Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA) and Potassium Acetate (KA). » Establish un-mowed vegetated buffer strips along the public shoreline of the Mill Pond. » Ensure that all sep c systems adjacent to the Mill Pond are opera ng correctly. Management objec ves outside the City include: » Encourage local par cipa on in the Sheboygan County Land and Water Conserva on (SCLWC) Stream Buffer Program. » Implement an educa onal series for rural residents

Chapter 2 to prevent introduc on of exo c species, promote na ve shoreline plan ngs as buﬀers and promote sustainable agricultural prac ce methods that will reduce excess phosphorus, nitrate, and soil erosion in the watershed. » Coordinate with the WDNR in order to protect known threatened and endangered resources within the Mill Pond watershed.

S ®Ã Äã S ÃÖ½®Ä¦ A ã®ò®ã® Ý R ÖÊÙã (2010) In January of 2010, Kapur & Associates, Inc. completed sediment sampling ac vi es and prepared a report based on their findings. This sediment sampling ac vity was completed as required by Ch. NR 347 for all dredging projects. Sediment sampling ac vi es included advancing sediment cores, collec ng sediment samples, logging field data collected from sediment coring, and submi ng sediment samples for analysis. The analysis of the sediment core samples revealed the following these inorganic metals were detected at above the established Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines Table 1 Threshold Effect Concentra on (TEC): » Chromium » Copper » Lead Mr. William Barbieur, current President of the Plymouth Mill Pond Lake Associa on, discussed the sediment analysis results with WDNR staff in 2011. At that me, WDNR staff indicated that the contaminants listed above were not of great concern, and that the dredged material would not need to be placed in a landfill, but could instead be land spread or u lized as general fill if suitable, nearby disposal sites can be iden fied. While this is good news, MSA was unable to reach WDNR staff who made these comments, and we cau on that typically dredging projects require approvals from several different programs within WDNR: Waterways staff regarding Chapter 30 permi ng; Wastewater staff regarding discharge of carriage water from the

dredging spoils; and Solid Waste staﬀ regarding the final disposal of the dredging spoils.

W ã Ù Qç ½®ãù M Ä ¦ Ã Äã P½ Ä ¥ÊÙ ã« Mç½½ ã R®ò Ù W ã ÙÝ« (2010) In 2010 the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) completed a Water Quality Management Plan for Mullet River Watershed. (h p://dnr.wi.gov/water/basin/sheboygan/wtplans/ sh05/SH05_WTPLAN.PDF) According the WDNR report the water quality of the Mullet River is considered good from its headwaters to Plymouth (approximately 25 miles) and fair from Plymouth downstream to its confluence with the Sheboygan River (approximately 15 miles). The middle of the river, from Glenbeulah to Plymouth, has an increase in spring flow that lowers stream water temperatures and is classified as a Cold Water Community stream (trout). Upstream of Glenbeulah, and downstream of STH 67 near Plymouth, the Mullet River is classified as a Warm Water Sport Fish Community stream. This classifica on difference is due primarily to the increase in spring flow between Glenbeulah and Plymouth. The Mullet River is unique in that it flows from the warm water headwaters into a cold water segment. All of the other major tributaries in the Sheboygan Basin, including the Sheboygan and Onion Rivers, originate as coldwater streams and change over to warm water further downstream. The WDNR report concludes that the Plymouth Mill Pond dam is affec ng water quality and impeding fish passage and the pond also suffers from poor water quality and is over-run with carp and Canada geese. The report recommends working with the City to remove the dam, or if dams must remain, encourage fish passage restora on, secure funding and implemen ng projects. The report also recommends minimizing urban stormwater runoff to improve water quality.

Mullet River Corridor Study

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

P½ùÃÊçã« D Ã IÄÝÖ ã®ÊÄ R ÖÊÙã, F® ½ F®½ NçÃ Ù 59.07 (2013) In October 2013, M Squared Engineering, LLC completed an inspec on of Plymouth Dam. The WDNR administers a state-wide dam safety program (Chapter 31 of the Wisconsin Statues) which requires dam owners to hire a Professional Engineer with experience in dams to inspect their dam once every two to ten years. Since Plymouth Dam is classified as a high-hazard large dam, inspec ons must occur every two years. This 2013 inspec on is in compliance with the Statute and included a visual inspec on of the Plymouth Dam and a checklist of short and long-term follow-ups for the Dam to remain in good working order. The visual inspec on of the dam revealed many cracks and concrete separa on, which is typical of older dams. Since there were some larger cracks (none of which were concerning), the report suggested doing a laser scan of the dam every two years to iden fy any movement of concrete or increases in concrete separa on. At the me of the report, the dam was found to be in overall good condi on with the excep on of the following items that needed to be addressed: Embankment: » Remove brush and weeds breaking thought the pavement » Topsoil, seed and mulch any disturbed areas » Per WDNR, remove asphal c pavement and replace with compacted material and grass Auxiliary Spillway (sprayed concrete seawall): » Monitor minor cracks and openings » Monitor and remove vegeta on growth on the wall

P½ùÃÊçã« D Ã S ¥ ãù IÄÝÖ ã®ÊÄ: WDNR M ÃÊÙ Ä çÃ (2014) In June of 2014, WDNR responded to the 2013 Plymouth Dam Inspec on Report completed by M Squared Engineering, LLC. The WDNR replied that

10 City of Plymouth, WI

the report meets its Chapter 31 requirements but also that the inspec on report revealed deficiencies in the dam which should be completed so the dam is in compliance with code. The following deficiencies were to be corrected (the highlighted items were given extensions since they were previous direc ves that at this me had not been completed): » Submit Inspec on, Opera on and Maintenance Plan for review (by December 1, 2014) » Clear vegeta on on auxiliary spillway (by September 1, 2014) » Remove tree from le embankment (by September 1, 2014) » Repair seepage at downstream face of auxiliary spillway (by July 1, 2016) » Dam failure analysis (by September 1, 2014) » Detailed Environmental Ac on Plan (by December 1, 2014) » Embankment erosion (ongoing/monitor) The WDNR classified the Dam as “Condi onally Fair” due to previous unmet requirements in the Emergency Ac on Plan and the Inspec on Opera on and Maintenance Plan. The comple on of these items could change the classifica on of the Dam to “Sa sfactory” or “Fair”.

T «Ä® ½ R ÖÊÙã ¥ÊÙ D Ã BÙ »Ý Sãç ù: P½ùÃÊçã« D Ã (2015) In February 2015, Kapur & Associates, Inc. completed a technical report which describes and documents the elements required by the WDNR to develop a hazard ra ng for a dam. The report is based on data from WDNR, NOAA, USDA, USGS, GIS, and FEMA. Kapur & Associates submi ed a revised report dated March 17, 2015 and July 23, 2015. The revised reports found that a dam hazard ra ng of “low” is jus fied because the hydraulic shadow of a dam failure (during a 100-yr flood event) would not lead to greater downstream flooding than would the scenario in which the dam does not fail, or in the scenario in which there is no dam at all.

Chapter 2 In layman’s terms, the revised report finds the dam failure would not lead to increased flooding downstream because the dam failure occurs prior to the peak condi ons of the 100-yr flood. There is not much water stored behind the dam when compared to the rate and volume of water coming down the river, so the downstream flooding when the dam breaks is less than the downstream flooding due to the 100-yr flood itself (dam or no dam). In a regulatory sense, there would not be any more land downstream of the dam which would be subject to development/ redevelopment restric ons than currently exists within FEMA’s regulatory floodplain. The revised reports also found that the dam does not meet the hydraulic design and safety requirements of NR 333.07 (even with the “low hazard” dam ra ng). WDNR issued a le er on July 7, 2015 which approved the dam failure analysis and the low hazard ra ng. Based on the Kapur study and WDNR approval le er, the poten al exists for the dam to overtop and fail due to storm events smaller than the regulatory 100-yr storm. Further, Kapur concluded and WDNR concurred that the dam is unable to safely pass the 10-yr flow through its principal spillway; and unable to pass the 100-yr flow through its combined spillways in compliance with NR 333. WDNR directed that the spillway capacity must be brought into compliance within 10 years from the date of approval (July 7, 2025). MSA discussed the NR 333 compliance issues with Bill Sturtevant at WDNR. Mr. Sturtevant indicated that it may be possible to make modifica ons to the dam that would sa sfy NR 333 by providing addi onal spillway capacity. The addi onal spillway capacity could take the form of lowering and enlarging the exis ng spillway(s) and/or construc ng an addi onal spillway. Stated simply, the modified spillway capacity would have to be equal to the downstream river channel capacity for the flow rate leading to dam submergence (which would most likely s ll be less than the 10-yr flow rate). The hydraulic analysis of how this increased capacity could be provided is beyond the scope of this report.

Likewise, without addi onal hydraulic analysis it would not be appropriate to provide an es mate of poten al construc on cost. That said, MSA believes the only economical way this could poten ally be achieved would be to u lize the park space (i.e. Anton Park) lying east of the dam to construct another auxiliary earthen spillway. The spillway could possibly be designed in an “L” shape, with one leg of the “L” parallel to the river. MSA es mates that a majority of the park space would have to be lowered in eleva on and then u lized as the auxiliary spillway. As an aside, it does appear that there is developed area upstream of the dam which could be removed from the regulatory floodplain if the dam were to be removed.

2.3 SçÃÃ Ùù Ê¥ K ù IÝÝç Ý There are two major issues facing the City: 1. Whether to keep, repair and improve the spillway capacity of Plymouth Dam; and subsequently if the dam is maintained, whether to improve the water quality of the Mill Pond through some type of sediment removal project. 2. Whether to remove the dam, and if so, what to do with the land currently occupied by the pond bed. The Plymouth Mill Pond Lake Associa on is advoca ng the City repair the dam and implement a sediment removal project to improve the pond. Other community members ques on whether public financing should be used to improve the pond as they believe the improvements largely benefit the property owners surrounding the pond and not the en re community due to the lack of public access to and use of the pond. These community members also raise concerns that con nued public financing will be necessary to maintain the dam and that future sediment removal projects will also be necessary as the pond fills with sediment again.

Mullet River Corridor Study 11

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

The City has also heard concerns regarding how property values adjacent to the pond would be aﬀected if the dam and pond were removed? How does removal of the dam aﬀect property ownership boundaries along the pond? What would happen to the area if the pond where removed?

also no designated boat water access at this loca on; however, the school does use the shoreline north of the Youth Center for canoe launches for instruc onal purposes. A pedestrian bridge crosses the river at this loca on.

The following sec ons explore these issues in more detail.

2.4 D Ý®¦Ä A½ã ÙÄ ã®ò Ý Ι P ÙÝÖ ã®ò Ý Two alterna ves were developed to visualize the longterm use and maintenance of the study area, one where the City keeps the dam and another where the dam and pond are removed. These two alterna ves are illustrated on the following pages through design concepts developed by MSA and refined by the MRCSC.

PÊÄ /D Ã IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã Figure 2.1 illustrates a design improvement concept in which the dam and pond are maintained. Improvement projects are generally isolated to the land area around the pond. As part of the planning process, the MRCSC discussed the desire to improve public access and use of the pond if the City were to proceed with repairing the dam and/or comple ng sediment removal projects. The consensus discussion was that if the City were to contribute financially to the improvement of the pond through a sediment removal project that they City should seek to increase public access and use of the pond as well.

Anton Park, Veterans Trail and Fishing Deck (above)

Figure 2.1 iden fies those exis ng parcels along the river/pond currently owned by the City. This includes approximately 0.75 acres of property adjacent to the dam on the southern end of the pond. This area comprises Anton Park which includes 166 feet of shoreline along the pond and a Veteran Memorial Trail which is part of the Plymouth River Trail. The City currently maintains an ADA fishing deck at this loca on; however, there is no boat water access at this loca on. The City owns another 0.25 acre parcel along the west side of the river just north of where the pond starts. This area comprises the City’s Youth Center. There is

12 City of Plymouth, WI

Plymouth Youth Center and Pedestrian Bridge on Mullet River

Chapter 2 F®¦çÙ 2.1 PÊÄ /D Ã IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã

Mullet River Corridor Study 13

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

Two public streets, Alfred and E. Main, also terminate along the west side of the pond, neither site includes public boat launching facili es. The terminus of E. Main St. does include a building which is used for a warming house during the winter for ice ska ng and hockey users.

Warming House at the end of E. Main St.

•

Sites 4-6 are located adjacent to the exis ng warming house at the terminus of E. Main St. Poten al improvements include an updated warming shelter, picnic/grill areas, fishing facili es and a small cra boat landing.

•

Sites 7-9 are on the south side of Alfred Street and provide another poten al loca on for picnic/ grill areas, fishing facili es and a small cra boat landing.

Sites 1-9 were chosen as the most viable sites due to factors such as:

Given that there is limited public access and no true “Mill Pond Park” the MRCSC iden fied three clusters of areas that could poten ally be redeveloped into a “Mill Pond Park” to improve public access to the pond. The three areas comprise nine exis ng parcels. Addi onal notes regarding these sites are provided below. •

the pond and picnic/fishing facili es at the water’s edge. This site connects the pond to the adjacent County fairgrounds and provides public access on the east side of the pond where currently none exists.

•

topography - most of the east bank of the pond has steep slopes which makes access to the pond more diﬃcult.

•

property values - since all of the parcels are privately owned the MRCSC chose to iden fy sites that had a lower assessed value as compared to other parcels adjacent to the pond. Current assessment values and acreages for all parcels are highlighted in Table 2.2.

Sites 1-3 are located at the corner of Riverview Drive and Fairview Drive. Poten al improvements include a Shelter near the roadways, walkpaths to

Table 2.2. PotenƟal “Mill Pond Park” AcquisiƟon Areas SITE # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Address

PROPERTY Tax Number

609 RIVERVIEW DR FAIRVIEW DR 530 FAIRVIEW DR 633 E MAIN ST 629 E MAIN ST 640 E MAIN ST 627 ALFRED ST 629 ALFRED ST 619 ALFRED ST

PARCEL AREA Acres Square Feet

59271814600 1.78 59271820420 0.24 59271820393 0.48 59271813570 0.32 59271813581 0.12 59271812810 0.38 59271813820 0.17 59271813830 0.23 59271813800 0.17133

14 City of Plymouth, WI

77,501 10,635 20,927 13,756 5,016 16,497 7,345 10,108 7,463

Land $56,200 $18,600 $30,500 $41,900 n.a. $36,500 $18,500 $28,000 $18,500

ASSESSED VALUES Improvement $143,900 $0 $99,100 $98,700 n.a. $99,800 $95,600 $85,700 $116,700

Total $200,100 $18,600 $129,600 $140,600 n.a. $136,300 $114,100 $113,700 $135,200

Chapter 2 •

proximity to exis ng public infrastructure proximity to the County Fairgrounds, Downtown and exis ng roadways (i.e. Alfred St. and E. Main St.) were also contribu ng factors.

It is important to note that none of the Sites 1-9 are currently listed for sale. These sites are listed only for planning purposes and inclusion of these sites within this plan does not compel property owners to sell their property to the City nor does it obligate the City to purchase these parcels. In addi on, other viable sites not listed on the map or in Table 2.2 may surface in the future as alterna ves for the City to consider should it decide to develop more parkland along the pond. Sites 1-9 are not listed in priority order; and it is not assumed that all three parcels within a cluster would necessarily need to be purchased to develop an adequate public access/park. It is possible that land acquisi on and parkland development could be phased. Addi onal site specific planning should be completed prior to any future land acquisi on projects.

PÊÄ /D Ã R ÃÊò ½ IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã Figure 2.2 on page 16 illustrates an alterna ve improvement concept which assumes the City would remove the dam and pond and return Mullet River to a “pre-dam se ng”. The concept design illustrates an approximate loca on and width for the river with the dam removed. Some historical reports indicate that the river may have been on the east side of “Picnic Island” prior to the original dams construc on. However, in 2009 the pond was

Mullet River looking north from Youth Center pedestrian during 2009 draw down

drawn down as part of an a empt to improve the water quality of the pond. At that me the river remained on the west side of Picnic Island. The dam removal concept includes an assump on that the City would acquire and maintain ownership of the land area where the pond formerly belonged. This would enable the crea on of new park and recrea on facili es along both sides of the river. During the planning process the MRCSC iden fied that if this alterna ve were pursued that ac ve use recrea onal facili es (e.g. ball diamonds) should not be located within the former pond land area. Figure 2.2 proposes a number of improvements which were deemed more appropriate by the MRCSC including: •

• • • • •

Extending the Plymouth River Trail along both sides of the river (see Chapter 3 for addi onal details) Crea ng secondary walking paths from the Plymouth River Trail Establishing fishing and picnic nodes Installa on of na ve prairie plan ngs, trees and habitat houses Construc on of an addi onal pedestrian bridge a few hundred feet north of the exis ng dam Maintaining loca ons for ice ska ng and hockey ac vi es

This concept is further illustrated in the perspec ve image, Figure 2.3, on page 17.

Example proposed fishing node

Mullet River Corridor Study 15

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

F®¦çÙ 2.2 D Ã R ÃÊò ½/R®ò Ù IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã

16 City of Plymouth, WI

July 22, 2015

Mullet River Planning

MILL POND IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVE

ExisƟng warming house to remain Public park Proposed parking lot

Stormwater basin/Ice Rink

Pedestrian bridge River trail

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

Habitat houses

Open lawn/Ice

River trail

Fishing nodes

Shade trees Ornamental trees

Picnic nodes

Picnic Island Warming house, parking lot and trail access

Chapter 2

F®¦çÙ 2.3 D Ã R ÃÊò ½/R®ò Ù IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã P ÙÝÖ ã®ò

Mullet River Corridor Study 17

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

2.5 D Ý®¦Ä A½ã ÙÄ ã®ò Ý - CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý As part of the planning project MSA developed cost es mates for each alterna ve. These are planning level cost es mates. These es mates would be updated during final design of any project approved to move forward by the City Council.

PÊÄ /D Ã IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã The January 2008 Comprehensive Management Plan prepared by Earth Tech included costs es mates for a number of water quality improvement alterna ves (refer to Table 2.1). At the me the report was completed, Earth Tech es mated that the cost to dredge the en re 180,000 cubic yards of so sediment in the Mill Pond by hydraulic methods was es mated to be between $3.5 and $5.2 million not including disposal costs, which was es mated to be as much as $3.2 to $5.4 million, for a total cost of $6.7 to $10.6 million. This planning process did not include upda ng field measurements collected for the 2008 study. However, in MSA’s opinion if the dredging spoils did not have to be land filled but instead could be spread on nearby undeveloped land (i.e. reduced disposal costs) the es mated costs for dredging, on a conceptual level, could be reduced by as much as perhaps $2 million depending on the iden fica on of a suitable loca on for disposal and its proximity to Mill Pond (i.e. reduced transit costs). Due to the lack of public land around the pond the cost es mates from the 2008 report assumed that hydraulic dredging would be necessary as opposed to mechanical dredging. These cost es mates in Table 2.1 do not include the cost to improve the dam to meet NR 333 compliance standards. MSA es mates that the costs to complete the dam repairs and increase the spillway capacity could be several hundred thousand dollars and would likely impact Anton Park and Veterans Memorial Trail. This planning process did not include developing cost es mates or concept illustra ons for the dam repair and spillway capacity improvements. The cost es mates in Table 2.1 also do not include poten al land acquisi on and park development costs to acquire and develop a “Mill Pond Park.” The

18 City of Plymouth, WI

Chapter 2 costs es mates also do not include addi onal longterm maintenance costs to maintain the dam or other future dredging projects as may be necessary.

PÊÄ /D Ã R ÃÊò ½ IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã Table 2.2 provides a detailed summary of the cost es mates to remove the dam and improve the pond area into a passive public park. Cost es mates were provided for the following site features: •

Bio-reten on facili es. There are eight storm sewer ou alls that drain into Mill Pond. These ou alls would need to be addressed if the pond were removed. MSA has envisioned construc on of a series of bio-reten on facili es that would aid in trea ng the stormwater runoﬀ prior to entering the Mullet River.

•

Plants. Most of the area would be restored with low maintenance restora on seeding.

•

Site Furnishings. The cost es mates include installa on of a number of picnic tables, benches, and educa onal signage along the trails. Some tensile shade structures are also envisioned. These have the ability to be placed within floodplain areas.

•

Miscellaneous. Includes a prefabricated pedestrian bridge near the exis ng dam, habitat and fishing habitat areas.

•

Concrete. Includes public park plaza and walkways (decora ve pa o). Assumed for acquisi on Site 4-6.

Example tensile shade structure

Chapter 2 T ½ 2.2 PÊÄ /D Ã R ÃÊò ½ IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý DAM REMOVAL ALTERNATIVE COST ESTIMATE ITEM

DESCRIPTION

ESTIMATED QUANTITY

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Bio-retention outfalls

UNITS

UNIT PRICE

Shade Trees

Ornamental Trees

Evergreen Trees

Shrubs

TOTAL PRICE

4,000.00 $

32,000.00

600.00 $

19,200.00

350.00 $

14,700.00

300.00 $

3,000.00

50.00 $

2,500.00

PLANTS

Perennials Restoration seeding

100

15.00 $

1,500.00

1,250.00 $

37,500.00

Shoreline stabilization/erosion control matting 26,000

2.50 $

65,000.00

110

45.00 $

4,950.00

Picnic table

1,500.00 $

15,000.00

Bench

1,000.00 $

20,000.00

25,000.00 $

125,000.00

250.00 $

2,500.00

112,500.00

Mulch SITE FURNISHINGS

Tensile shade structure Education signage MISCELANEOUS Pedestrian Bridge

1,500.00 $

Habitat Houses/Nest Boxes

50.00 $

1,000.00

2,500.00 $

12,500.00

Public Park Plaza and walks (Decorative patio)

10,000

25.00 $

250,000.00

Trails (8' wide asphalt)

10,400

23.50 $

244,400.00

2,500

12.25 $

30,625.00

40,000

6.00 $

240,000.00

80,000.00 $

80,000.00

Subtotal $ Contingency (20%) $ TOTAL $

1,313,875.00 262,775.00 1,576,650.00

Fishing Habitat Areas CONCRETE

TRAILS* Trails (8' wide limestone) EARTHWORK Land Shaping DAM REMOVAL

•

Trails. Includes both eight-foot wide asphalt and limestone trails. The asphalt por on includes those segments of the Plymouth River Trail.

•

Earthwork. Includes land shaping along the final river bank.

The total es mated costs, including a 20% con ngency, is approximately $1.6 million. This includes an es mated $80,000 to remove the dam as reported in the January 2008 Comprehensive Management Plan. The cost es mates do not include land acquisi on

expenditures to purchase addi onal public property along the river. In addi on, the cost es mates do not include poten al land acquisi on costs for the land area currently occupied by the pond bed which may revert to private ownership if the dam were removed. Refer to Sec on 2.6 for addi onal details. Long-term maintenance costs for the area are also not included; however, the intent of the park design is to choose plan ngs and furnishings that require minimal annual maintenance.

Mullet River Corridor Study 19

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

2.6 PÊã Äã® ½ PÙÊÖ Ùãù IÃÖ ãÝ Having addressed in concept how the area currently occupied by the pond could be used if the dam were removed the MRCSC wanted to explore two issues related to poten al property impacts. The first is what eﬀect, if any, there would be on adjacent property assessment values if the dam is removed. The second, who retains ownership of the land from the current high water mark of the pond to the high water mark of the river once the dam is removed.

PÙÊÖ Ùãù AÝÝ ÝÝÃ Äã IÃÖ ãÝ In 2006, Professor Bill Provencher from the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics from the University of Wisconsin and Helen Sarakinos from the River Alliance of Wisconsin completed a study tled Does Small Dam Removal Aﬀect Local Property Values? An Empirical Analysis. The proper es that were analyzed in the report were all located in the same general area, south-central Wisconsin, to help control the number of variables which aﬀect property value. Three categories of sites were examined in the paper: sites with an intact dam, sites where a dam was recently removed and sites where a stream had been free-flowing for at least 20 years. The study examined a number of dam removal projects including: • • • • •

Woolen Mills Dam, West Bend, WI LaValle Dam, LaValle, WI Waterworks Dam, Baraboo, WI North Avenue Dam, Milwaukee, WI Willow Am, Willow Falls State Park, Hudson, WI

Many of these dams had similar characteris cs as Plymouth Dam (i.e. built in the mid-1800s, impoundments of 40-100 acres, etc.). The study concluded that shoreline proper es along small dams do not have higher property values than shoreline proper es along free-flowing streams. Sarakinos clarified the report’s findings in a 2014 interview (h p://www.waupaca.com/Content/News/ Waupaca-News/Article/Economic-impact-of-dam-

20 City of Plymouth, WI

s-removal/7/16/23551) sta ng that dam removal typically does not aﬀect property value so long as the property retains its stream frontage. A loss of property value could occur if water recedes and the newly exposed land does not legally belong to the adjacent property owner. Moreover, property near a free flowing stream can be more valuable than property near a small dam. This increase in value occurs because as the impoundment is converted to a free-flowing state, the adjacent riparian zone also converts back to its natural state. The study points out that new open space adjacent to the stream o en increases property value, par cularly if the open space is used for nature preserva on or “passive recrea on” ac vi es like hiking and bird-watching. In addi on to the review of relevant prior research, MSA also completed a cursory comparison analysis of property assessment values between proper es located along Mill Pond with those proper es located along Meyer Park, were a prior dam was removed from the Mullet River. The proper es were compared based on land value and land value per square feet. Improvement values were not including in this evalua on since they can vary greatly from one property to another based on condi ons of the structure(s). The following provides a comparison of property values of similar proper es under similar circumstances along stretches of the Mullet River in Plymouth. Methodology: •

Single family residen al riverfront parcels on the Mullet River were exacted from parcel data along both sides of Mill Pond and southern por ons of the Mullet River adjacent to Meyer Nature Park.

•

Parcels were grouped based on shape area, under 10,000, 10,001-15,000, 15,001-20,000, 20,00125,000. 25,001-30,000, 30,001-40,000 and above 40,001 and then evaluated on their land value per square foot. One to one comparisons were not feasible due to the varia on in parcel sizes.

Chapter 2 F®¦çÙ 2.4 M®½½ PÊÄ Ä M ù Ù P Ù» L Ä V ½ç AÝÝ ÝÝÃ Äã Sã ã®Ýã® Ý Mullet River Properties: Land Value Per Square Foot Calculations by Range

Square Foot Average Range (All) under 10,000 $2.79 10,001-15,000 $2.45 15,001-20,000 $2.08 20,001-25,000 $1.81 25,001-30,000 $1.55 30,001-40,000 $1.31 40,001 and over $0.88

Average (Mill Pond) $2.70 $2.49 $2.12 $1.84 $1.55 $1.31 $0.88

Mullet Mill Average Max Median Median Min Number river south pond (Mullet Max (Mill (Mullet Median (Mill (Mullet Min (Mill (Mullet of South) Max (All) Pond) South) (All) Pond) South) Min (All) Pond) South) parcels parcels parcels $2.83 $2.97 $2.88 $2.97 $2.82 $2.76 $2.85 $2.52 $2.52 $2.24 12 8 4 $2.28 $2.77 $2.77 $2.34 $2.47 $2.49 $2.30 $1.75 $1.75 $2.20 27 5 22 $2.04 $2.77 $2.77 $2.11 $2.04 $2.12 $2.03 $1.67 $1.67 $1.99 13 7 6 $1.73 $1.89 $1.89 $1.88 $1.84 $1.85 $1.73 $1.59 $1.78 $1.59 11 8 3 $1.55 $1.67 $1.67 $1.55 $1.55 $1.54 $1.55 $1.34 $1.34 $1.55 8 1 7 n/a $1.47 $1.47 n/a $1.26 $1.26 n/a $1.21 $1.21 n/a 9 0 9 n/a $1.11 $1.11 n/a $0.86 $0.86 n/a $0.67 $0.67 n/a 6 0 6

Average Land Value per sq. ft. comparison $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00

Median Land Value per sq. ft. comparison $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00

Average (All)

Average (Mill Pond)

Average (Mullet South)

Median (All)

Max Land Value per sq. ft. comparison

Median (Mill Pond)

Median (Mullet South)

Min Land Value per sq. ft. comparison $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00

$3.50 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00

Max (All)

Max (Mill Pond)

Max (Mullet South)

Study Results: Figure 2.4 provides a summary of the results of the land value assessment comparisons between residen al proper es along Mill Pond and those found further down stream where a prior dam was located. Land values per square foot for proper es along Mill Pond appear to be higher than further south along the por on of the river where the dam has been removed previously. Overall the land assessment value of residen al parcels adjacent to Mill Pond was between 8 and 28 cents more per square foot than property

Min (All)

Min (Mill Pond)

Min (Mullet South)

located along the southern por on of the Mullet River. However, there was an excep on, for proper es under 10,000 square feet the average land values of proper es south along the Mullet River are 13 cents more than the Mill Pond Average of $2.70 square foot. There are a variety of factors that were not considered in this comparison that may impact the value of land. The results of this analysis should not be construed to indicate that if the dam were removed assessment values for residen al proper es around the pond would correspondingly lower. The sample size for

Mullet River Corridor Study 21

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

this analysis presents limita ons to the analysis. The conclusions from the Provencher and Sarakinos study should be considered first.

R®Ö Ù® Ä L Ä OóÄ ÙÝ«®Ö R®¦«ãÝ The other major ques on regarding property impacts concerns property ownership in the event of dam removal. Given the longevity of the Plymouth Dam, coupled with the number of proper es implicated by the dam’s removal, the property ownership and boundary issues are complicated. To address this issue the City directed their a orney to review the issue, research a sample of deeds, and provide a summary memorandum. The memorandums dated July 8, 2015 and August 21, 2015 are on file with the City Administrator. The following is a summary of these memorandums. In general, riparian land adjoins a lake or stream, and the boundary of the riparian land depends on both the type of waterbody to which it is adjacent and the language on the deed gran ng tle. The Mullet River would be considered a “natural stream” because it is a watercourse which has a direc on of flow or current, a defined bed and bank, and a regular flow of water. For natural streams, the riparian owner owns the bed to the geographic center of the stream, unless limited by deed. Mayer v. Grueber, 29 Wis. 2d 168, 138 N.W. 2d 197 (1965). Natural streams that have been dammed retain the same rules of streambed ownership as other natural streams. Thus, damming the stream does not convert the bed from a streambed to a lake bed. Private ownership of the streambed is retained, unless limited by the deed of the riparian property. If the dam is removed, a riparian property with a deed descrip on that extends to the OHWM (Ordinary High Water Mark) would very likely have ownership rights to the land that was previously part of the Mill Pond streambed. However, if the tle to the property does not extend to the OHWM, riparian rights may belong to the adjoining parcel or the parcel from which the riparian property was created. To determine whether riparian rights exist for a par cular parcel, the City would need to conduct an extensive review of the property’s tle for each parcel along the Mill Pond.

22 City of Plymouth, WI

The common law doctrine of “relic on” also supports the posi on that any por on of the riverbed returning to dry land would become the property of the adjoining riparian owner if the legal descrip on of the property is described to the edge of the waterbody. Relic on is the process whereby land is created when water permanently recedes or withdraws from a lake or river. Heise v. Village of Pewaukee, 92 Wis. 2d 333, 336 (1977). The City A orney concluded that the City, as owner of the dam, will not be en tled to all lands currently used for Mill Pond purposes if the City removed the dam. Any lands covered by the 1949 deed that gave the City ownership of the dam that become exposed as a result of dam removal will remain the land of the City. In addi on, any lands that become exposed to the north of the parcel that can be traced back to the City parcel will become land of the City. The City A orney also concluded that the 1848 deeds grant an easement to benefit the City parcel for use as a Mill Pond and for water flowage; however, the 1848 deeds do not intend to grant fee simple ownership rights to the owner of the dam for lands covered by the Mill Pond. Addi onal research is required to determine with any specificity which parcels would acquire lands exposed through dam removal. The cost of this addi onal research is unknown and therefore was not included in the cost es mates for the dam removal concept shown in Table 2.2. Likewise the cost to acquire any property currently occupied by the pond that may become private property a er deed research is completed is unknown and not shown in the cost es mates in Table 2.2. This could add substan ally to the cost of this alterna ve. However, it should be noted that the City is not obligated to keep the dam and therefore Mill Pond. If the City were to remove the dam it may have an obliga on to address land ownership issues but is not obligated to purchase the property occupied by the pond for construc on of the public park envisioned in this plan. Therefore, those landowners who retain ownership of the land were the pond is located would have to maintain this property and pay addi onal property taxes for any addi onal

Chapter 2 lands they receive. Through the planning process the MRCSC discussed how the City would be be er suited to develop and maintain this property as a unified park as opposed to a consor um of land owners. In addi on, given the land is in a floodplain it would not have any developable value for the property owners and could be a nuisance to maintain. Therefore, it may be possible to acquire the proper es at a reduced or no cost in exchange for the City comple ng public improvements to create a park such as the one envisioned in this planning project.

2.7 PIM CÊÃÃ ÄãÝ A public involvement mee ng was held during the planning process to inform ci zens about the project objec ves and to collect input and feedback regarding dra design concepts. Approximately 50 people a ended the public involvement mee ng. The majority were property owners along Mill Pond. A er a presenta on by MSA a endees were provided an opportunity to ask ques ons and submit comment forms for each design concept. Twelve of the a endees submi ed wri en comments. Copies of these forms are on file with the City Administrator. The majority of those who a ended the mee ng were in favor of repairing the dam and dredging the pond. A couple of the wri en responses favored removal of the dam. The majority of wri en responses can be grouped as follows: • •

•

Ques ons or concerns regarding the long-term costs of maintaining the proposed park space. Whether it would be possible to keep a reduced Mill Pond in some fashion while providing the bike paths. Ques ons regarding who would own the land occupied by the pond if the dam were removed.

2.8 GÙ Äã FçÄ ®Ä¦ OÖÖÊÙãçÄ®ã® Ý There are a few poten al grant funding programs that could assist with the improvement projects discussed in this study. The WDNR Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program provides 50% matching funds for both the acquisi on and development of nature based outdoor park and recrea on facili es. This program could be used to help oﬀ-set costs related to the development of “Mullet River Park”, including recrea onal trail development. Several state and federal acquisi on and development programs fall under the same local assistance stewardship grant program, including the federal Recrea onal Trails Grant Program. Applica ons are accepted annually on May 1. The WDNR’s Dam Municipal Grant Program provides a cost-sharing opportunity to municipali es and lake districts to improve the safety of a dam through eligible projects including dam maintenance, repair, modifica on, or abandonment and removal. Applica ons are due in January 21, 2016 for 20132015 biennial budget funds. The programs covers 50% of the first $400,000 of eligible project costs and 25% of the next $800,000 of eligible project costs. The program will cover 100% of the first $400,000 of eligible project costs for dam removal projects. The WDNR also has a Dam Removal Grant Program which provides reimbursement for 100% of eligible project costs up to a maximum of $50,000 to remove a dam. Applica ons are accepted on a con nual basis and funded on a first come first served basis un l all biennial budgeted funds are obligated. The WDNR also oﬀers a Surface Water Grant Program, including lake management planning, lake protec on & classifica on, river protec on, river planning and aqua c invasive species control. Grant deadlines and eligible ac vi es vary by type of sub-program. These programs generally fund planning and engineering studies and implementa on of best management prac ces to improve water quality. However, dredging ac vi es do not appear to be an eligible cost. Addi onal informa on these programs can be found at: h p://dnr.wi.gov/Aid/Grants.html

Mullet River Corridor Study 23

Chapter 2

Mill Pond

2.8 Sãç ù SçÃÃ Ùù CÊÄ ½çÝ®ÊÄÝ Phase I, studied Mill Pond, a 41-acre impoundment of the Mullet River, to evaluate and present two alterna ves for the future of the pond. The City is considering whether it should proceed with removal of the dam and pond or improvements to the dam and removal of the sediment in some way to improve the pond. Each op on will have social, aesthe c, environmental, and economic impacts. The purpose of this phase of the project was to evaluate the impacts and facilitate discussion about pond/dam improvement versus dam removal. The evalua on compared these two basic alterna ves in terms of es mated costs, impact on surrounding proper es and the community, opportuni es for public recrea on, and aesthe c outcomes. The report does not include a recommenda on regarding a par cular course of ac on regarding the ques on of whether to remove the dam or proceed with dam improvement and sediment removal to maintain the pond. The purpose of the study and report is to describe the social, aesthe c, environmental, and economic impacts of proceeding with these two op ons, including developing concept plans and illustra ons for each op on, to aid future decisions by the City Council. The July 23 2015 Technical Report included a revised dam failure analysis which assigned a “low hazard” ra ng to the dam due to the 100 year dam failure shadow and the 100 year no dam shadow being the same. The WDNR confirmed the low hazard ra ng. The “Low Hazard” ra ng requires the primary spillway to eﬀec vely pass the 10 year flow and the secondary spillway to eﬀec vely pass the 100 year flow. The exis ng dam does not conform to NR 333.07. A new or rehabilitated dam will not conform to the requirements due to the short length of the dam and eleva on constraints. The WDNR may approve a lessor spillway capacity in accordance with NR 333.07. The WDNR has directed that the dam spillway capacity must be brought into compliance within 10 years, or by July 7, 2025. This essen ally sets the meline within which the City Council must decide whether to proceed with repair of the dam and spillway capacity improvements or removal of the dam.

24 City of Plymouth, WI

This planning project did not include developing cost es mates for the spillway capacity improvements or illustra ons to document the possible impacts to Anton Park. The City should consider proceeding with this addi onal study to gain a be er understanding of these poten al costs and impacts. In addi on, the City could consider addi onal sediment sampling to determine updated cost es mates for dredging the pond under Chapter NR 347. It would also be beneficial to complete research of all deeds for proper es surrounding the pond to determine riparian land ownership configura ons if the dam was removed.

CHAPTER 3 PLYMOUTH RIVER TRAIL D AVE

The following chapter summarizes the por on of the planning study related to Plymouth River Trail, specifically: • • • • • • • •

A summary of the Plymouth River Trail A review of exis ng bicycle and pedestrian plans and studies within Plymouth. Map exis ng bicycle routes & signage, iden fy key community des na ons Map future trail and signage improvements Develop cost es mates for short and long term improvement projects Review regulatory permi ng processes aﬀec ng pedestrian bridges across the Mullet River A summary of public input provided at the August 19th, 2015 public involvement mee ng A summary of poten al grant funding opportuni es

3.1 P½ùÃÊçã« R®ò Ù TÙ ®½ Plymouth River Trail (PRT) is a City designated bicycle route that connects to the Old Plank Road Trail, which parallels STH 23, a road originally built out of wooden planks in the 1800s, from the western edge of Sheboygan to the Village of Greenbush. The trail was one of the first in the country constructed in the same right-of-way as a divided 4-lane highway. In Plymouth, there is a trailhead at the intersec on of STH 57 and CTH C. The Plymouth River Trail connects to the Old Plank Road Trail in two loca ons, at Sunset Dr. (west of the Mullet River) and Fairview Dr./CTH O (east of the Mullet River). The two segments unite at the Plymouth Youth Center and con nue south through the community to Meyer Park where the trail terminates at STH

67/CTH E. The trail consists of a mix of on- and oﬀroad segments. The City has branded the trail with a signature logo. These signs dot the trail at various loca ons (refer to Figure 3.3, page 27)

3.2 Eø®Ýã®Ä¦ B® ù ½ Ι P ÝãÙ® Ä P½ ÄÝ MSA reviewed a number of exis ng local and regional plans as they relate to bicycle and pedestrian planning within Plymouth including: • • • • • • •

2009 Plymouth Outdoor Recrea on Plan 2011 Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Plymouth Recrea on Trail Map 2007 Sheboygan County Pedestrian & Bicycle Comprehensive Plan 2007 Sheboygan County Outdoor Recrea on and Open Space Plan 2008 Sheboygan County Comprehensive Plan Sheboygan County Bike Map

Both the Plymouth Recrea on Trail Map and the Sheboygan County Bike Map are available on each community’s web site to promote and orient bike/ ped users. These maps are displayed on the following pages. Copies of the other reports are on file with the City Administrator.

Mullet River Corridor Study 25

Chapter 3

Plymouth River Trail

F®¦çÙ 3.1 Eø®Ýã®Ä¦ P½ùÃÊçã« R Ù ã®ÊÄ ½ TÙ ®½ M Ö © ¡

DRIVE CARR ROAD

TRAIL HEAD

IA I Æ * I

###

STATE HIGHWAY 57

PLAZA LANE

# ###### #

CT.

PICKETT ST BABCOCK

HAZEN ST

`PP'

LINDOERFER ROAD

DR.

FAIRFIELD LN

PILGRIM ROAD

. RD

PLEASANT VIEW ROAD

BUTTERCUP

CATTAIL CT.

SONGBIRD CT

OLLIE LN.

AIR PR

JUNE GRASS CT.

INDIAN GRASS CT.

'E' COUNTYHIGHWAY

*A ! I O

LA NE

DAY LILY CT

BRUNS

BITTERSWEET

WALTON

LINWOOD LN

`E' HIGHWAY AVE

DEWEY

MULBERRY

SHORTCUT

HIGHWAY

COUNTY

BROOKSIDE LN

HIGHLAND AVENUE

COUNTY

SALEM DR.

SAMUEL CIR BRUNS AVE LN

AVE HEIN

SELMA COMMERCE

WINDSONG CIR.

ORILE LN

SOUTH

O !

TA LLGRA SS

LANE

LA NE

PLEASANT VIEW ROAD

RD BISHOP

DRIVE ST

LOLIE CT STREET

CLARK ST

RAV EN CT.

ING BI RD

VALLEY ROAD ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

HUM MIN GBIRD

KILLDEER LN

! !

AVE

MEAD

KARIN CIR.

HIGH ST. BYRON ST

EVERGREEN CT.

STATE

AVE

FAIRVIEW

MILL POND CT

DIVISION ST

# #APPLETON ##

PONY

AN NC T.

#####

BEECH

TRIENENS

# DR

LN ME ADO W

TORKE TERRACE

! ! !!

ST ST STAFFORD HILL ST

# # ##

MILWAUKEE

DRIVE

OOK

SMITH

ST ST

CAROLINE

SPRING ST

ST PLEASANT

VIE

WBR

# W# DR # LO

WIL

DA LE

HUSON CT.

FA CT ST OR Y .

FA CT OR ST Y

ST ST PARK

PARK PL

TERRACE CT

PLYMOUTH

RIVERBEND DR.

LN.

SU NS ET

## # ##

! !

RD .

STATE HIGHWAY '67'

KRUMERY

! WOODLAND DR.

KARASAN CT.

PARKVIE W DR

KIM CT.

BRIAN ST.

! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PAR K

FAIRVIEW

OA R K I DG E

CHT 'O'

# # # # # # # # # # CTH 'OJ' DAVENPORT # ##

SOUTH

MO CK

# # # # RD ### ##

#############################

S GO

VALL EY

WAY

*A I

I! O

COLUMBIA DR

BIL

DRIVE

ADRIAN CT

KILEY

MAPLE

CIR

EV ER GR E

POCH AVE KENSINGTON AVE

RECREATION TRAIL MAP

RYAN AVE

HILLTOP LN AVE

! ! !

DOUGLAS DR

UR KS P LA R RD

# # O # #! RIV # ER # # BLVD # #

SCHOOL

AVE

ROBERTS

CLIFFORD

BETH

# SO#

EASTERN

CARPENTER ST

## ### ####

# # # # #ST CLIFFORD

BONNIE

Æ I

REED

ANN

RIVERBEND

PARKING

COLD STORAGE ST.

O !

KENSINGTON

####

HILLS

O !

McCOLM

Æ ! ! ! ! ! ST ! ! IN S!

! COLL

NIE JEN . DR

H EC BE . CT

OI I! *

CIR

A I

AVE

ST. I

EASTMAN

PICNIC AREA

TRAVIS CT

ALFRED ST

AN EG

D TR

DALE

ñ+ MILL

!! ! ! ! !

CLIFFORD

DOUGLAS

HOME AVE

!! !! !!!! !! ! !! ! !

Æ ! I O

THAYER ST

PROSPECT

# ####

INFORMATION

FREDERICK

* I

OBSERVATORY CIR

. DR

MAIN

I I Æ A

O !

BRAUN ST ELIZABETH

PO DE

G IN RN MO

O !

PARK

H RT NO

C LA

TOLIETS

* I

SUMMIT

E AV

ANTON RD

DREIFUERST

A Æ OI !

FRANKLIN ST

AVE

FOREST

MARSHNER ST

ST.

FREMONT

NA ED . ST

AV E

ORCHARD LN I EDNA

LE R MID D O CT ST VI EY BR UM KR

SC HW AR TZ

DOOLEY RD

* I

GROVE

LOEBE DR. I

O I! Æ

CITY PARK

HIGHWAY 'O'

4 O ! A

W V IE ER RIV

ON ILS

CHAPLIN

COUNTY

STATE HIGHWAY '23' © ¡

RUSTIC RD

SUHRKE

!!!!!!!!!!

N SO HN ST. JO

CITY PAVED TRAIL

# # ## ## # ##

! ! ! ! !

HARVEY

AIRPARK

STREET ROUTE

PLANK TRAIL © ¡

SUPERIOR AVE

QUIT QU OC ATHLETIC CENTER

COUNTY HIGHWAY 'PP'

F®¦çÙ 3.2 S« Êù¦ Ä CÊçÄãù B®» M Ö (P½ùÃÊçã« ÖÊÙã®ÊÄ ÊÄ½ù) City of Plymouth

" ) OJ

t nse Su Dr

" ) C

Quit Qui Oc Athletic Complex

The following is a summary of the key issues addressed during this phase of the study:

" ) E

Old Plank Road Trail

) " O

le t R

Milwaukee St

ul r

® v

County Fairgrounds

Historic Downtown, shopping, museum, & Arts Center

Clifford St

Riverbend Dr

High School Valley Rd

Pleasant View Rd

H.M. Meyer Nature Park

•

Incorrect/Out-Dated Mapping. Both the City and County exis ng bicycle maps are out of date and do not illustrate accurately the bicycle routes, route types, and signage in Plymouth. As part of the planning process MSA completed a field inventory of these exis ng features which are illustrated in Figure 3.3.

•

Comple ng the Plymouth River Trail. The Plymouth River Trail currently ends abruptly at STH 67 and misses several opportuni es to link to local and regional des na ons such as exis ng residen al neighborhoods and exis ng regional bicycle routes.

Plymouth Trailhead

B !

Eastern Ave

South St

" )

Highland Ave

Nutt Hill Park

ive

Fairview Dr

M Suhrke Rd Est. 2014

3.3 SçÃÃ Ùù Ê¥ K ù IÝÝç Ý

) " C

57 £ ¤

) " PP

0.5

Miles

26 City of Plymouth, WI

Est. 2014

Loebe Field

City Park and Aquatic Center

Youth Center

Nutt Hill Park

Roosevelt Park

Utility Park

Stayer Park

Huson Park

WE ST

AV E

S HILLS DR

13 ( !

800

Warming House

Lone Oak Park

Lions Park

Rotary Park

South River Park

2400 2400

4900

4000

ßE

4200

% ¾ 67

4700

1200 690

1600

3700 5600

4900

14 ( !

910

il l P

2200

2100

O ß

1100

MOC KI NG

15 ( !

11900

190 15900

PP ß

VALLEY RD

B IR D LN

750

KENSINGTON AVE

County Fairgrounds

E CLIFFORD ST

REED ST

IN COL L

E MAIN ST

2700

ELIZABETH ST

a `

a! 18 ` ` a ( 880 a! ` 4700 5000 E MILL ST 10 ( 11 ( ! 1500 a ` ` 1100 !7 ( aa a !8 ! ` (9 1500ST ` 1700 a ( ` S 1200

5900

2900

1000

`! a 4 a( `

FOREST AVE

900

Riverview M.S.

Printed By: abremer, File: P:\4000s\4040s\4047\04047004\GIS\4047004_ExistingBicycleFeatures.mxd

Meyer Park

Evergreen Golf Course

MAPLE DR

Anton Park

4900

67 % ¾

12100

11700

12 ( !

ä EASTERN AVE

B e

ßE

16000

( !

Horizon S.

2100

5200

IRIE RA

TALLGRAS 16 S LN

H.S.

3700 Plymouth

12500

17 ! (

O ß

1000

3000

640

16100

ll e t R i v e

PICKETT S

5600

a `

BEECH DR

Veterans Park

Num. Park Name

3600

W MAIN ST

ER N

HILL AND DALE RD

Quit Qui Oc Athletic Complex

G ID

ßZ

(6 !

( !

GROVE ST

(3 !

2300

ME A D

ßC

(2 !

KRUMREY ST

a `

23 ¾ %

BISHOP AVE

RIVERVIEW RD

CHAPLIN CT

Parkview S.

N MILWAUKEE ST

520

APPLETON ST

SUHRKE RD

N PARK

DIVISION ST

HEIN AVE

700 1600

i tR

Num. Park Name

10700

MEAD AVE

N HIGHLAND AVE

5800

DEWEY LN

S S BRUN

PLEASANT VIEW RD

!1 (

SOUTH ST

M u ll e

RIDGE

W RIVERB EN

O AK

TH BE SHORT C UT R

1F ä A VE

eB 1F ä P

ä B e

S HIGHLAND AVE

BLUEBERRY LN

B e

T WILSON S

K AC

B e

CARR RD

DR iv tR TH

B e

ET ll e R NO

Mu DR

d PILGRIM RD

W VIE ER RIV

B e

NS SU KILEY W

11000

23 ¾ %

470

1900

10800

ßC

12700

13400

2400

8600

57 % ¾

TH " !

3500

3100

Plymouth River Trail

Bike Lane

Bicycle May Use Full Lane

Feet 1,500 Print Date: 11/2/2015

375 750

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

DATA SOURCES: BASE DATA PROVIDED BY COUNTY. ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS PROVIDED BY WISDOT.

Annual average daily traffic counts (2011 and 2014)

TH Old Plank Road Trailhead " !

a `

B e

1F ä

Existing Bicycle Signs

Plymouth River Trail Designated Route

Street Route (unmarked and unsigned)

Street Route (unmarked pavement and signed shared lane)

Street Route (marked pavement and signed bike lane)

City Unpaved Trail

City Paved Trail

Old Plank Road Trail

Existing Bicycle Routes

Waterbody

State Property

County Property

City Property

School Property

Parks

Parcels

LEGEND

EXISTING BICYCLE FEATURES

Chapter 3

F®¦çÙ 3.3. Eø®Ýã®Ä¦ P½ùÃÊçã« B® ù ½ TÙ ®½Ý, RÊçã Ý, Ä S®¦Ä ¦

WALTON DR

CIR

Mullet River Corridor Study 27

PLAZA LN

Chapter 3 •

Plymouth River Trail

Increase User Safety and Wayfinding. The current Plymouth River Trail uses a system of on- and oﬀstreet trails. The City desires to increase user safety and trail enjoyment by gradually transi oning the trail to a completely oﬀ-street facility. In addi on, exis ng trail signage and wayfinding needs to be addressed to aid user naviga on.

3.4 P½ùÃÊçã« R®ò Ù TÙ ®½ IÃÖÙÊò Ã ÄãÝ Figures 3.4 and 3.5 illustrates proposed improvements to the Plymouth River Trail to address the key issues summarized in the previous sec on. Trail enhancement projects are grouped into short- and long-term improvement projects. Short-term is generally defined as within the next five years, with long-term beyond year 2020. Improvements including signage, wayfinding, intersec on markings, bridges, and trail rou ng. These improvements were developed by MSA and refined by the MRCSC.

S«ÊÙã-T ÙÃ IÃÖÙÊò Ã ÄãÝ In general, short-term improvement projects maintain the Plymouth River Trail on its current alignment. Proposed improvements focus on installing rou ng signage and intersec on markings where there are exis ng deficiencies and comple ng small segments of new oﬀ-street trail segments mostly in those loca ons where the City already owns right-of-way or easements. The following summarizes those proposed short-term improvements shown in Figure 3.4.

B. Off-Street Trail Segment. These improvements include two short segments of paved trail where gaps currently exist in the off-street trail network. The first is on Suhrke Rd. from Sunset Dr. to Krumrey St. There is an exis ng off-street trail from STH 67 to Krumrey St. along the south side of the road adjacent to City Park and the Plymouth Aqua c Center. From Krumrey St. to Sunset Dr. the PRT con nues on-street. However, the south side of the road contains an exis ng sidewalk which could be transi oned into a wider mul -use path. The other loca on is between CTH O and Torke Terrace. In this loca on the PRT follows a dirt two track road to get bicyclists off of CTH O and onto the quieter Torke Terrace. This small sec on should be paved to facilitate saver condi ons for bicyclists, par cularly since many bicyclists may be on road bicycles with res not designed for the exis ng rough trail condi ons. C. Off-Street Trail Segment & Pedestrian Bridge. This is a longer off-street trail segment designed to alleviate the need for bicyclists to travel along STH 67 to Frederick St. to access the PRT at Meyer Park. The exis ng off-street PRT terminates in front of the former City U lity Building/Antoine e Cow Statue. When the City sold the former u lity building they maintained an easement along the Mullet River around the rear of the parking lot to an exis ng pedestrian bridge that crosses the river. The parcel across

iver

let R

PRT

E x te

n si o

Former City Utility Building

Mul

A. Intersec on signage and pavement markings. The exis ng trail currently crosses STH 67 at two busy intersec ons (Suhrke Rd. and Mill. St.). Both loca ons require bicyclists to stop at STH 67; however, neither loca on requires oncoming traﬃc to stop. In addi on, there are no intersec on markings or pre-warning signs aler ng motorists that bicyclists cross at these loca ons and there are no PRT signs direc ng bicyclists in which direc on to proceed. Addi onal loca ons for new PRT signs are shown on the map.

Milwaukee Street

Mill Street

Fredrick Street

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AE

Poten al Oﬀ-Street PRT Improvement, including bridge crosses, behind former City U lity Building

28 City of Plymouth, WI

Chapter 3 F®¦çÙ 3.4. P½ ÄÄ P½ùÃÊçã« R®ò Ù TÙ ®½ - S«ÊÙã T ÙÃ IÃÖÙÊò Ã ÄãÝ

PLANNED PLYMOUTH RIVER TRAIL

RIVERVIEW RD

Short Term Improvements OJ ß

Parcels

23 ¾ %

a `

N HIGHLAND AVE

BISHOP AVE

1F ä

B e

S HIGHLAND AVE

BEECH DR

a E` ! (

MAPLE DR HILL AND DALE RD

Street Route (unmarked pavement and signed shared lane) Street Route (unmarked and unsigned) Proposed Bicycle Routes Proposed Street route (marked pavement and signed bike lane) Proposed City Paved Trail Proposed Pedestrian Trail Proposed Plymouth River Trail Designated Route Bicycle Signs 1F ä Bicycle May Use Full Lane

B IR D LN

Description (Short Term) PP ß

Intersection Markings

Paved Trail

BLUEBERRY LN

CIR

MOC KI NG

Plymouth H.S. Horizon S.

MEAD AVE

S BRUN DEWEY LN S A VE

DIVISION ST

N STAFFORD ST

APPLETON ST

SOUTH ST

N MILWAUKEE ST

CAROLINE ST

ßE

Street Route (marked pavement and signed bike lane) B e

VALLEY RD

UT R

O ß

RIDGE

O AK

E CLIFFORD ST

TH BE

S HILLS DR

SHORT C

N PARK

i tR

City Unpaved Trail

B e B e

City Paved Trail

INS COL L

1F ä

M ull e

W RIVERB EN

! (E

67 % ¾

Old Plank Road Trail

KENSINGTON AVE ` ` a a a ` a a ` ` EASTERN AVE E ! ( a `

REED ST

ME A D

P d

i ll

a ` ` a

E MILL ST

a `

Waterbody Existing Bicycle Routes

a `

ßC

A D ! ( ! ( a `

C ! (

G ID

SMITH ST

Parkview S.

a E` ! ( a `

State Property County Fairgrounds

a `

R NO

ßZ

County Property

eB AV E

W MAIN ST

W VIE ER RIV

Riverview M.S.

FOREST AVE ER N

City Property

K ST AC LA

GROVE ST

WE ST

i ve tR

a `

HEIN AVE

KRUMREY ST

l le

A ! (

a `

! (B ` a

B e

a `

School Property

ßE

67 % ¾

T WILSON S

NS SU

a `

B ! (

SUHRKE RD

CHAPLIN CT

Parks

23 % ¾

Paved Trail and Bridge

Paved Trail

Kiosk/Trailhead

Printed By: abremer, File: P:\4000s\4040s\4047\04047004\GIS\4047004_PlannedPlymouthRiverTrail.mxd

B e ä Bike Lane

a Plymouth River Trail ` a Proposed Plymouth River Trail Sign `

DATA SOURCES: BASE DATA PROVIDED BY COUNTY.

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

375 750

Feet 1,500

Print Date: 10/16/2015

the river is owned by the City and used as a u lity substa on. There is amble open space along this parcel to con nue the PRT to Frederick St., thus elimina ng the need for bicyclists to travel on STH 67. This improvement project also includes replacing the exis ng pedestrian bridge with a new bridge that is accessible to bicyclists. Refer to Sec on 3.6 for addi onal details.

bicycle and vehicle travel lanes. This could be accomplished by either pain ng a strip along the exis ng pavement or by crea ng a separate paved path between the exis ng pavement edge and the river. Installa on of lighted ballards between the path and the alleyway would enhance safety and aesthe cs along this por on of the trail.

D. Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. A por on of the PRT travels through an alleyway behind a block of Downtown proper es from S. Staﬀord St. to the railroad underpass. This improvement aims to improve the safety of bicyclists by separa ng

E. Kiosks. This improvement project includes installa on of wayfinding kiosks at four key des na ons in the community. Three loca on are along the PRT at Meyer Park, Stayer Park and at the Youth Center. The fourth loca on is at the

Mullet River Corridor Study 29

Chapter 3

Plymouth River Trail

F®¦çÙ 3.5. P½ ÄÄ P½ùÃÊçã« R®ò Ù TÙ ®½ - LÊÄ¦ T ÙÃ IÃÖÙÊò Ã ÄãÝ

PLANNED PLYMOUTH RIVER TRAIL

OJ ß

M u l le

RIVERVIEW RD

LongTerm Improvements r t Ri ve 67 % ¾

a `

Paved Trail

Bridge

Stairs

Paved Trail

Pedestrian Trail

Bridge

Paved Trail

S HIGHLAND AVE

D UT R

P ! (

Plymouth H.S. B e

PP ß

BLUEBERRY LN

M u l l et R i

SHORT C

D RIDGE

O AK

CIR

a ` r

MAPLE DR HILL AND DALE RD

a `

Q ! (

Street Route (unmarked and unsigned)

MOC ID KI Description (Long Term) NG B IR D LTrail N F Paved

BEECH DR

S HILLS DR

O ! (

TH BE

ßE

N ! (

Street Route (unmarked pavement and signed shared lane)

VALLEY RD R

B e

Horizon S.

O ß

N HIGHLAND AVE

BISHOP AVE HEIN AVE

MEAD AVE

E CLIFFORD ST

Street Route (marked pavement and signed bike lane) ä

1F ä

N STAFFORD ST

CAROLINE ST

APPLETON ST

SOUTH ST

N PARK

W RIVERB EN

% ¾ 67

City Unpaved Trail

B e

REED ST

City Paved Trail

1F ä

H ST

! (L

O LLINS ST

a ` ` a

ME A D

E ! ( M ! (

a `

Old Plank Road Trail

KENSINGTON AVE

! (J EASTERN AVE K ` a ! ( a `

E MILL ST

a ` C

P on

G ID

ßC

a `

ßZ

i ll

S BRUN DEWEY LN S A VE

N MILWAUKEE ST

Existing Bicycle Routes H ! (

! (I

SMITH ST

Parkview S.

` a a `

Waterbody

County Fairgrounds

W MAIN ST

State Property

W VIE

AV E

County Property

ER RIV

K ST AC LA

Riverview M.S.

FOREST AVE ER N

City Property

O ß

DIVISION ST

ßE G ! (

GROVE ST

Parks School Property

! (F

B e

KRUMREY ST

a `

T WILSON S

NS SU

a `

23 % ¾

SUHRKE RD

WE ST

Long-term improvement projects aim to reroute the Plymouth River Trail completely oﬀ-street and extended further south to CTH PP and further east along the Mullet River. The following summarizes those proposed long-term improvements shown in Figure 3.5.

Parcels

23 % ¾

CHAPLIN CT

LÊÄ¦-T ÙÃ IÃÖÙÊò Ã ÄãÝ

Proposed Bicycle Routes Proposed Street route (marked pavement and signed bike lane) Proposed City Paved Trail Proposed Pedestrian Trail Proposed Plymouth River Trail Designated Route Bicycle Signs 1F ä Bicycle May Use Full Lane B e ä Bike Lane

a Plymouth River Trail ` a Proposed Plymouth River Trail Sign `

DATA SOURCES: BASE DATA PROVIDED BY COUNTY.

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

375 750

Feet 1,500

Print Date: 10/16/2015

exis ng Old Plank Road Trailhead at STH 57. Kiosk informa on should include a map of the bicycle routes in the City and key des na ons such as parks, schools, and commercial districts.

F. Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. Segment F proposes rou ng the PRT from the Old Plank Road Trail south along the rightof-way on the east side of STH 67. The trail could then turn inward toward the Mullet River at a number of loca ons including north of the cemetery, through the cemetery, or through the driveway to the Middle School where the exis ng trail currently lies.

G. Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. Segment G would connect the Old Plank Road Trail to the exis ng pedestrian bridge across the Mullet River at E. Edna St. This segment would follow the east bank of the Mullet River. H. Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. Segment H would con nue along the east bank of the Mullet River to Anton Park. This segment is part of the proposed improvements to “Mullet River Park” if the City were to move forward with removal of the dam/pond and crea on of this park as described in Chapter 2.

Example trail kiosk at Plymouth Youth Center

30 City of Plymouth, WI

Chapter 3 I.

Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. Segment I mirrors Segment H on the west bank of the Mullet River.

Pedestrian Bridge. Improvement J includes the addi on of a pedestrian bridge to connect trail segments H and I just upstream from the exis ng dam near Anton Park.

K. Path Widening. The PRT currently passes under the south side of the bridge on CTH C down stream from the dam. The abutment under the bridge is narrow but passable by single bicyclists at a me. Future reconstruc on of the bridge should consider widening the abutment to provide addi onal width for safer two-way cycling. L. Stairs/Pedestrian Path. Improvement L includes construc on of a trail or stairway to connect the PRT at Stayer Park to Huson Park and the residen al neighborhood to the north. There is a steep embankment at this loca on which makes construc on of a hard surface trail more diﬃcult. However, a stairway or serpen ne wood chipped path can connect the neighborhood to the Downtown and PRT. M. Pave Exis ng Trail. Improvement M includes paving an exis ng grass trail that connects a residen al neighborhood to Meyer Park and the PRT. N. Pedestrian Trail. Improvement N also serves to link a residen al neighborhood to Meyer Park and the PRT. This neighborhood sits significantly above the park and therefore, similar to improvement L, a serpen ne wood shipped path is envisioned.

P. Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. Improvement P includes extending the PRT from its current terminus at STH 67 along the west right-of-way along STH 67 to CTH PP to connect to the regional County bike route system. Q. Oﬀ-Street Trail Segment. This segment would con nue along the north side of the Mullet River to South River Park.

3.5 PÙÊÖÊÝ IÃÖÙÊò Ã ÄãÝ - CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý As part of the planning project MSA developed cost es mates for short- and long-term PRT improvement concepts, refer to Table 3.1. These are planning level cost es mates. These es mates would be updated during final design of any project approved to move forward by the City Council. Note, there are a couple of long-term improvement projects with an es mated cost to be determined due to addi onal or unknown design considera ons that were outside of the scope of this planning project.

3.6 R ¦ç½ ãÊÙù P ÙÃ®ãã®Ä¦ PÙÊ ÝÝ Ý ¥ÊÙ P ÝãÙ® Ä BÙ® ¦ Ý Êò Ù ã« Mç½½ ã R®ò Ù There are a number of exis ng pedestrian bridges that currently cross the Mullet River. As part of the study the City desired to research regulatory permi ng processes for replacing the exis ng pedestrian bridge behind the old City U lity Building. The exis ng bridge is deteriora ng, is quite narrow, and contains

O. Bridge Widening. The long-term improvements include con nuing the PRT along the Mullet River to South River Park. This connec on will require the PRT to con nue along the right-of-way on STH 67 a short distance across an exis ng bridge. The current bridge has a narrow shoulder. Future reconstruc on of the bridge should consider a wider shoulder to allow safer ride for bicyclists. Exis ng Pedestrian Bridge behind old City U lity Building

Mullet River Corridor Study 31

Chapter 3

Plymouth River Trail

T ½ 3.1 P½ùÃÊçã« R®ò Ù TÙ ®½ S«ÊÙã Ä LÊÄ¦ T ÙÃ IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý Plymouth River Trail - Short Term Planned Improvement Cost Estimates Improvement Item A B C C D E

Description Insersection Markings/Signage Paved Trail Paved Trail Pedestrain Bridge Paved Trail Kiosk/Trailhead Facilities

Length (ft) NA 425 550 65 525 NA

$ $ $ $ $ $

Unit Cost 500.00 23.50 23.50 1,500.00 23.50 5,000.00

Estimated Total Cost $ 1,000 $ 9,988 $ 12,925 $ 97,500 $ 12,338 $ 15,000

Subtotal $ Contingency (20%) $ TOTAL $

148,750 29,750 178,500

Plymouth River Trail - Long Term Planned Improvement Cost Estimates Improvement Item F G H I J K L M N O P Q

Description Paved Trail Paved Trail Paved Trail Paved Trail Pedestrain Bridge Bridge Improvements Stairs Limestone Trail Limestone Trail Bridge Improvements Paved Trail Paved Trail

Length (ft) 1900 2400 3300 2800 75 65 125 1000 1000 100 1500 1800

$ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

Estimated Total Cost Unit Cost 23.50 $ 44,650 23.50 $ 56,400 23.50 $ 77,550 23.50 $ 65,800 110,000.00 $ 110,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD 12.25 $ 12,250 12.25 $ 12,250 TBD TBD 23.50 $ 35,250 23.50 $ 42,300

Subtotal $ Contingency (20%) $ TOTAL $

steps on either end. All of these features makes the exis ng bridge essen ally unusable for future bicycle use as part of the planned improvements to the PRT. This pedestrian bridge could be replaced as part of a river trail improvement project as long as the new replacement construc on does not conflict with Sec on 13-2-29 of the City’s Floodplain Zoning Ordinance. The new bridge structure would be considered an accessory to a permanent open space use and it must not obstruct flow of flood waters or cause any increase (more than 0.01 foot) in the regional (base) flood levels. Figure 3.6 displays the FEMA FIRM map showing the general loca on of the exis ng pedestrian bridge. The floodway width at this loca on is approximately 160+ feet and the regulated floodplain appears to

32 City of Plymouth, WI

456,450 91,290 547,740

extend from the high ground at the nearby electrical substa on (west bank) to the intersec on of S. Milwaukee Street and Thayer Street (east bank), including the former u li es building and some nearby homes. Due to the extent of the floodplain it is not feasible to think that the new bridge would completely span the floodplain and thereby not affect the base flood eleva on. However, it may be possible to span the floodway and not cause an increase in the base flood eleva on of more than 0.01 foot. In order to design a new bridge structure and provide suppor ng data that the base flood eleva on is not substan ally affected, a computer flood model of the river must be constructed. Depending upon available data and the complexity of the proposed improvements, an expected range of costs for this computer modeling effort might be $5,000 to $8,000

Chapter 3 F®¦çÙ 3.6. FEMA FIRM P Ä ½ 0301F, C®ãù Ê¥ P½ùÃÊçã«

based upon similar past projects. This cost is separate from the engineering fees for the bridge design, bidding and construc on process. If a design solu on is iden fied that will not significantly aﬀect the base flood eleva on then the permi ng process is as follows (not including any local City permits). 1. Submit the flood modeling of the newly proposed improvements along with a Condi onal Le er of Map Revision (CLOMR) based upon new bridge hydrology to FEMA for review. This submi al, in advance of the actual construc on, allows the applicant assurance that if the project is constructed according to the submi ed plans, then FEMA will approve the final map revision when the actual as-built documenta on is received in a follow-up submi al a er construc on. The current FEMA review fee for a CLOMR of this type is $6,750. Applica on Forms & Instruc ons: h p://www.fema.gov/na onalflood-insurance-program-flood-hazard-mapping/ mt-2-applica on-forms-and-instruc ons.

2. Submit the improvement plans along with the applicable waterway protec on permits (Chapter 30 permits) to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). More than likely the associated permits will include: (1) the bridge structure; (2) grading more than 10,000 square feet on the banks of a navigable waterway; and possibly, (3) stream bank protec on. The bridge would likely be considered an individual permit requiring a 30-day public comment period and a fee of $603 (current fee WDNR schedule). The grading and stream bank protec on permits might be considered general permits (depending upon the nature of the work) that would not require a public comment period but a fee of $303 (current WDNR fee schedule). WDNR Waterway Protec on Permit Applica on: h p:// dnr.wi.gov/topic/Waterways/

Mullet River Corridor Study 33

Chapter 3

Plymouth River Trail

3. The nature of the exis ng site does not appear to contain any wetlands, but the process should include contact with the Army Corps of Engineers to clear the work of any wetland impacts. h p:// www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/ Permi ngProcessProcedures.aspx 4. Assuming receipt of a FEMA approval for the CLOMR, the WDNR permits, and clearance from the Army Corps of Engineers, construc on of the improvements can begin. Note that the CLOMR is not a final clearance document from FEMA. It is only a “condi onal” approval that must be followed up by a second applica on to receive the final Le er of Map Revision (LOMR). The LOMR applica on includes the “a er construc on” asbuilt informa on. The current FEMA review fee for a LOMR of this type is $8,250. At the end of this process FEMA will issue a map revision le er that formally approves the project in the floodplain. The appropriate planning meline for permit ac vi es #1 thru #3 above should be about three to four months. Item #4 would be completed a er construc on, typically in about four to six weeks.

related to how closely these proposed trails segments would be to their exis ng property line, preferring any future trail to follow closer to the river.

3.8 GÙ Äã FçÄ ®Ä¦ OÖÖÊÙãçÄ®ã® Ý There are a few poten al grant funding programs that could assist with the improvement projects discussed in this study. The WDNR Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program provides 50% matching funds for both the acquisi on and development of nature based outdoor park and recrea on facili es. This program could be used to help oﬀ-set costs related to the development of the Plymouth River Trail. Several state and federal acquisi on and development programs fall under the same local assistance stewardship grant program, including the federal Recrea onal Trails Grant Program. Applica ons are accepted annually on May 1. Addi onal informa on these programs can be found at: h p://dnr.wi.gov/Aid/Grants.html

3.9 Sãç ù SçÃÃ Ùù CÊÄ ½çÝ®ÊÄÝ 3.7 PIM CÊÃÃ ÄãÝ A public involvement mee ng was held during the planning process to inform ci zens about the project objec ves and to collect input and feedback regarding dra design concepts. Approximately 50 people a ended the public involvement mee ng. The majority were property owners along Mill Pond. A er a presenta on by MSA a endees were provided an opportunity to ask ques ons and submit comment forms for the short- and long-term PRT improvement concepts. Twelve of the a endees submi ed wri en comments. Copies of these forms are on file with the City Administrator. The majority of those who a ended the mee ng were in favor of the proposed improvements to the PRT. Concerns generally centered around those segments which would be built if the dam were removed, which is generally more of a reflec on on their favorability to keep the dam in place. A few a endees had concerns

34 City of Plymouth, WI

Phase II evaluated alterna ves for a connected system of bicycle and pedestrian trails along the Mullet River from the Old Plank Road Trail on STH 23 to CTH PP. The City currently has a network of on- and off-street bicycle routes and trails, some of which have been branded as the “Plymouth River Trail.” The current network is incomplete. The purpose of this phase of the study was to evaluate the exis ng Plymouth River Trail network to iden fy gaps in infrastructure and signage and to iden fy short and long term improvement projects to bring the en re trail off-street to improve user experience and safety. Next project phases include implementa on of the short-term improvement projects star ng with signage/intersec on markings and final designs for new off-street trail segments and the pedestrian bridge behind the former City U lity Building. The City should also update its on-line bicycle map for residents and tourists.

CHAPTER 4 DOWNTOWN/STAYER PARK

The following chapter summarizes the por on of the planning study related to the Downtown and Stayer Park, specifically: • • • • • • • •

A summary Downtown and Stayer Park features A review of exis ng Downtown/Stayer Park plans and studies. A parking occupancy analysis A review of design concepts Cost es mates for proposed improvement projects Review regulatory permi ng processes aﬀec ng river wall repair or replacement A summary of public input provided at the August 19th, 2015 public involvement mee ng A summary of poten al grant funding opportuni es

4.1 DÊóÄãÊóÄ P½ùÃÊçã« Ι Sã ù Ù P Ù» Plymouth’s Historic Mill Street is the center of all town ac vity and is the historic Downtown area of the community. The Mullet River runs parallel to Mill Street on the south side (or rear yard) of the proper es on the south side of Mill Street. The Downtown district extends from the Plymouth Dam to STH 67/Milwaukee St., or approximately 0.5 miles, and is a very walkable place. In June 2011 a group of ar sts and mural painters by the name of “The Walldogs” converged upon Plymouth to beau fy historic downtown Plymouth and to preserve the city’s history. Each mural captures the nostalgia and historic significance of Plymouth’s rich business history. A total of 21 new murals were painted by the Walldogs. Plymouth now boasts a total of 23 murals, four within the study area. The Plymouth Chamber of Commerce maintains a Mural Walking Tour (see Figure 4.1).

Stayer Junior Park is a two acre park located at 39 Stafford St. on the north side of the river. The park has frontage along the Mullet River and is fenced in with playground equipment, si ng areas, and a 12,000 square foot dog park adjacent to the play equipment. The park is named a er Ralph F. and Alice Stayer, founders of the Johnsville Sausage Food Company. Access to the rear businesses and Stayer Park is provided from both Stafford St. and Mill St. Across from Stayer Park and the Mullet River is Huson Park, a 2.4-acre passive park. The Plymouth River Trail travels along the south side of the Mullet River through Huson Park with a foot bridge crossing the river to Stayer Park. Within the park area is a steeply wooded hillside along the river. Immediately to the east of Stayer Park is a two story parking structure. A ramp provides two-way access from Stafford Street/Stayer Park to the upper parking deck which contains 93 parking stalls. Several business surround the upper parking lot, and due to the topography of the site, are at grade with the upper parking deck. The southeast corner of the upper deck actually projects over the Mullet River, including a structural support pylon in the river. Access to the upper parking deck is also provided from Mill St.

Mullet River Corridor Study 35

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park Planning

F®¦çÙ 4.1 DÊóÄãÊóÄ MçÙ ½ TÊçÙ M Ö

History of Sargento

520 E. Mill Street | Plymouth Center, Inc. Artist: Ray Guzman Sponsor: Sargento Foods, Inc.

130 Division Street Artist: Nancy Bennett Sponsor: Plymouth Public Library Foundation

6 2

Historic Plymouth Public Library

Foundations of Faith

Interurban Car 26

208 E. Mill Street Artist: Dale Knaak Sponsor: Plymouth Downtown Revitalization

Plymouth Post Office

302 E. Main Street This mural is only viewable during Post Office hours.

9 7

300 E. Mill Street | Advanced Eyecare Artist: Noella Cotnam Sponsor: Bank First National

Cream of Wheat

420 E. Mill Street | Plymouth Historical Society Artist: Debbie Karr (Lands End ARI) Sponsor: Plymouth Historical Society, Jim Stahlman Memorial Fund

Historic Dairy State Bank

222 N. Stafford Street | St. John Lutheran Church Artist: Brad Bandow Sponsor: Thrivent Financial, Jerry Thompson, LUTCF, FIC Financial Associate

Wadham’s Gas Station

Hi-Ho Soda

120 E. Mill Street Artist: Ben & Joe Diaz Sponsor: Bank First National

320 E. Main Street | Frontier Communications Artist: Scott Lindley Sponsor: Van Horn Auto St John's Lutheran School and Church

Isaac Thorp

*The four murals highlighted in blue were not painted by “The Walldogs”, but we would like to include them for your enjoyment.

Post Oﬃce

Main Street

13 12 11

5 Fron er

4 3

Edward Jones A orney Seigert

Plymouth Review

A central staircase provides access from the upper parking deck to the lower parking area. The lower por on of the parking structure contains some public parking spaces; however, this area primarily serves as a loading zone. The concrete on the lower por on of the parking structure is showing significant heaving. A one-way access drive connects CTH C/Eastern Ave. (near the Mill St. intersec on) to the lower parking deck. The direc on of flow is east to west.

Am. Legion

19 20

De O'Malley's

Parking

117 Division Street | Edward Jones Building Artist: Dave Petri Sponsors: Plymouth Rotary Club, Plymouth Lions Club, Plymouth Optimist Club, Women’s Civic Society of Plymouth, GFWC Plymouth Woman’s Club, Sheboygan County Fair Association

Mill Dam Pond

Mill Street

Parking

Sheboygan County Fair

Plymouth 1 Art Center

Mill Street

Plymouth Historical Soc.

North Street

Division Street

Fiber McGee's

Staﬀord Street

Library

Smith Street

Milwaukee Street

115 Division Street | Attorney Larry Siegert Law Office Artist: Carole Bersin Sponsor: Plymouth Historical Society

Caroline Street

Plymouth Medical Plaza

Ea s

Parking access and ramp

The City owns the parking structure; however, the land where the structure is located is privately owned. Refer to Figure 4.2 for a map of the study area. Areas shaded in purple denote parcels owned by the City.

4.2 Eø®Ýã®Ä¦ DÊóÄãÊóÄ Ι Sã ù Ù P Ù» P½ ÄÝ MSA reviewed a number of exis ng local plans as they relate to the Downtown and Stayer Park. Copies of these reports are on file with the City Administrator. • • • • •

1989 Stayer Riverside Park Proposed Design Idea 2002 Plymouth Downtown Revitaliza on Plan 2009 Plymouth Outdoor Recrea on Plan 2011 Plymouth Comprehensive Plan 2015 Plymouth 2020 Downtown Ac on Plan

In 1989, a local ar st Alan Pape proposed a design idea to complete an upgrade of all the riverside areas between the Mill Street bridge and the Staﬀord Bridge. At the me the property was privately owned by the Downtown/Stayer Park, 2015.

36 City of Plymouth, WI

Chapter 4 F®¦çÙ 4.2 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» Sãç ù AÙ

Lower Parking Deck One-Way Access Point

Mill Street

Stafford Street

Eas ter

Parking Deck

Lower Parking Deck Two-Way Access Point

Parking Ramp

uth y mo

r Rive

ven u

l Tra i

t River Mulle

Stayer Park

Bridge

Huson Park

s St Collin

reet

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

F®¦çÙ 4.3 1989 Sã ù Ù R®ò ÙÝ® P Ù» CÊÄ Öã P½ Ä

Mullet River Corridor Study 37

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park

Stayer family and was been considered for dona on to the City. The design concept is illustrated in Figure 4.3 and included an open-air park pavilion, childrens play area, restrooms and a brat stand, an homage to the famous Johnsville Brat company founded by the Stayer family. Addi onal improvements included burial of overhead u lity wires, parking, ligh ng, and landscaping improvements. Pape envisioned the area as a poten al main s mulus for renewed ac vi es in all of Downtown Plymouth. The 2002 Plymouth Downtown Revitaliza on Master Plan included a number of redevelopment objec ves relevant to this planning study including: •

Maximizing Mullet River views and ameni es

•

Enhance and preserve the natural quali es of the Mullet River, embracing it as a community treasure

•

Create links between the downtown and the river that enhance the pedestrian experience and bolster business ac vity

•

Develop, maintain and promote ac vity generators to anchor the downtown district

On March 5, 2015 the City adopted a Downtown Ac on Plan tled Plymouth 2020 “The Cheese Capital of the World.” The Cheese Capital of the World is more than a slogan. It is a vision that combines what is important and unique about Plymouth and maximizes the value those features bring to the community in four specific ways: by suppor ng key economic drivers, especially the food industry; nurturing the workforce pipeline to extend that vision into the future; developing its most visible focal point “the downtown”; and crea ng more des na on opportuni es suppor ng this vision. One of the key objec ves of the ac on plan is to Upgrade the Downtown Experience.

4.3 SçÃÃ Ùù Ê¥ K ù IÝÝç Ý The 1989 Pape Plan and 2002 Downtown Master Plan led to the installa on of a number of improvements including the riverwalk, play equipment, and murals. However, other recommenda ons such as public restroom facili es, burying u li es, improving parking

38 City of Plymouth, WI

areas, public shelter and plaza space, and pedestrian enhancements remain not yet fully achieved. The following is a summary of the key issues addressed during this phase of the study: •

Burying Overhead U li es. Burying overhead u li es that run parallel to the Mullet River behind downtown businesses is an on-going goal of the City. This planning process includes developing costs es mates for this improvement project.

•

Remove Parking Ramp. In an eﬀort to improve both the aesthe cs of the Downtown and gain addi onal park space the City desired to conceptually plan for the removal of the parking ramp (ramp only, and not the deck). This planning process addresses cost es mates for removal of the ramp, conceptual illustra ons, and considera on of changes to traﬃc flows.

Parking Ramp & U li es, 2015

•

Park Enhancements. The play equipment in Stayer Park is older and is being considered for replacement. Local service clubs have indicated an interest in assis ng with fundraising and planning in order to create a new ADA accessible “Dream Park” in lieu of more tradi onal play equipment. The City also desired to expand the park area, develop a river trail on the north side of the Mullet River, and consider installa on of plaza/event space and public restrooms.

Chapter 4 4.4 P Ù»®Ä¦ O çÖ Ä ù AÄ ½ùÝ®Ý MSA completed a parking occupancy analysis to determine the use of exis ng parking spaces in the study area. MSA completed three inventories on the following dates and mes: • • •

Weather condi ons were clear and seasonable warm for all three inventories. The inventory included all on-street parking spaces along the east side of S. Stafford Street and along the south side of E. Mill Street from S. Stafford Street to CTH C/Eastern Ave. On-street parking spaces account for 20 total spaces. The inventory also included all public and private offstreet parking spaces in the same study area. Offstreet parking spaces account for 342 parking stalls, excluding the approximately 65 spaces under the parking deck which are primarily not used due to condi on of the pavement and availability of other parking loca ons.

Stayer Park, 2015

•

Wednesday, March 11, Noon-1pm Friday, March 20, 6-7pm Saturday, March 21, Noon-1pm

Parking Lot Enhancements. Stayer Park withstanding, the exis ng study area is considered a sea of concrete. Traﬃc flow and parking spaces are not well marked and pedestrian and vehicle areas are not well diﬀeren ated. The City desired to study the use of parking spaces, iden fy opportuni es to enhance pedestrian safety, site aesthe cs and user experiences.

F®¦çÙ 4.4 P Ù»®Ä¦ O çÖ Ä ù Sãç ù R Ýç½ãÝ

On Street Friday Saturday Wednesday

20 Total Spaces 17/20 = 85% 13/20 = 65% 16/20 = 80%

Oī Street (Mill) Friday Saturday Wednesday

Oī Street (rear)

180 Total Spaces

Friday Saturday Wednesday

143/180 = 85/180 = 72/180 =

Parking Study Map

79.4% 47.2% 40%

Area North of Ramp Friday Saturday Wednesday

20 Total Spaces 19/20 8/20 3/20

= = =

95% 40% 15%

Area South of Ramp Friday Saturday Wednesday

36 Total Spaces 14/36 11/36 7/36

= = =

38.9% 30.6% 19.4%

Ramp (above) Friday Saturday Wednesday

49 Total Spaces 5/49 = 10.2% 12/49 = 24.5% 11/49 = 22.4%

93 Total Spaces 3/93 = 3.2% 7/93 = 7.5% 32/93 = 34.4%

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

Mullet River Planning October 14, 2015

Mullet River Corridor Study 39

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park

Figure 4.4 illustrates the results of the parking occupancy study, by sub-areas per each of the three event counts. In general, MSA found 56% (201 of 362) of the total parking spaces occupied on Friday evening, 39% (141 of 362) of the total parking spaces occupied on Wednesday a ernoon, and 38% (136 of 362) of the total parking spaces occupied on Saturday a ernoon. While certain areas have higher sub-area occupancy rates, in general the results indicate that there is an over supply of parking in the study area.

•

Rerou ng the Plymouth River Trail. The design concept includes construc on of a new off-street trail from the exis ng pedestrian bridge in Stayer Park along the north side of the river to S. Stafford Street. This proposed improvement provides several benefits to the site including allowing for free flowing bicycle travel. The current PRT accesses S. Stafford Street on the south side of the river via several stairs which require bicyclists to carry their bike up or down the stairs.

4.5 D Ý®¦Ä A½ã ÙÄ ã®ò Ý Ι P ÙÝÖ ã®ò Ý

•

Restrooms. The exis ng park and Downtown area lack public restrooms. The City currently places a port-a-po y next to the park during the summer. Construc on of a permanent restroom like the one envisioned in the 1989 Pape plan is prohibited due to the site being within the 100year floodplain. The concept proposes acquiring an exis ng small single story commercial building for conversion into a public restroom.

As part of the planning project MSA developed a design alterna ve and several perspec ve renders that reimagine the Downtown/Stayer Park area. Figure 4.5 illustrates the proposed improvements. Key aspects of the design concept include:

F®¦çÙ 4.5 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã

40 City of Plymouth, WI

Chapter 4 •

Bike Rental Sta on. The concept includes an area for a bike rental sta on. This would allow tourists the ability to rent a bike for a specified period of me to enjoy a ride on the PRT. The bike rental sta on could charge a fee or be developed as a free ride sta on.

•

Dream Park. The concept includes an area for construc on of new playground equipment. As labeled the MRCSC envisions an ADA accessible “Dream Park”. The planning process did not include iden fying final equipment design and selec on. As shown there is approximately 13,000 square foot area for playground equipment.

•

Shelter and Plaza Space. The concept includes an outdoor plaza and open air shelter. The plaza is designed to mimic a mill wheel as part of developing a unified brand for the area consistent with exis ng marke ng and logo eﬀorts of the City. The shelter area will provide a space for concerts, picnics and special events. It is conceptually located to provide views from E. Mill St. Since water can pass freely through the structure it is permissible within the floodplain.

•

Dog Park. The concept includes maintaining a 9,500 square foot area for a dog park. The MRCSC desired to maintain a dog park in the redesigned park since it is used by residents above main street businesses. However, the dog park has been shi ed to the east side of the park to an area that is currently under u lized and separated from the playground and plaza spaces. There is another 7,600 square feet of “flex space” between the dog park and the parking lot that could be used for expansion of the dog park if use warrants a larger size.

•

Living Wall. Surrounding the north side of the dog park is a proposed living wall. The living wall consists of vegeta on to screen the ground level of the parking structure.

•

Parking Lot Reconstruc on. The design maintains all of the exis ng access loca ons; however, the parking areas are reconfigured in several loca ons to provide clearly delineated parking areas. Most of the improvements remain on City-owned property; however, some coordina on with private property owners will be necessary. The proposed 6,500

Poten al Public Restroom Building with exis ng mural

Poten al Open Air Shelter

Poten al Living Wall Screening Parking Ramp

Mullet River Corridor Study 41

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park

square foot parking lot on the east side of the shelter includes the op on for one aisle of parking or expanding for two aisles of parking. The en re design is net neutral with regards to parking spaces (e.g. the same number as currently exist). Since the parking occupancy studied indicated there was an over supply of parking, developing just the single aisle of parking next to the shelter, or no parking at all, would permit addi onal green space next to the shelter. Likewise, the City could remove the row of parking perpendicular to the proposed park to increase park size by an addi onal 4,000 square feet. Two accommodate two way traﬃc movements from the E. Mill Street access the exis ng angled parking is reconfigured from 60 degree to 45 degree parking. New curb and gu er is installed throughout the site to delineate and separate parking areas. •

U lity Replacement. The site contains exis ng underground water, sewer and stormwater mains. This planning project assumes these u li es would be replaced by the City as part of the reconstruc on of the parking lot.

•

Parking Ramp Removal. The concept includes removal of the exis ng parking ramp and installa on of an exterior stairwell at the southwest corner of the parking deck. The stairwell could either be open air or enclosed. An enclosed stairwell will be more expensive but permit year round use. Due to the removal of the parking ramp the southern aisle of the upper parking deck would need to change its direc on of traﬃc flow and angle of parking.

•

Burial of U li es, Landscaping and Public Art Installa ons. The concept includes several ideas to improve the aesthe cs and safety of the site including burial of overhead u li es, installa on of landscaped medians, decora ve ligh ng and crosswalks. The concept also includes several alterna ve loca ons to consider public art installa ons that celebrate Plymouth’s Cheese Capital of the World status.

•

Exis ng Stormwater Sewer Mains

Exis ng Sanitary Sewer Mains

Exis ng Water Mains

Gateway Entrances. The concept includes installa on of gateway arches across the E. Mill St. and S. Staﬀord St. entrances. The arches support the overall branding and aesthe c improvements to the site.

Figures 4.6 illustrates a perspec ve rendering of the proposed concept. Figure 4.7 includes a street level rendering of the proposed gateway features from the Mill Street entrance to the site.

42 City of Plymouth, WI

Exis ng Entrance to Stayer Park from Mill St.

Chapter 4 F®¦çÙ 4.6 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã - P ÙÝÖ ã®ò New staircase Dog park Plaza

Ornamental trees

Open air shelter

Shade trees Public restrooms PlanƟng areas

Dream park Bench Swings

Gateway feature Bike staƟon Evergreen screen

DOWNTOWN RIVERFRONT CONCEPT

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

F®¦çÙ 4.7 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã - G ã ó ù P ÙÝÖ ã®ò

Mullet River Corridor Study 43

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park

A March 5, 2015 Technical Memorandum completed by Kapur & Associates had ini ally indicated that Plymouth Dam could be given a high hazard ra ng under NR 333.06. A high hazard ra ng could have meant that those proper es currently within the floodway south of the dam, including many proper es in the Downtown, would become part of the floodway. As such, future property sales, renova ons, and redevelopment would have been significantly limited. A possible op on to remove the subject proper es from the floodway is the construc on of a levee on the river side of the aﬀected property. Levees are strictly regulated by NR 116.17 and the Army Corps of Engineers. Kapur es mated that a levee would be approximately 1,860 in length and 9-12 feet in height, with an es mated cost of $2.0 - $2.5 million. As part of this planning project the City requested MSA complete a grade level perspec ve rendering of the poten al levee wall to gather public feedback. Figure 4.8 includes a perspec ve rendering of a poten al levee wall along the Mullet River through the study area. The Technical Memorandum was later revised in July of 2015 based on a revised dam failure analysis. The revised dam failure analysis assigned a hazard ra ng

of “low” due to the 100 year dam failure shadow and the 100 year no dam shadow being the same. The WDNR confirmed the low hazard ra ng. The “Low Hazard” ra ng requires the primary spillway to eﬀec vely pass the 10 year flow and the secondary spillway to eﬀec vely pass the 100 year flow. The exis ng dam does not conform to NR 333.07. A new or rehabilitated dam will not conform to the requirements due to the short length of the dam and eleva on constraints. The WDNR may approve a lessor spillway capacity in accordance with NR 333.07. The levee wall remains a possible op on to remove the subject proper es from the floodway; however, it would greatly impact the aesthe cs of the Downtown and Stayer Park. In addi on, many of the improvements proposed in Figure 4.5 would no longer be feasible.

4.6 D Ý®¦Ä A½ã ÙÄ ã®ò Ý - CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý As part of the planning project MSA developed cost es mates for the proposed Downtown/Stayer Park improvements, refer to Table 4.1. These are planning level cost es mates. These es mates would be updated during final design of any project approved to move forward by the City Council.

F®¦çÙ 4.8 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» L ò W ½½ CÊÄ Öã - P ÙÝÖ ã®ò

Levee wall (approximately 8’ based on esƟmate provided in the Kapur Study of total wall height between 8’ and 12’)

LEVEE WALL ILLUSTRATION 44 City of Plymouth, WI

CITY OF PLYMOUTH SHEBOYGAN COUNTY, WI

Chapter 4 T ½ 4.1 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý ITEM #

ITEM DESCRIPTION

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Mobilization/ Bonds/ Insurance 1. Erosion Control 2. 3.

Traffic Control

REMOVALS Removal of Storm Sewer 4. Removal of Sanitary Sewer 5. 6.

Abandonment of Water Main

Removal of Pavement

Removal of Concrete Curb & Gutter

Sawcut Asphaltic Pavement

CONCRETE Curb & Gutter, 30-Inch 10.

ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNITS

ESTIMATED UNIT PRICE

ESTIMATED TOTAL PRICE

20,000.00

7,000.00

20,000.00 7,000.00

5,000.00

8,000.00

12,000.00

5,000.00

10,153

2.50

25,382.50

2,575

5.00

12,875.00

565

2.50

1,412.50

2,515

16.00

40,240.00

11.

Concrete Sidewalk, 5-Inch

8,725

5.00

43,625.00

12.

Colored Stamped Concrete, 5-Inch

5,060 1

SF LS

$ $

18.00 40,000.00

$ $

91,080.00 40,000.00

Concrete Stairs 13. ASPHALT Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Surface, 3-Inch (Path) 14. 15.

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Surface, 3-Inch Binder

110

TON

68.00

7,480.00

1,275

TON

65.00

82,875.00

16.

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Surface, 2-Inch Surface

850

TON

65.00

55,250.00

17.

Base Aggregate Dense 1 1/4-Inch

3,210

TON

15.00

48,150.00

3,210

48,150.00

18.

Base Aggregate Dense 3-Inch

19.

Pavement Marking Arrow Epoxy, White

Pavement Marking ADA Epoxy, White

Pavement Marking Epoxy, 4-Inch White 21. SANITARY SEWER Sanitary Sewer, 8-Inch 22.

TON

15.00

160.00

2,560.00

EA LF

$ $

160.00 1.25

$ $

1,440.00 6,387.50

5,110 375

60.00

22,500.00

225

75.00

16,875.00

Sanitary Manhole Type One, 4-Foot Diameter

3,500.00

10,500.00

Chimney Seals

250.00

750.00

Manhole Covers

1,000.00

3,000.00 2,400.00

23.

Sanitary Sewer, 12-Inch

24. 25. 26. 27.

Sanitary Sewer Granular Backfill

28.

Connection to Existing Sanitary

29. 30.

600

4.00

1,200.00

Inlets 2x3 Foot

1,000.00

10,000.00

Inlet Covers

1,000.00

10,000.00

STORM SEWER Storm Sewer Pipe Reinforced Concrete, 15-Inch 31.

400

52.00

20,800.00

32.

RCP Apron Endwall, 15-Inch

1,500.00

33.

Storm Sewer Manhole, 4-Foot Diameter

1,800.00

7,200.00

34.

Manhole Covers

1,000.00

4,000.00

35.

Storm Sewer Granular Backfill

400

4.00

1,600.00

36.

Storm Connection to Existing

850.00

WATER MAIN D.I. Water Main, 8-Inch 37.

425

60.00

25,500.00

38.

Fire Hydrant

4,200.00

39.

Valve, 8-Inch

1,600.00

3,200.00

40.

Water Main Granular Backfill

425 1

TF EA

$ $

4.00 2,250.00

$ $

1,700.00 2,250.00

497,236.00

Connection to Existing Water Main 41. BURIAL OF ELECTRIC UTILITIES Bury Electric Utilities 42. RAMP REMOVAL

Mullet River Corridor Study 45

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park

T ½ 4.1 DÊóÄãÊóÄ/Sã ù Ù P Ù» IÃÖÙÊò Ã Äã CÊÄ Öã CÊÝã EÝã®Ã ã Ý CÊÄã®Äç $ RAMP REMOVAL Ramp Removal 43. PUBLIC RESTROOM SITE ACQUISITION AND DEMOLITION Property Acquisition (current assessed value) 44.

40,000.00

76,000.00

TBD

STAIRWELL INSTALLATION Stairwell Installation (Enclosed Structure) 46.

$ 200,000.00

200,000.00

PLAYGROUND Playground Equipment 47.

$ 200,000.00

200,000.00

BIKE STATION Bike Station 48.

55,000.00

SHELTER & PATIO Shelter and Patio 49.

$ 160,000.00

160,000.00

TBD

60,000.00

570

23.50

13,395.00

45.

Renovations

SITE LANDSCAPING & FURNISHINGS Site Landscaping and Furnishings 50.

TBD

TRAIL 51

Trail

ARCH GATEWAY FEATURES Arch Gateway Features 52

EA $ 70,000.00 $ 140,000.00 Subtotal Items #1-#52 $ 2,155,563.50 Contigency (20%) $ 431,112.70 TOTAL $ 2,586,676.20

FUTURE PARKING EXPANSION Removal of Concrete Curb & Gutter 53 54

Curb & Gutter, 30-Inch

100

5.00

500.00

127

16.00

2,032.00

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Surface, 3-Inch Binder

TON

65.00

2,275.00

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Surface, 2-Inch Surface

TON

65.00

1,625.00

Base Aggregate Dense 1 1/4-Inch

TON

15.00

1,200.00

Base Aggregate Dense 3-Inch

TON

15.00

1,200.00

160.00

Pavement Marking ADA Epoxy, White

Pavement Marking Epoxy, 4-Inch White

Sources: U lity burial es mates, Forster Electrical Engineering Ramp removal, Town and Country U lity Construc on All others MSA Professional Services Notes: Es mated costs for burial of u li es includes from the railroad bridge to Eastern Ave.

46 City of Plymouth, WI

235

160.00

LF $ 1.25 $ Subtotal Items #51-#60 $ Contigency (20%) $

293.75 9,285.75

TOTAL $

11,142.90

1,857.15

The cost es mates in Table 4.1 assume the City would replace the water, sewer and stormwater u li es as part of the reconstruc on of the study area. Note, there are a couple of long-term improvement projects with an es mated cost to be determined due to addi onal or unknown design considera ons that were outside of the scope of this planning project (e.g. restroom renova ons).

Chapter 4 4.7 R ¦ç½ ãÊÙù P ÙÃ®ãã®Ä¦ PÙÊ ÝÝ Ý A¥¥ ã®Ä¦ R®ò Ù W ½½ R Ö ®Ù ÊÙ R Ö½ Ã Äã Most por ons of the Mullet River from the CTH C / Eastern Ave. bridge to the old City U lity Building are lined by stone walls. The majority of the walls are in good condi on; however, there are some areas were the stone is crumbling. As part of the study the City desired to understand the regulatory processes aﬀec ng river wall repair and replacement to aid poten al future improvement projects.

Sheboygan and Washington Coun es (Telephone: 920-893-8531 or Email: kathleen.kramasz@ wisconsin.gov). WDNR Contact informa on website: h p://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Waterways/contacts.html In the case of an emergency repair, the DNR would probably issue a verbal approval to proceed with the repair and depending upon the nature of the work, may require a follow-up permit applica on along with construc on documenta on. For projects involving a proposed wall replacement (non-emergency) an individual permit will likely be required because of the nature of the ver cal wall structure. This permit will require a 30-day public no ce and comment period and a fee of $603 (current fee WDNR schedule). The nature of the exis ng site and wall structure does not appear to contain any wetlands, so the Army Corps of Engineers would not be involved.

4.8 PIM CÊÃÃ ÄãÝ

Mullet River Stone Walls Downtown Plymouth, 2015

The permi ng process for a “like-in-kind” river wall repair or replacement is somewhat less involved than previously described in Chapter 3 for pedestrian bridge replacement as long as the improvement cross sec on remains rela vely unchanged. That is to say, that no addi onal fill or structures or other impediments to river flow will be introduced into the floodplain other than what generally currently exists. In this case, wall repairs or replacements could be undertaken without the involvement of FEMA and/or the Army Corps of Engineers. In the case of an emergency repair of the wall (like a sudden collapse of a sec on of wall) the local WDNR representa ve should be contacted before undertaking any work. The current local Water Regula ons and Zoning Specialist is Kathi Kramasz covering Ozaukee,

A public involvement mee ng was held during the planning process to inform ci zens about the project objec ves and to collect input and feedback regarding dra design concepts. Approximately 50 people a ended the public involvement mee ng. The majority were property owners along Mill Pond. A er a presenta on by MSA a endees were provided an opportunity to ask ques ons and submit comment forms for the design concepts and perspec ves. Twelve of the a endees submi ed wri en comments. Copies of these forms are on file with the City Administrator. The majority of those who a ended the mee ng were in favor of the proposed improvements to the Downtown. Several individuals submi ed comments that they did not support the construc on of the proposed levee. One individual raised a ques on regarding whether there would s ll be access to the back of businesses for deliveries.

Mullet River Corridor Study 47

Chapter 4

Downtown/Stayer Park

4.9 GÙ Äã FçÄ ®Ä¦ OÖÖÊÙãçÄ®ã® Ý

4.10 Sãç ù SçÃÃ Ùù CÊÄ ½çÝ®ÊÄÝ

There are a few poten al grant funding programs that could assist with the improvement projects discussed in this study.

Phase III evaluated the costs and benefits of implemen ng a number of infrastructure improvement projects along Mullet River in the Downtown, including evalua ng improvements to exis ng retaining walls and pedestrian bridges; studying the feasibility of burying overhead u lity lines; evalua ng removal of a public parking ramp (ramp not deck), and improvements to Stayer Park. This phase of the study included conceptual designs, cost es mates, and descrip ons of permi ng processes.

The WDNR Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program provides 50% matching funds for both the acquisi on and development of nature based outdoor park and recrea on facili es. This program could be used to help oﬀ-set costs related to the development of the Plymouth River Trail. Several state and federal acquisi on and development programs fall under the same local assistance stewardship grant program, including the federal Recrea onal Trails Grant Program. Applica ons are accepted annually on May 1. Addi onal informa on these programs can be found at: h p://dnr.wi.gov/Aid/Grants.html. Other poten al funding sources include the use of Tax Increment Financing, or TIF, which could be used to assist with redevelopment of the parking lot, burial of u lity lines and removal of the parking ramp. The proposed project area is currently within the City’s TIF District #5, which was created in 2008 and has a maximum statutory life of 20 years. Eligible TIF expenditures include property acquisi on for development or conservancy (e.g. public restroom), Demoli on (e.g. parking ramp), Site Grading (e.g. parking lot), U li es (e.g. sanitary sewer, water, stormwater sewer, electrical), Streets and Streetscaping (e.g. sidewalks, landscaping, parking areas, etc.). The City has un l January 14, 2023 to complete these TIF #5 eligible projects.

48 City of Plymouth, WI

The next phase in the project would be to acquire the parcel proposed for the public restroom and proceed with final designs for the site, including coordina on with aﬀected property owners. Once final designs are completed the projects can be bid out including burial of the u lity lines, removal of the parking ramp, restroom renova ons, and park development. These projects could also be bid out and constructed in phases.