Draft Environmental Impact Assessment University of Wisconsin-Madison Picnic Point Site Improvements - Prepared for: Wisconsin Department of ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Draft Environmental Impact Assessment University of Wisconsin-Madison Picnic Point Site Improvements Prepared for: Wisconsin Department of Administration Division of State Facilities DSF Project No. 08F2K January 2011
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Draft Environmental Impact Assessment
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Picnic Point Improvement Project
State Project Number 08F2K
This report prepared by:
________________________________
Lynn Scherbert, PE
Supervisor - Environmental Services
This report reviewed by:
________________________________
Dennis L. Johnson, PE
Supervisor – Environmental Services
1802 Pankratz Street
Madison, WI 53704-4069
608.443.1200 • Fax: 608.443.1250
www.AyresAssociates.com
Ayres Associates Project No. 53-0830.00Page Intentionally Left Blank
Contents
Page No.
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
General .................................................................................................................................... 1
Project Description ................................................................................................................... 1
EIA Process ............................................................................................................................. 1
I. Description of Proposed Action ........................................................................................... 3
A. Title of Proposal .............................................................................................................. 3
B. Location .......................................................................................................................... 3
C. Project............................................................................................................................. 3
1. Project Description .................................................................................................... 3
2. Purpose and Need (Objective, History and Background).......................................... 3
D. Estimated Cost and Funding Source .............................................................................. 5
E. Time Schedule ................................................................................................................ 5
II. Existing Environment........................................................................................................... 6
A. Physical .......................................................................................................................... 6
B. Biological ........................................................................................................................ 8
1. Flora .......................................................................................................................... 9
2. Fauna ...................................................................................................................... 10
C. Social ............................................................................................................................ 10
D. Economic ...................................................................................................................... 12
E. Other (archaeological, historical, etc.) .......................................................................... 13
III. Proposed Environmental Change..................................................................................... 15
A. Manipulation of Terrestrial Resources .......................................................................... 15
B. Manipulation of Aquatic Resources .............................................................................. 15
C. Structures ..................................................................................................................... 16
D. Other ............................................................................................................................. 16
IV. Probable Adverse and Beneficial Impacts......................................................................... 20
A. Physical Impacts ........................................................................................................... 20
B. Biological Impacts ......................................................................................................... 21
C. Socioeconomic Impacts ................................................................................................ 22
1. Social....................................................................................................................... 22
2. Economic................................................................................................................. 22
D. Other (archaeological, historical, etc.) .......................................................................... 23
V. Probable Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Avoided ........................................................ 24
iPage Intentionally Left Blank
Page No.
VI. Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and
Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity .......................................................................... 25
VII. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitments of Resources if Action is Implemented ............ 26
A. Energy .......................................................................................................................... 26
B. Archaeological and Historic Features or Sites .............................................................. 26
C. Other ............................................................................................................................. 26
VIII. Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 27
IX. Evaluation.......................................................................................................................... 29
References.................................................................................................................................. 32
List of Appendices
Appendix A - Figures
Appendix B - Scoping Letter, Mailing List, and Response Letters
Appendix C - DEIA Public Meeting Notice and Distribution List
Appendix D - Historical Photographs
Appendix E - Site Photographs
Apptendix F - Summary of Archaeological Reports
Appendix G - Design Concept Public Meeting Minutes
Appendix H - Form 4440 and Endangered Species Review
List of Figures
Figure 1 Project Location
Figure 2 Aerial of Project Site
Figure 3 Fire Circle Locations
Figure 4 Lakeshore Nature Preserve Boundaries
Figure 5 Delineated Wetland Boundary
Figure 6 FEMA Floodplain Firmette
Figure 7 WDNR Remediation and Redevelopment Sites
Figures 8-15 Concept Designs “A” through “H”
iiPage Intentionally Left Blank
Glossary of Acronyms
AHI Architectural History Inventory
ASI Archaeological Sites Inventory
AST Aboveground Storage Tank
BAR Bibliography of Archaeological Reports
BRRTS Bureau of Remediation and Redevelopment Tracking System
DSF Division of State Facilities
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GFSB General Fund Supported Borrowing
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Services
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
SF Square Feet
SLOH State Laboratory of Hygiene
USGS United States Geologic Survey
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
UST Underground Storage Tank
UW University of Wisconsin
UW-Madison University of Wisconsin-Madison
UWSA University of Wisconsin System Administration
WARF Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation
WDNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
WEPA Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act
WHPD Wisconsin Historical Preservation Database
WPDES Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
iiiPage Intentionally Left Blank
Introduction
General
The Wisconsin Department of Administration, Division of State Facilities, retained Ayres
Associates to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Picnic Point Site
Improvement Project, at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW-Madison) campus in
Madison, Wisconsin. The EIA is required by University of Wisconsin System Administration
(UWSA) guidelines in compliance with the Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act (WEPA), Section
1.11, Wis. Stats. The purpose of the EIA is to assess potential environmental effects of the
project relative to the quality of the human environment. The Wisconsin Department of
Administration, Division of State Facilities, is the project manager and the UW System Board of
Regents is the project owner.
Project Description
The project site is located on the UW-Madison campus in Madison, Wisconsin, and is situated
along the northernmost edge of Picnic Point, approximately 0.75 miles northeast of University
Bay Drive and the Class of 1918 Marsh (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A). This project provides
improvements for the Picnic Point site to enable safe pedestrian access to the shoreline; to
protect and enhance views; restore compacted soils; stabilize eroding slopes and shoreline;
remove invasive vegetation; upgrade and reposition the lake safety light; and upgrade the fire
circle benches and fire ring where large group gathering areas exist on the eastern tip of Picnic
Point. Additionally, project enhancement activities include installing interpretive signage.
The estimated project cost is $600,000, which will be funded using gift funds.
EIA Process
The UW System Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act (WEPA) compliance process began in
December 2008 with authorization to prepare a Type II Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA). The EIA team consists of representatives of the Division of State Facilities, UW System
Administration, UW-Madison, the project Architect, and Ayres Associates.
Scoping Letter
A scoping letter to solicit input on potential environmental impacts of the project was sent on
January 12, 2009, to selected parties. Responses were received from the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources and the Wisconsin Historical Society. A copy of the scoping
letter along with the distribution list and the responses received is located in Appendix B.
Draft EIA
Based on input from the EIA team and scoping process, Ayres Associates has prepared a Draft
EIA. A public notice will be published in the Wisconsin State Journal, one student newspaper,
and electronically on the Lakeshore Preserve website on January 13, 2011, to request public
input prior to finalizing the EIA, as well as to provide notification of the Public Information
Meeting. A copy of the Draft EIA will be made available for public review beginning January 13,
2011, and ending January 27, 2011. Copies of the Environmental Impact Assessment will be
made available at the UW-Madison Helen C. White Library and City of Madison Public Library
(Central Library location), along with being electronically provided to the individual recipients
1listed in Appendix C. Copies will also be made available online at
www.ayresprojectinfo.com/UW-PicnicPoint-EIA.
Draft EIA Public Meeting
A public meeting to present the project and EIA findings and to take verbal and written
comments will be held on January 27, 2011, at 5:30 p.m. in Room 132 of the WARF Building,
located at 610 Walnut Street, Madison, WI. The public meeting is expected to be attended by
representatives of the Division of State Facilities, UW-Madison, UW System Administration,
Ayres Associates, and members of the general public. Minutes of that meeting, the sign-in
sheet, public comments, and other information pertinent to that meeting will be incorporated into
the Final EIA document. All comments should be received no later than the end of the meeting
on January 27, 2011, and should be directed to:
Ms. Lynn Scherbert, PE
Ayres Associates
1802 Pankratz St.
Madison, WI 53704-4069
ScherbertL@AyresAssociates.com
2I. Description of Proposed Action
A. Title of Proposal
Picnic Point Site Improvements
DSF Project # 08F2K
Location
University of Wisconsin – Madison
County: Dane
Political Town: City of Madison, Wisconsin
B. Project
1. Project Description
The intent of the UW-Madison Picnic Point Site Improvements project is to enable
safe pedestrian access to the shoreline; to protect and enhance views; restore
compacted soils; stabilize eroding slopes and shoreline; remove invasive vegetation;
upgrade and reposition the lake safety light; and upgrade the fire circle benches and
fire ring where a large group gathering area exists on the eastern tip of Picnic Point.
Outlined parameters include the following:
1. Preservation of mature trees to maintain the tree canopy but allow filtered views.
2. Stone for steps and council ring should be natural in finish, smooth enough for
safe passage, and serve as step elements to prevent slope erosion, soil
compaction, and damage to vegetation.
3. Council ring should be designed to accommodate 80 people arranged in
concentric rings so all can hear and view activities in the center.
4. Significant openings for views to the south, east, and north with primary views of
the main campus and State Capitol should be created and maintained.
5. Removal of invasive shrubs, but preserve overall massing of vegetation.
6. Shoreline stabilization.
7. Utilization of natural/recycled materials wherever possible.
8. Provision of unobtrusive seating.
9. No use of artificial lighting.
2. Purpose and Need (Objective, History and Background)
The UW-Madison Lakeshore Nature Preserve was established in 1962 to preserve
undeveloped lands along the south shore of Lake Mendota. Encompassing 300
acres, the preserve is located on the outskirts of the UW-Madison campus but in a
highly urbanized area of downtown Madison. The preserve provides bountiful
3opportunity for research, outreach, recreation, and environmental protection. The
three goals of the preserve to guide them toward their mission statement of the UW-
Madison Lakeshore Nature Preserve 2006 Master Plan are: 1) preserve, restore and
interpret natural plant and animal communities in conjunction with the university’s
education mission, 2) protect signature landscapes and views that are vital to
defining the city and university, and 3) establish management priorities that maximize
educational benefits while minimizing the impacts of educational use.
Picnic Point is a nearly mile-long peninsula located within the Lakeshore Nature
Preserve. Perhaps more so than other aspects of the preserve, it is a heavily utilized
recreation feature and is very popular for any number of activities from hiking and
running to cross-country skiing and bird watching. In the 2006 Master Plan, the
northeastern limits of the point, as well as the associated trail system, were classified
as high intensity. Other uses include training runs and navigational exercises
performed by the Naval ROTC, research conducted for ecological and
archaeological purposes, and recreational activities conducted at the fire circles and
picnic sites. Picnic Point is extensively used in all seasons and is a highly visible
feature within the City of Madison and along the lake. Current features in the vicinity
of the project include rustic camp and picnic sites, a campfire circle, as well as
crushed limestone hiking trails.
Picnic Point has also been a key part of the university experience, acting as an
extension of the classroom, the research laboratory, and of traditional student
gatherings. Many departments including Botany, Forestry, Geography, Landscape
Architecture, Limnology, and others use the Preserve to study a variety of plant and
animal communities. Traditional bonfires held by lakeshore residence halls bring
groups of 70 to 90 students to the tip of Picnic Point for camaraderie and storytelling.
This is just one of the activities supporting the need for both the sizing and the
physical improvements to the traditional council ring and fire pit. Alumni frequent
Picnic Point during return visits to campus and Madison residents gather for bird-
watching and geo-caching activities.
Picnic Point was historically used as an Indian campground or inhabitation area in
addition to having several Indian burial mounds located along the area southwest of
the narrows. Beginning in the 1800’s and continuing up until the sale of the property,
the point was used as a farming settlement with a farm house located along the
western edge of the point. In 1941, the owners of Picnic Point sold the property to
the University of Wisconsin System as part of a land swap. During the farming
period, and as shown in historical photographs contained in Appendix D, Picnic Point
was a grazing area with much less tree growth and no indication of the vegetative
undergrowth that currently exists at the site. These photographs show open views to
Lake Mendota and the Madison isthmus area and the presence of a limited number
of mature trees with apparent underbrush. Current views, Appendix E, are obscured
due to the existence of underbrush such as buckthorn, honeysuckle, and additional
exotic shrubs and mature trees which are present at the site and are shown in the
low altitude aerial photographs in the appendix. Today, accessing the scenic
viewscapes of downtown Madison and Lake Mendota requires traversing steep
slopes along eroded soil paths just to reach the water’s edge.
University students and the public at large enjoy using the fire circle for bonfires in an
area near the tip of the point (Figure 3). There are six fire circles on the spine and tip
4of Picnic Point which may be reserved for use and they serve as formal gathering
spaces for groups both large and small. Surrounding vegetation often blocks views
to the lake and people then create informal paths to the edge of the lake, adding to
erosion problems. Only fire circle number 6 is within the proposed project limits, but
all of the existing fire circles are in significant need of maintenance and
reconstruction.
While the tip of Picnic Point is frequently used for large group gatherings, it has
never been properly designed to accommodate the volume of use it receives. Lack
of appropriate spaces designed for large group gatherings has led to: soil
compaction, soil erosion, invasion of exotic species, damage to vegetation, and
undesirable, potentially detrimental informal trails.
Planners have proposed a gathering circle/council ring, discreetly blended into the
landscape, and a stone stairway down to the water's edge. This project is critical to
the future of Picnic Point, to help accommodate groups who come to the tip of the
Point for campfires, storytelling, and camaraderie; to serve the many people who
already visit the tip of the Point; and to protect the very resource from the effects of
such popularity.
3. Estimated Cost and Funding Source
The preliminary estimated project cost of $600,000 will be funded using gift funds.
4. Proposed Project Schedule
BOR/SBC Approval September 2008
A/E Selection October 2008
Preliminary Design January 2009
Release Draft EIA January 13, 2011
Public Comment Period January 13-January 27, 2011
Draft EIA Public Meeting January 27, 2011
Distribute Final EIA February 2011
Final Design Complete Late February 2011
Bid Opening April 2011
Start Construction June 2011
Substantial Completion November 2011
Final Completion Spring 2012
Dedication Fall 2012
5Page Intentionally Left Blank
II. Existing Environment
A. Physical
Land Use
Picnic Point is part of a 300-acre natural area known as the UW-Madison Lakeshore
Nature Preserve that is utilized by the general public, students and naturalists alike for
recreation and academic research (Figure 4). As described in the Master Plan, the
preserve consists of a “complex matrix of forests, prairies, wetland sand former
savannah ecosystems… It protects cultural resources that include Native American
mounds and archaeological sites…The Preserve includes working landscapes that
support the ongoing educational mission of the university.”
The existing site usage in the project area is primarily recreational and takes advantage
of the scenic views the area provides. Within the vicinity of the project site, bonfires are
lit within the fire pits/circles using fire wood available from storage cribs located along the
Picnic Point pathway. Multiple rough packed dirt trails lead both down to the lake edge,
as well as along the more level paths on the upper surface of the point. Main paths from
the base to the tip of Picnic Point are generally crushed limestone screenings
approximately 5 to 10 feet in width for use by pedestrians, as well as by maintenance
and emergency vehicles. Both unguided and guided field trips and walks occur within
the Preserve, including trips to the proposed project area at the tip of the point. These
walks center on a number of subjects including Native American burial mounds, geology,
trees, wildflowers, birds, butterflies, mammals, general ecology, and human history.
Located at the tip of the point is a lighted beacon that serves as a navigational guide for
boats in the area during times of poor weather. There is a boat launch also located in
the preserve, but the steep eroding slopes within the project area on the northeast tip of
Picnic Point prevent launching of canoes or boats from this location.
Topography
The topography in the project area is gently sloping to the south along the top of the
point, but the slopes steeply transition from the higher elevations to lake levels. There is
an approximate 16-foot vertical drop in this area creating an average slope of 20%.
Peak elevations on the top of the point generally range from 866 to 864 feet, while
elevations along the lake are between 850 and 852 feet above mean sea level.
Soils
Soils in the project area are mapped on United States Department of Agriculture maps
as Military loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded. This soil type is mapped over the entire
tip of Picnic Point. Military loam soils are well-drained with typical depths to paralithic
bedrock of 20 to 40 inches (USDA-NRCS, 2008).
Military Loam Series soils (MhC2) – The Military series consists of moderately deep,
well-drained, sloping to steep soils on glaciated uplands. These soils are in areas of
shallow glacial drift where sandstone bedrock is exposed. They were formed in sandy
loam glacial till and sandstone bedrock. The upper part of the soils formed in weathered
glacial till about 28 inches thick. The lower part formed in residuum weathered from
6sandstone. The surface profile in a representative sample is grayish brown loam about
4 inches thick. The subsoil is about 24 inches thick. The upper part is brown loam, the
middle part is brown sandy clay loam, and the lower part is strong-brown sandy loam.
The underlying material is yellowish-brown sandstone bedrock. In some places, this
sandstone bedrock is strongly cemented.
Soil borings have been conducted at the project site and indicate no bedrock or
groundwater within the top 10 feet; the silt/sand layer being very dense at about 6 feet
below surface. The soil conditions on site will not be a factor in the fire circle design.
Soil is well compacted due to site activities and likely has minimal void space near the
surface.
Utilities
Utilities located on the proposed primary project site are limited to telephone lines to
provide witching control to the lighted warning beacon for navigational purposes. Power
is supplied to the light by a 12-volt battery.
Stormwater
No stormwater control devices are in place in the project area. Stormwater is allowed to
naturally drain to low areas through sheet flow without any manmade channelizing or
pipe devices.
A campus stormwater management plan (Innovating Stormwater Management on the
University of Wisconsin-Madison Campus, 2004).has been developed incorporating best
management practices. As part of the plan, the Campus Planning Committee approved
a resolution supporting stormwater management policy, which states the amount of
runoff from newly developed and redeveloped areas will be no greater than the amount
that occurred under native conditions.
Surface Water
Surface water bodies are not located directly within the project boundaries; however,
Lake Mendota surrounds Picnic Point in the project vicinity. This inland freshwater lake
is approximately 10,000 acres in size and has a maximum depth of 83-feet. The normal
water level is reported at 848 feet and the high water mark 850.7. Recreational activities
associated with Lake Mendota include boating, fishing, swimming, canoeing, and biking.
Fish common to Lake Mendota include many types of pan fish, muskellunge, northern
pike, walleye, and largemouth and smallmouth bass. Other larger surface water bodies
in the Madison area include Lake Monona, Monona Bay, and Lake Wingra. These
surface water bodies are located greater than 8,000 feet from the project site.
Wetlands and Flood Plains
The WDNR has identified and categorized a lakebed wetland off of the southern shore of
Picnic Point which stretches toward University Bay. The categorization, identified as
“E6L”, is indicative of an emergent, broadleaved, non-persistent, standing-water wetland
(Figure 5).
7According to FEMA data (Figure 6), the project site is outside of both the 100-year and
500-year flood plain.
Groundwater
Regional groundwater in the project area is located in the sandstone aquifer, which
makes up the most important aquifer in the Rock-Fox River basin, and shallow
groundwater occurs within the glacial materials that overlie the bedrock.
Air
Chapter NR 400 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code regulates air quality for new
construction sites. Contaminants regulated by this chapter include the “criteria
pollutants”: particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, organic compounds, nitrous oxides, and
carbon monoxide. Hazardous air pollutants and visible emissions are also regulated. If
an ambient monitor measures criteria pollutant concentrations or dispersion modeling
indicates concentrations within the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the
region is designated as “an attainment area” for that pollutant. Dane County’s air
monitoring station, which monitors the air quality of the county on regular intervals, is
located in Madison, just east of Lake Mendota. All monitored pollutant concentrations in
the project area are currently within ambient air quality standards. The air quality for the
Madison area is “good”, according to monitoring station data.
Miscellaneous
The Wisconsin Department of Commerce Storage Tank database and the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources Bureau for Remediation and Redevelopment Tracking
System (WDNR BRRTS) database were searched for potential environmental hazards
within the project area (Figure 7). There were no hazardous material sites, or above
ground or underground storage tanks listed in the project area. The project site is
located within the UW-Madison Lakeshore Nature Preserve, which is a relatively quiet
area of campus due to the limited number of academic facilities or residence halls.
Current permanent noise sources near to the project area include traffic from University
Bay Drive and noise from boating or other recreational activities occurring on the lake.
B. Biological
An Endangered Resources Review (ERIR Log # 08-352) request was submitted to the
WDNR in January of 2009 for information on threatened, endangered, and special
concern species that may be in the general project area or impacted by the project. The
response is in Appendix B. According to the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, threatened or endangered species
that are located within or around the project area include the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser
fulvescens). This fish is listed as a “Special Concern” and lives in large rivers or lakes
with preference for the deepest mid-river areas and pools. Spawning occurs from late
April through early June in cold, shallow fast water. Other WDNR historical records
(data is greater than 25 years of age) identified several rare species historically known to
be located within the vicinity of the project site including the following:
• Banded killfish (Fundulus diaphanous), a State Special Concern fish, prefers clear
water of the bays and quiet backwaters of large lakes and medium to large streams
8with sparse to no vegetation over gravel, sand, silt, marl, clay detritus or cobble.
Spawning occurs from June through mid-August.
• Pugnose Shiner (Notropis anogenus), a fish listed as Threatened in Wisconsin,
prefers weedy shoals of glacial lakes and low-gradient streams over bottoms of mud,
sand, cobble, silt, and clay. Spawning occurs from mid-May through July.
In the Lakeshore Nature Preserve description of Picnic Point, the middle section of the
point is described as having very large red oak, white oak, and shagbark hickory
dominating the canopy along with some American elm. Hackberry, green ash,
basswood, and sugar maple are prominent along the tip of the point along with black
cherry, silver maple, box elder, black locust, and black willow. The shrub layer is
dominated by honeysuckle and buckthorn. The ground layer contains white avens,
Virginia creeper, enchanter's nightshade, false Solomon’s seal, violet, and trout lily. The
tip of Picnic Point is dominated by sugar maple, basswood, and hackberry. A few
hackberry and oak trees emerge above the other canopy trees. Sugar maple and
basswood saplings and seedlings are also listed as being abundant.
Historical information on the vegetation that existed on picnic point indicated that in the
early 19th century, the area consisted of marsh and wet prairie vegetation with white and
bur oaks. Later developed as logging and grazing area, it continued to be used as such
until the current vegetation eventually established dominance. According to
Christiansen’s’ Phase 1 Archaeological Report, “The Wisconsin Land Economic
Inventory of 1958 classified the cover density on most of Picnic Point as a "poor stand"
of oak-hickory, 12-18 inches in diameter (Baum 2001:16). Baum makes the argument
that in the last several hundred years, Picnic Point was a savanna that was perhaps
originally maintained by fire and then kept open by grazing. When these two forces
ceased to be a factor, the present day vegetation took hold of the area.”
1. Flora
The WDNR identified four threatened, endangered, or special concern plant species
that were historically recorded within the vicinity of the project site. The list and
definitions provided by the WDNR are printed below exactly as they were provided.
Potential habitat for these species exists throughout the UW-Madison Lakeshore
Nature Preserve, but outside of the project site boundaries.
• Short’s rockcress (Arabis shortii), a plant of Special Concern in Wisconsin,
prefers mesic alluvial floodplain forests. Flowering occurs throughout May.
Optimal identification period is from early May to mid-June.
• Sheathed pondweed (Potamogeton vaginatus), a plant listed as Threatened in
Wisconsin, prefers the shallow water of lakes and creeks. Blooming probably
occurs through the month of July. Optimal identification period is throughout the
month of August.
• Snow campion (Silene nivea), a plant listed as Threatened in Wisconsin, prefers
alluvial deciduous forest margins and meadows, streambanks, wooded ravines,
and calcareous fens. Blooming occurs from mid-June through late July. Optimal
identification period is from mid-June to late July.
9• One-flowered broomrape (Orobanche uniflora), a plant of Special Concern in
Wisconsin, this saprophytic species prefers mesic woods and blooms from May
to June.
The habitat within the project boundaries of the project site is a mix of bare soil,
gravel, limestone screenings, mature trees, smaller immature trees, woody
undergrowth, and invasive species such as honeysuckle and buckthorn. Suitable
habitat for the threatened, endangered, or special concern species listed by the
WDNR and described above does not appear to exist directly within the project site
in its current condition, and it is unlikely that any of the species are present on the
project site. However, suitable habitat for the identified plant species, especially
those that thrive in wetland conditions or deciduous forest margins, exists in the
adjacent areas, and the upland plant species and community identified could likely
be supported within areas of the UW-Madison Lakeshore Nature Preserve.
2. Fauna
Due to the proximity of the project site to the wetlands and the nature preserve,
many types of birds, mammals, insects, reptiles, and amphibians may frequent the
project site. The use of the site varies between species as some may be foraging for
food or locating spent scraps from humans and others may be using the area
surrounding the project site for nesting. Evidence and sightings of raccoons and
squirrels were noted within the project site boundaries during the site visit. Raccoon
and squirrel tracks were observed near the project site during the site visit. Ducks
were observed to be swimming within Lake Mendota approximately 200 feet from the
project site.
Although these were the animal species documented on the project site, other
species such as fox, hawks, swans, deer, opossum, frogs, salamanders, toads,
turtles, bats, and snakes, among others are expected to occur or have been
documented in or around the project site.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Department of Fish
and Wildlife did not identify endangered or threatened animal species in the area of
the proposed project or its adjacent lands.
C. Social
UW-Madison, founded in 1848, stretches across 933 acres on the main campus. This
campus is the oldest and largest of 13 institutions within the University of Wisconsin
System. The most recent figures from fall 2009 enrollment of 42,099 consists of 28,690
undergraduates, 9,116 graduate students, 2,640 professional students (law, pharmacy,
etc.), and 1,653 special students. All UW System institutions remain under enrollment
management levels set by the Board of Regents to assure a high quality educational
experience for students.
To support this enrollment, UW-Madison employs 16,507 persons, including 2,017
faculty members. In addition, student employment is also extensive, both on and off
campus. UW-Madison housing employs 1,500 students alone. The student body
consists of approximately 48 percent male and 52 percent female. Approximately 56
percent of the student body is from Wisconsin, 29 percent from other states, with the
10remaining 12 percent consisting of international students. UW-Madison boasts over
374,000 living alumni (these statistics provided by www.wisc.edu website).
Picnic Point and the overall Lakeshore Preserve are an integral part of the UW-Madison
experience. There is no other area on campus that is both so suitable and is so
acceptable as an interactive mix of history, research, recreation, and nature. Whether
hiking, running, cross-country skiing, bird watching, conducting archaeological digs,
performing ROTC navigational exercises, having traditional campus dorm bonfires,
Picnic Point is extensively used in all seasons and is a highly visible feature within the
City of Madison and along the lake.
Important social features and buildings located near the project area include:
• UW-Madison Lakeshore Nature Preserve permanently protects the undeveloped
lands along the shores of Lake Mendota. The preserve, which shelters biologically
significant plant and animal communities, and cultural features, provides members of
the campus community and the public a place to interact with the natural world. The
nature preserve also enables educators and students a living, breathing lab in which
to conduct teaching, outreach, and research, while protecting this sensitive area.
• The Friends of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve is “a non-profit organization that
serves as an advocate for the active stewardship of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve.”
The group encourages and supports the University’s efforts to promote biodiversity,
education, and appropriate use of this protected area, and raises funds and
mobilizes volunteers to carry out the mission of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve.
• The Lakeshore Path is part of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve and ties the entire
Lakeshore Nature Preserve together. It is comprised of two trail segments (the
Howard Temin Path and the Lake Mendota Path) that either run through or near all
the major areas in the Preserve. The path is used extensively for biking, walking,
and jogging and runs adjacent to the project site and around the Class of 1918
Marsh.
• Class of 1918 Marsh is a tiny remnant of a wetland that formerly covered much of
the area now occupied by playing fields, parking lots, and the Nielsen Tennis
Stadium. Historically, this wetland was drained in the 1800’s for agriculture using a
series of drain tiles and clay pipes. Because the water level (elevation) at the
wetland is lower than the elevation of Lake Mendota, water was pumped out of the
marsh using a windmill system and into Lake Mendota. This wetland, now part of the
Lakeshore Nature Preserve, was restored in 1969 with funds donated by the Class of
1918, hence giving the marsh its name. Water is still pumped out of the wetland at
the University Bay Pump House; however, pumping is now conducted electronically
in order to increase water quality, rather than to drain the wetland. A quote from the
Lakeshore Nature Preserve website reads “Unfortunately, during the last 25 years
little has been done to maintain the marsh, in spite of the interest of a large number
of people and the development of several management plans. It suffers from runoff
from nearby construction sites, parking lots, and fertilized playing fields...”
• The University Bay Marsh, located along the western margin of University Bay, is a
diverse wetland community located within the Nature Preserve frequently traversed
by walkers, joggers, and bicyclists as they travel along the Lakeshore Path.
11• Lake Mendota is an approximately 10,000-acre inland freshwater lake that borders
the northern limits of the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus. Recreational
activities associated with Lake Mendota include boating, fishing, swimming,
canoeing, and biking.
• Bill’s Woods, according to the Lakeshore Nature Preserve website, “consists of a
broad rectangle of wooded land between University Bay Drive and Eagle Heights
Community Gardens. The eastern third of the tract was established woodland before
1930, but in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the western two thirds was both
cropped and grazed as part of a working farm. Later, the central and western parts
of the area were used for agricultural research and part of the eastern third was used
as a storage area for campus landscaping operations, an activity that threatened the
older part of the forest. The present forest in the western two-thirds of Bill's Woods
has come into being as a result of half a century of regrowth. After persuading the
university to move its storage activities away from the older part of the forest, a
dedicated group of volunteers from the Friends of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve
has been working steadily since the late 1990s on a series of restoration projects
here to return the older eastern portion of Bill's Woods to a more diverse native plant
community.” As a vital part of the nature preserve, Bill’s Woods, is used for
recreational purposes, such as hiking and bird watching, as well as for educational
purposes and research.
• Parking Lot 130 is an 84-stall lot located north of the 1918 Marsh and across
University Bay Drive from the Picnic Point entrance. This lot is used for parking
though at times of heavy snow fall surplus snow storage is located on part of this lot.
Lot 130 is classified as Type X and is metered during the weekday and open to the
public on evenings and weekends.
• Parking Lot 129 is a 26-stall lot located on the north side of University Bay Drive just
east of the Picnic Point entrance. Lot 129 is classified as Type “X” and is metered
during weekday and open to the public on evenings and weekends.
• Other nearby parking lots, such as Lot 60, Parking Ramp 76, Lot 85 and others
provide necessary parking for the facilities located at this area of campus. Campus
capacity for parking is at or near 100 percent and is limited both by physical area for
additional parking, as well as a City of Madison cap to limit to the degree possible the
amount of traffic on campus. These lots allow campus faculty, staff, visitors and
students access to the campus in a relatively convenient manner.
D. Economic
UW-Madison had a 2009-2010 budget of $2,448,400,000, which consisted of
approximately $457 million from State Revenue, $377 million from student tuition, $684
from federal programs and projects, $490 million from gifts, grants and segregated
funds, with the remaining $440 million made up of state laboratory fees, auxiliary
enterprises, and operational receipts.
The existing economic environment at the project site is effectively zero. No direct
revenue is generated at the project site since no goods or services are produced or
generated at that location. Recreational use is free, with picnic sites allotted by
reservation. Indirectly, the project site provides a destination source for users of Lots
12129 and 130. Both Lots 129 and 130 are free and open to the public from 7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m. seven days a week. Both lots have a three hour parking limit, and no
overnight parking is allowed. Parking times are tracked by campus security patrols. Lot
129 has 26 stalls and Lot 130 has 85 stalls. No revenue is generated from either of
these lots.
E. Other (archaeological, historical, etc.)
Archaeological and Historical
Archaeological research has been extensive along Picnic Point and is detailed in the
historical resources reviewed to determine the possibility of presence within the
proposed project site limits. The Wisconsin Historical Preservation Database (WHPD)
was accessed, and locally designated historical or archaeological properties were
reviewed within the specific project area. This database includes information from the
Archaeological Sites Inventory (ASI), Architectural History Inventory (AHI), and the
Bibliography of Archaeological Reports (BAR). In addition, a 2001 Phase 1
Archeological Survey for 16 acres on Picnic Point, and the 2009 Archaeological
Investigation No. 3 were reviewed for this report. There are multiple historic and
archeological sites throughout the UW-Madison Nature Preserve, including within Bill’s
Woods and within Picnic Point. Additionally, the College Hills Historic District is located
approximately a half-mile west of the project site.
The Phase 1 Archaeological survey had a total of 417 shovel tests from the Picnic Point
Bath House Trail to the tip of the point, as well as visual surveys on areas subjected to
previous disturbance by modern construction equipment or on slopes greater than 15
percent. Methodologies for the shovel test involved excavating 30 centimeter diameter
holes on 10 meter intervals to a depth of 50 centimeters. Visual inspects were walked
on 5-meter transect intervals where the ground surface was visible. Of those shovel
tests, 42 were positive producing artifacts from five different sites. The findings indicated
that there is a thin scatter of historic or prehistoric debris across the entire point, though
the location of the proposed project was not identified as a specific site in the database.
The nearest identified sites are 47DA123 Stevens and 47DA501 Picnic Point. The
Stevens site was listed as a camp and workshop site located northeast of the narrows
and southwest of the proposed site improvement project area. The Picnic Point site is
further from the proposed project area than the Stevens site, but is located along the
narrows. The site consists of a single conical mound and some other artifacts collected
in the area, some of which were exposed from erosion.
The Phase 1 Archaeological report references on-going actions to protect existing
mounds, stabilize shoreline areas to prevent erosion to archaeological sites, and
conduct additional shovel tests prior to facilities development since the study had a 10
meter interval and did not allow for the level of accuracy to identify potential findings for
specific projects.
An additional archeological investigation specific to the Picnic Point project area was
performed during the spring of 2009 (Results of Archaeological Testing of a Portion of
47DA122 – Stevens, University of Wisconsin – Madison Campus, Dane County,
Wisconsin Reports of Investigations No. 3, June 24, 2009). In summary, a series of 12
one by one meter test excavations were placed within the easternmost portion of
47DA122 – Stevens to evaluate the archaeological deposits of the site within an area
13that is proposed to be disturbed by the Picnic Point Improvements project. A summary
of the recommendations of the reports are located in Appendix F. The depth of
excavations ranged from 30 to 55 centimeters. No archaeological features were
encountered, and no diagnostic artifacts were recovered. The top 20 centimeters of
each unit contained a mixture of Euroamerican and Native American artifacts while the
20-30 centimeter below ground surface level typically contained only Native American
debris. The report indicated that site damage was apparent due to both human agents
and extensive rodent and other biological impacts to the general area. The little amount
of information obtained further supports the presence of a Late Woodland stage Effigy
Mound culture component at the site. The report recommended that no additional
archaeological testing for the portion of 47DA122 – Stevens, which will be impacted by
the Picnic Point improvements, was necessary.
However, this report also stated that natural agents including rodents, roots, and most
significantly erosion, have displaced artifacts, leaving archaeological deposits with little
or no integrity. Erosion had been cited as a particular concern at Picnic Point, the
results of soil movement leading to the displacement of archaeological remains on a
regular basis. In particular, erosion occurring on the eastern tip of the Point is exposing
lithic waste from deposits that were once buried 20 to 30 centimeters below the surface.
For preservation of existing archaeological deposits, it was recommended that erosion
stabilization measures be undertaken.
14Page Intentionally Left Blank
III. Proposed Environmental Change
A. Manipulation of Terrestrial Resources
Site development will include excavation, grading, landscaping, installation of steps
along existing bare soil grades, erosion stabilization and removal of undergrowth in
the vicinity of the project site. Excavation of the fire circle will require removal of
approximately 67 cubic yards of soil and an additional estimated 69 cubic yards to
address site grading to accommodate the new pathways and the retaining wall and
associated overlook. It is expected that minimal soil will be removed from the site,
and excavated materials will be used where possible to balance fill areas. The
surface material of compacted soil will remain the same in the upper area of the site
and in the area of the fire circle.
Installing rough steps traversing from the upper elevations near the fire circle to the
lake grades will also require excavation and possibly root removal to adequately and
safely install these features. Excavation and installation of the steps will likely need
to be done by hand due to the steep slopes and poor access in the areas that will
receive this work.
Removal of undergrowth such as honeysuckle and buckthorn will open up the views
to a larger degree and may result in short-term reduction in ground dwelling plants
such as white avens, Virginia creeper, enchanter's nightshade, false Solomon’s seal,
violet and trout lily. Other vegetation removal is anticipated to be performed on
saplings located in areas with mature canopies to further provide improved viewing
of the lake and downtown Madison as compared to current conditions.
The WDNR recommended that equipment used in removal of invasive species
should be cleaned of all mud, dirt and plant parts before moving into areas free of
invasive species. This will be done by the contractor through use of a cleaning
station to prevent the spread of invasive seeds or plant parts to new areas. The
cleaning station will collect the water, mud, or plant debris so that these materials are
not discharged to waterways or naturally vegetated areas.
Shoreline stabilization processes will also require some minor excavation to
adequately anchor new materials and to remove vegetation and bare soil that
adversely impacts the stabilization process. Light weight construction equipment
with associated load limits will be required to minimize site impacts in these areas.
Due to the proximity of the water, WDNR indicates there may be a Chapter 30 permit
required for the proposed work.
B. Manipulation of Aquatic Resources
Project components will be installed along the northeast tip of Picnic Point-Lake
Mendota shoreline and require use of watercraft in certain locations to adequately
access site features. This watercraft will consist of construction barges or some
other large water-born vessel with the capacity to transport construction equipment
and materials such as the integrated (biological and hardscape) armoring system.
Use of such a vessel requires gasoline and oil and as such contributes to air
emissions including green house gases such as carbon dioxide. Improper storage or
15refueling of the boat motors could adversely impact local aquatic environments
through spillage, and propeller turbulence may create minor disturbances to
surrounding sediment.
Excavation is expected to be minimal; however, any materials removed during
construction activities will be located within the approximate 0.5 acre construction
zone limits with a secondary option to store materials on the UW storage grounds
located approximately 0.5 miles from the site. Excess materials will be removed
from the site as soon as possible following completion of activities.
No spawning beds or intact lake or shoreline structures will be removed, filled or
otherwise harmed during the development of this project.
A short-term increase in sediment runoff into the lake is possible as it will take some
time for vegetation to be established following construction. It was stated in the
WDNR’s letter response on the Endangered Resource Review that strict erosion and
siltation controls be practiced while making improvements to the site. This would
minimize the potential for sediment to enter the lake and protect fish habitat. They
also noted that erosion control netting (also known as erosion control blankets,
erosion control mats or erosion mesh netting) can have detrimental effects on local
snake and other wildlife populations. Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 151 which
includes performance standards for construction sites and post construction sites are
not applicable to this project due to the size of the project (less than an acre, the
minimum for applicable permit); however, it is expected that NR 151 protocol will be
used as general guidance during construction.
C. Structures
Existing structures in the vicinity of the project include wooden benches surrounding
a metal fire circle. Other features that may be changed or impacted include a
wooden pole that supports a light used for maritime navigation and wooden cribs
used for storage of firewood. No other existing subsurface or above surface
structures will be modified or removed as part of this project. That includes leaving
the existing walking paths southwest of the project site untouched.
Structures that will be added in conjunction with the proposed site improvements
include the new limestone fire circle, limestone slab steps and a structural retaining
wall of reinforced concrete and natural decorative stone to support the overlook, a
possible memorial plaque, and installation of a new navigation beacon.
D. Other
Hazardous Materials
No historical dumping or hazardous materials have been reported in the general
vicinity of the project site through database searches available. Based on current
information, it is unlikely that hazardous materials exist within the site boundaries.
16Utilities
No sewer or water utilities will be affected or impacted by this project since they are
located approximately one mile from the proposed project site. New electrical may
be routed to the proposed replacement navigational beacon pole. The telephone
line currently serving the navigational beacon will remain and be adjusted to continue
to serve the system. The future pole location has not yet been designated, but is
expected to be within approximately 150-feet of the current location.
Noise
Permanent ambient noise levels are not expected to be altered by the project.
Noise impacts will occur during the construction duration, which is limited to June
through November of 2012. Major construction elements that will produce noise
include the following: excavating, hauling, grading, and landscaping. Anticipated
noise will most directly impact those individuals using the Picnic Point recreation
area and those boaters on Lake Mendota in the vicinity of the project site. As long
as construction activities are temporary and do not occur during nesting or spawning
periods, noise impacts to wildlife are not anticipated.
The project duration is expected to be six months in length with construction noise of
short duration with standard hours of operation between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. All
construction work will be in compliance with the applicable City of Madison noise
permit and local ordinances.
Table 1 lists typical peak operating noise levels from construction equipment at a
distance of 50 feet, grouping construction equipment by mobility and other operating
characteristics. Earth moving equipment of limited size will be used for this project
due to the site constraints. On-going existing noise aspects from the site include use
as a social gathering location with intermittent bonfires or other activities taking
place. These noise levels should not appreciably change from existing uses at the
site.
17Table 1 – Typical Construction Noise Levels
Source: U.S. Report to the President and Congress on Noise, February 1972
Topography and Erosion Control
Minor topographic changes will result from grading and surface disturbance due to
excavation and construction activities. The campus stormwater management plan
(see “Manipulation of Aquatic Resources” above) developed by the University and
the City of Madison, will provide guidance for developing erosion control and
stormwater pollution prevention methods. These practices will be carried out
according to standards required by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
Best management practices will be used before and after construction, including silt
fencing and erosion matting as designated within the WDNR endangered species
report. Appropriate stormwater management and erosion control measures will be
used to control discharge into nearby Lake Mendota.
18Traffic and Parking
This project will have a minimal impact on traffic or parking compared to existing
conditions. It is possible that the new layout could be utilized by larger groups and
thereby increasing parking need at specific events utilizing the upgraded site
features. There may also be some additional limited traffic during the construction
activities related to work crews and other construction related personnel. Closure or
limited access to areas of the site during construction activities will be addressed
with signage and barricades where necessary.
19Page Intentionally Left Blank
IV. Probable Adverse and Beneficial Impacts
A. Physical Impacts
As part of the overall Lakeshore Nature Preserve, Picnic Point has a long and rich
history in the community and, as such, it is always difficult to balance what is best for
preserving this area while maintaining access to enrich the human experience.
Depending on a group’s or individual’s perspective, the so-called improvement could
be something that is not in line with their respective goals. Recognizing that this
area has historically been used as a public gathering space for a variety of users, the
perspective of impacts should be evaluated on those conditions.
Physical impacts to the site are limited in nature and primarily consist of reworking
site features that have previously been disturbed during past construction activities
and from on-going use. The proposed surface excavation activities will have minor
physical short-term environmental impacts, and construction actions should not
threaten water or soil quality provided that typical measures are taken to control
erosion, including limiting site access and the size of equipment used. Short-term air
impacts are expected from construction vehicle emissions. Environmental concerns
are not expected to be encountered during soil excavation and present little adverse
or beneficial impacts to the site.
Construction of new benches and a new fire circle will continue to enable gatherings
of people (groups often as large as 90) to enjoy bonfire activities in the area. As a
result of past and future campfire activities, air pollutants and green house gases will
continue to be released in smoke during the combustion process. The incremental
air emissions increase from these activities is intermittent in frequency and is not
larger than historic emissions, but it would be identified as an adverse environmental
impact. Madison’s air quality is classified as “good” according to the NAAQS, and
this will not have an identifiable impact on this quality.
Changing site characteristics such as placing rustic steps down to the lakeshore to
provide safer passage and creating an overlook is a beneficial impact to recreational
users of the area. Instead of the steep and potentially treacherous route that
currently exists, steps cut into the existing bank will change the surface and will likely
allow additional pedestrian traffic access to the water’s edge. Doing so will improve
social aspects to allow better viewing of waterfowl, better access for fishing, and
better scenic views to downtown Madison. Additionally, if properly managed, there
would be minimal adverse impacts to the water or shoreline area from the
development of these steps. These improvements will serve to correct the current
erosion problems, minimize future potential erosion concerns, and as a consequence
help preserve the archaeological deposits that are slowly disappearing due to soil
movement. However, improperly managed renovation processes may result in
additional erosion around the steps which could carry suspended solids to the lake.
During construction activities, the site area will be inaccessible except to necessary
construction equipment and vehicles. This will prevent recreational users from
accessing the site for a limited period of time. In summary, the physical impacts of
the proposed project activities will have minimal adverse effects and are anticipated
to be limited to construction activities. Short-term noise and minor air impacts from
20You can also read
