HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand & Water 02-19-02ST. CROIX COUNTY
NOTICE OF COMMITTEE MEETING
TO: Tom Dorsey, Chairman
St. Croix County Board
FROM: Art Jensen, LWCC Chairman
COMMITTEE TITLE: Land & Water Conservation /Resource & Education
Committee
Planning, Zoning, and Parks Committee
DATE: February 19, 2002
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
LOCATION: Ag Center, Baldwin
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
DATE OF NEXT MEETING:
ACTION ON PREVIOUS MINUTES
NEW BUSINESS:
DNR Report - Pete Skorseth
Municipal waste
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
C.R.E.P (Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program)
ANNOUNCEMENTS & CORRESPONDENCE
POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING:
ADJOURNMENT (Agenda not necessarily presented in this order)
SUBMITTED BY: Robert Heise
DATE: February 8, 2002
COPIES TO: COUNTY BOARD OFFICE NEWS MEDIA /NOTICE BOARD
COUNTY CLERK COMMITTEE MEMBERS
* ADDITIONS /CORRECTIONS /CHANGES
Convened: 9:00 a.m.
Adjourned: 11:52 a.m.
ST. CROIX COUNTY LAND & WATER CONSERVATIONlRESOURCE
& EDUCATION COMMITTEE
PLANNING, ZONING, AND PARKS COMMITTEE
Agricultural Service & Education Center, Baldwin, WI
February 19, 2002
Members Present: Leon Berenschot, Chris Bethke, Lois Bum, Jim Cody, Art Jensen, Ron
Raymond, Jerry Larson, Buck Malick
Members Absent Linda Luckey
Staff Present: County Conservationist -Bob Heise; Land Specialists -Tim Popple, David Sander;
Watershed Technicians -Chad DeWyre, Steve Olson; Secretary - Arlene Lier
Others Present: Pete Skorseth -DNR; Steve Pemsteiner -NRCS; Jim Boettcher — Hydrogeologist,
DNR Eau Claire; Rick McMonagle- Kinnickinnic River Land Trust; Sam Warp
Jr.- Village of Hammond; Rod Eslinger- Zoning; Willard Moeri- Roberts Village
President; Mark Jensen - Village of Roberts D.P.W.; Rod Eslinger, Steve Fisher,
Kevin Grabau -St. Croix County Zoning; Brett Budrow, Ellen Denzer, Dave
Fodroczi -St. Croix County Planning; Troy Nemmers- Humphrey Engineering
Meeting called to order by Chair Art Jensen.
Berenschot made motion to adopt agenda. Bethke seconded. Carried.
DNR REPORT — MUNICIPAL WASTE
Pete Skorseth (Environmental Engineer) gave a detailed power point presentation of the Phase 1 report,
developed for the Hammond/Roberts municipal treatment proposal.
Presentation included:
• Discussion of Phase I report process and conclusions.
• What is the Phase 1 report — Wastewater effluent discharge alternatives?
• What were the conclusions and recommendations of the Phase I report?
• What options were evaluated and discarded?
• What options were recommended for further consideration in the Phase I study?
• What was the department response to the Phase I study?
• At the end of the evaluation process what alternatives remained?
• Information/education.
• Comments — what are the primary concerns to date?
• Let's take a look at the groundwater discharge option.
• Effluent limits.
• Groundwater monitoring.
• Most probable treatment technology.
• Human health considerations.
• Human health preferred sites.
• Pollutant loads.
• Select pollutant parameters.
• Secondary pollutant load impacts.
• Hydraulic implications.
• How much water are we talking about?
• Conclusions.
• Thermal impacts.
• Land use implications.
• Sustainability (what happens in 20 years)
• Summary
1. Human Health Impacts
- The impacts on groundwater can't exceed Drinking Water standards.
- If your goal is minimize potential for human health impact you want the sites where
groundwater recharges the Kinni — shortest distance to surface water recharge.
2. Environmental considerations
- Pollutant loads are probably limited to nutrients and other inorganics. How clean is clean?
- All pollutant loads are ultimately tributary to the St. Croix River.
3. Recharge
- All sites result in net imports or exports of groundwater.
- If you want to maintain the current recharge to the Kinni(without hydraulic trading) you
want to consider the red sites on the map. This will result in an import of up to 0.6 cfs.
4. Thermal implications — None.
5. Land Use — All sites have similar implications.
6. Sustainability — Enlarge facility and infiltration area.
The Facility Planning hearing is scheduled for March 19, 2002.
There were numerous questions and discussion among committee members and department staff.
CREP (CONSERVATION RESERVE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM)
Discussed issue of the county collecting fees to administer CREP. There has been correspondence and
information made available that the USDA is having problems with counties charging fees for CREP.
The issue of equal access by limited resource participants could be questioned.
Local organizations (having water quality goals) could possibly make contributions to help pay for
administrative costs of the program.
DC Steve Pemsteiner will hire a work -study student to help with the program. Job responsibilities of
the current staff could be shifted.
Berenschot made motion for LWCD to go forward with participation in CREP with receiving other
sources of funding to offset costs to administer the program. Cody seconded. Carried.
Berenschot made motion to adjourn meeting at 11:52 a.m. Seconded by Bum. Carried.
Jim Cody
Secretary