DOCSLIB.ORG

Existing Park and Open Space Sites

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Chapter III EXISTING PARK AND OPEN SPACE SITES INTRODUCTION A comprehensive areawide inventory of park and open space sites was conducted in 1973 under the initial regional park and open space planning program. The inventory is updated periodically, including in 2007 as part of the Ozaukee County comprehensive planning program. The inventory of park and open space sites in the County was updated again in 2010 for use in preparing this new County park and open space plan. The findings of the 2010 inventory are presented in this chapter. The 2010 inventory identified all park and open space sites owned by a public agency, including Federal, State, County, or local units of government and school districts. Also identified in the inventory were lands held in conservation easements by organizations such as the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) and the Ozaukee Washington Land Trust (OWLT). The inventory also included privately owned resource-oriented outdoor recreation sites such as golf courses, campgrounds, ski hills, boating access sites, swimming beaches, hunting clubs, and group camps such as Scout or YMCA camps, and special use outdoor recreation sites. Sites owned by nonprofit conservation organizations, such as OWLT, were also identified. The inventory of private outdoor recreation sites focused on resource-oriented sites because the County park and open space plan is most directly concerned with the provision of sites and facilities for resource-oriented activities. The inventory also identified such other recreation resources as existing trails and bicycle ways and historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places. EXISTING PARK AND OPEN SPACE SITES Park and Open Space Sites Owned by Ozaukee County Park and open space sites owned by Ozaukee County in 2010 are shown on Map 15 and listed on Table 10. In 2010, Ozaukee County owned nine such sites, encompassing a total of 860 acres, or less than 1 percent of the total area of the County. 1The regional park and open space plan is documented in SEWRPC Planning Report No. 27, A Regional Park and Open Space Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin: 2000, November 1977. 41 Existing Park and Open Space Sites The nine existing County parks are: Mee-Kwon County Park and Virmond Park in the City of Mequon; Covered Bridge County Park in the Town of Cedarburg; Lion’s Den Gorge Nature Preserve in the Town of Grafton; Hawthorne Hills County Park, Tendick Nature Park, and Ehlers County Park, all in the Town of Saukville; Harborview County Park in the City of Port Washington; and Waubedonia County Park in the Village of Fredonia. Also shown on Map 15 and listed on Table 10 are other sites owned by the County, but not part of the County park system. These sites include the Ozaukee County Fair Grounds in the City of Cedarburg; the Guenther Farmstead property in the Town of Saukville; the Ozaukee County Trail property in the Town of Port Washington; and the Bee Keeper Bog, Pinnacle, and Shady Lane properties in the Town of Fredonia. Selected outdoor recreation facilities within the County park system in 2010 are listed in Table 11. As indicated in that table, three parks within the County system currently provide playfields, two parks provide golf courses, all nine parks provide picnic areas, eight parks provide restroom facilities, eight parks provide trails, one park provides a boat launch, two parks provide campsites, six parks provide opportunities for cross-country skiing, and five parks provide kayak/canoe access. Park and Open Space Sites Owned by the State of Wisconsin As indicated in Table 12 and shown on Map 15, in 2010 there were 12 State-owned park and open space sites in Ozaukee County, encompassing 3,184 acres, or about 2 percent of the total area of the County. Of these 12 sites, 11 sites, encompassing 2,913 acres, were owned by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; and one site, encompassing 271 acres, was owned by the University of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has acquired large areas of park and open space lands in Ozaukee County for a variety of resource protection and recreational purposes. Sites acquired for natural resource preservation and limited recreational purposes include the Cedarburg Habitat Preservation, Cedarburg Bog State Natural Area, and a number of scattered sites, including four sites within the North Branch Milwaukee River Wildlife and Farming Heritage Project Area. One Department-owned site, Harrington Beach State Park, is associated with more intensive recreational activities. The site provides camping, swimming, picnicking, trail facilities, and a wildlife refuge. Map 15 also reflects project boundaries approved by the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board for State forests, parks, and wildlife areas within the County. Lands within the approved project boundaries have been identified by the Board as appropriate additions to adjacent parks, forests, natural areas, or wildlife areas and are intended to be acquired by the Department of Natural Resources, on a "willing seller-willing buyer" basis, for recreational or open space purposes as funding permits. University of Wisconsin In 2010 there was one open space site affiliated with the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The UWM Cedarburg Bog Field Station encompasses about 270 acres and is located in the Town of Saukville. Federally-Owned Park and Open Space Sites Map 15 and Table 12 also identify six open space sites in Ozaukee County owned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, encompassing 695 acres, or less than 1 percent of the total area of the County. Five of the open space sites were purchased for the primary purpose of preserving and improving breeding habitat for waterfowl in Wisconsin. Park and Open Space Sites Owned by Local Governments, School Districts, or Other Public Districts In addition to the County-, State-, and Federally-owned park and open space sites in Ozaukee County, in 2010 there was a total of 162 sites owned by local units of government, school districts, or other public districts. Those sites, listed on Table A-1 and shown on Map A-1 in Appendix A, encompass 2,259 acres, or about 2 percent of the 42 Existing Park and Open Space Sites Map 15 OZAUKEE COUNTY, STATE OF WISCONSIN, AND FEDERAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE SITES: 2010 SHEBOYGAN CO. 31 22 -,43 RQ57 13 RQ32 22 24 32 33 25 23 VILLAGE OF BELGIUM 26 VILLAGE OF 9 FREDONIA 14 BELGIUM FREDONIA 15 M I C H I G A N PORT WASHINGTON 12 5 VILLAGE OF NEWBURG RQ33 30 6 11 7 RQ32 8 27 VILLAGE OF SAUKVILLE 21 CITY OF WASHINGTONCO. PORT SAUKVILLE WASHINGTON 20 FEDERALLY OWNED SITES RQ32 STATE OWNED SITES 19 28 COUNTY OWNED SITES 3 4 REFERENCE NUMBER 29 10 (SEE TABLES 10, 11, AND 12) 60 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE RQ PROJECT BOUNDARY 18 VILLAGE OF GRAFTON 10 WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL -,43 RESOURCES PROJECT BOUNDARY CITY OF CEDARBURG NORTH BRANCH MILWAUKEE RIVER RQ57 WILDLIFE AND FARMING HERITAGE AREA 32 RQ HARRINGTON BEACH STATE PARK GRAFTON CEDARBURG CEDARBURG BOG STATE NATURAL AREA Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wisconsin Department 17 of Natural Resources, Ozaukee County, and SEWRPC. 1 RQ181 VILLAGE OF L A K E THIENSVILLE 16 57 RQ167 RQ CITY OF 2 Q32 MEQUON R N RQ57 -,43 VILLAGE OF BAYSIDE 0 1 2 3 MILES MILWAUKEE CO. 43 Existing Park and Open Space Sites Table 10 PARK AND OUTDOOR RECREATION SITES OWNED BY OZAUKEE COUNTY: 2010 Number Size on Map 15 Site Name Locationa (acres) 1 Mee-Kwon County Park ................................................................................................. T9N, R21E, Sections 10, 11 244 2 Virmond County Park ..................................................................................................... T9N, R22E, Section 28 63 3 Covered Bridge County Park .......................................................................................... T10N, R21E, Section 10 12 4 Lion’s Den Gorge Nature Preserve ................................................................................. T10N, R22E, Section 10 74 5 Hawthorne Hills County Parkb ........................................................................................ T11N, R21E, Sections 3, 4 286 6 Tendick Nature Park ....................................................................................................... T11N, R21E, Section 14 125 7 Ehlers County Park ........................................................................................................ T11N, R21E, Sections 13, 14, 23, 24 10 8 Harborview County Park ................................................................................................ T11N, R22E, Section 28 1 9 Waubedonia County Park T12N, R21E, Sections 27, 34 45 Total : 9 Sites - - 860 Other County Properties – Not Considered Part of the County Park System 10 Ozaukee County Fairgrounds ..................................................................................... T10N, R21E, Sections 22, 27 18 11 Guenther Farmstead Property .................................................................................... T11N, R21E, Section 17 213 12 Ozaukee County Trail Property ................................................................................... T11N, R22E, Section 4 36 13 Bee Keeper Bog Property ........................................................................................... T12N, R21E, Section 5 41 14 Pinnacle Property ....................................................................................................... T12N, R21E, Section 32 39 15 Shady Lane
Recommended publications
  • A 2035 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mequon

    A 2035 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mequon

    A 2035 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF MEQUON Chapter I INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INTRODUCTION In 1999, the Wisconsin Legislature enacted a new comprehensive planning law, set forth in Section 66.1001 of the Wisconsin Statutes. The new requirements supplement earlier provisions in the Statutes for the preparation of county development plans (Section 59.69(3) of the Statutes) and local master plans (Section 62.23 of the Statutes). The new requirements, which are often referred to as the “Smart Growth” law, provide a new framework for the development, adoption, and implementation of comprehensive plans in Wisconsin. The intent of the comprehensive planning law is to require that comprehensive plans be completed and adopted by the governing bodies of counties, cities, villages, and towns prior to January 1, 2010, in order for county or local government to adopt or enforce zoning, subdivision control, or official mapping ordinances. To address the State comprehensive planning requirements, a multi-jurisdictional comprehensive planning process was undertaken by Ozaukee County, 14 participating local governments, and the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC). As a result of the multi-jurisdictional process, comprehensive plans that satisfy the planning requirements set forth in Section 66.1001 of the Statutes have been developed for the County and all participating local governments. The comprehensive plan for the City of Mequon is documented in this report. The 14 local governments participating in the Ozaukee County
  • Mapping Lake Sturgeon Habitat in the Milwaukee River Using Side-Scan Sonar

    Mapping Lake Sturgeon Habitat in the Milwaukee River Using Side-Scan Sonar

    Mapping Lake Sturgeon Habitat in the Milwaukee River Using Side-Scan Sonar Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 2018 Office of Great Waters Grant & 2018 River Protection Planning Grant RP30818 Draft Final Reports 2018 Fund for Lake Michigan Grant # 20180479 Draft Final Report Prepared By: Andrew Struck, Matt Aho, Ryan Miller, Angela Richter, Natalie Cotter, Brittany Hahn, and Cassie Avery Ozaukee County Planning and Parks Department 121 W. Main Street Port Washington, WI 53074 June 30, 2021 Table of Contents Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Review of Existing Efforts ........................................................................................................................ 4 Fish Passage Remediation Efforts............................................................................................................. 7 Project Description ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Remote Analysis of the Milwaukee River .............................................................................................. 13 Habitat Evaluation .................................................................................................................................
  • Amendment to Ozaukee County Jurisdictional Highway

    Amendment to Ozaukee County Jurisdictional Highway

    ( . -". , ~ t , ' 'I • AM-END"MENT "I PORT "" .... SHt.... t.TO!'. ......... : •• t J • • , , , - <, " " I I SOU;'HEAS'rERN:'wlse~NsIN -REGIONAL pJANNING COMMISSION ... It'" ~ .4<"~ I<,,~ ·~~it;J.!l".. ,,~ .. ; .....- ~,. ':~:: r T J J :'.... JAN"UARY 1993 ; 40_. .. ......f .... ~....... n ., ' . •••• • '.:..o ...~_---:•• _ 1 I < '~'N) ..... , '­ -', TECHNICAL COORDINATING AND ADVISORY SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN COMMITTEE ON JURISDICTIONAL HIGHWAY PLANNING REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION FOR OZAUKEE COUNTY KENOSHA COUNTY RACINE COUNTY Sylvester N. Weyker ............Highway Commissioner. Leon T. Dreger David B. Falstad Chairman Ozaukee County Francis J. Pitts Martin J. Itzin Kurt W. Bauer . .. Executive Director. Sheila M. Siegler Jean M. Jacobson, Secretary Southeastern Wisconsin Secretary Regional Planning Commission Leland J. Allen . ..Chairman, Town of Port Washington Lester A. Bartel, Jr. Chairman, Town of Grafton MILWAUKEE COUNTY WALWORTH COUNTY Paul H. Brunquell ."""" Supervisor, Town of Saukville Donald C. Bystricky .. ,,,,,,,,. ,President, Village of Belgium John R. Bolden John D. Ames Anthony R, Depies ."'" , ... ,., .. , .. , .City Engineer, William Ryan Drew Anthony F. Balestrieri City of Port Washington Thomas W. Meaux Allen L. Morrison, Robert R. Dreblow Director of Engineering and Vice-Chairman Public Works, City of Cedarburg Thomas L. Frank Planning and Research Engineer, U. S. Department of Transportation, OZAUKEE COUNTY WASHINGTON COUNTY Federal Highway Administration Leroy A. Bley Daniel S. Schmidt Robert Gerke ....... .. Street Commissioner, Thomas H. Buestrin Patricia A. Strachota Village of Thiensville Elroy J. Schreiner Frank F. Uttech, William S. Heimlich Planning Supervisor, Wisconsin Chairman Department of Transportation Frederick Kaul Chairman, Ozaukee County Highway Committee WAUKESHA COUNTY Francis J. Kleckner .... .. Chairman, Town of Belgium Richard A. Congdon Jeffery P. Knight ... President, Village of Saukville Robert F.
  • School Desegregation in the North: Eight Comparative Case Studies of Commnity Structur and Policy Making

    School Desegregation in the North: Eight Comparative Case Studies of Commnity Structur and Policy Making

    SCHOOL DESEGREGATION IN THE NORTH: EIGHT COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES OF COMMNITY STRUCTUR AND POLICY MAKING Robert L. Crain With Assistance of Morton Inger Gerald A. McWorter James J. Vanecko This research was supported by the Office of Education Department of Health , Education , arid Welfare, Project No. 5-0641-2.12- NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER University of Chicago 5720 South Woodlawn Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60637 Report No. llO. April, 1966 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A study such as this owes a huge debt to the two hundred persons who permitted us to interview them and who gracious ly made their files available to us. We are especially conscious of the sacrifices these men made since they were all very busy men and women--school board members , school admin- istrators , public officials , newspapermen , heads of civil rights groups. number of them gave us confidential documents , permitted us to borrow their personal files , and helped us locate other documents which we needed. They spent as long as eight hours in interviews with us. We remember several of these persons as especially helpful , considerate, or insightful; but we have decided not to attempt to thank any of these persons by name here. To thank one or two would be an insult to twenty others who also went out of their way for us; and to thank twenty would be an improper recognition of our debt to a hundred more. We will no doubt disappoint many of these respondents, who were hope- ful that we would present a series of recommendations which they could make use of; but as responsible social scientists we are convinced that our duty is to report facts and possible sociological explanations of these facts and let those who are qualified by experience or training develop specific proposals from this.
  • The Doolittle Family in America, 1856

    The Doolittle Family in America, 1856

    TheDoolittlefamilyinAmerica WilliamFrederickDoolittle,LouiseS.Brown,MalissaR.Doolittle THE DOOLITTLE F AMILY IN A MERICA (PART I V.) YCOMPILED B WILLIAM F REDERICK DOOLITTLE, M. D. Sacred d ust of our forefathers, slumber in peace! Your g raves be the shrine to which patriots wend, And swear tireless vigilance never to cease Till f reedom's long struggle with tyranny end. :" ' :,. - -' ; ., :; .—Anon. 1804 Thb S avebs ft Wa1ts Pr1nt1ng Co., Cleveland Look w here we may, the wide earth o'er, Those l ighted faces smile no more. We t read the paths their feet have worn, We s it beneath their orchard trees, We h ear, like them, the hum of bees And rustle of the bladed corn ; We turn the pages that they read, Their w ritten words we linger o'er, But in the sun they cast no shade, No voice is heard, no sign is made, No s tep is on the conscious floor! Yet Love will dream and Faith will trust (Since He who knows our need is just,) That somehow, somewhere, meet we must. Alas for him who never sees The stars shine through his cypress-trees ! Who, hopeless, lays his dead away, \Tor looks to see the breaking day \cross the mournful marbles play ! >Vho hath not learned in hours of faith, The t ruth to flesh and sense unknown, That Life is ever lord of Death, ; #..;£jtfl Love" ca:1 -nt ver lose its own! V°vOl' THE D OOLITTLE FAMILY V.PART I SIXTH G ENERATION. The l ife given us by Nature is short, but the memory of a well-spent life is eternal.
  • COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN Town of Cedarburg, Ozaukee County

    COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN Town of Cedarburg, Ozaukee County

    COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN Town of Cedarburg, Ozaukee County COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN Town of Cedarburg, Ozaukee County TOWN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS David Salvaggio, Chairman Wayne Pipkorn Bill Wattson Tom Esser Gary Wickert PARK & RECREATION COMMITTEE TOWN STAFF Tom Esser, Committee Chairman Tim Rhode, Administrator Carol Boettcher Eric Ryer, Assistant Administrator/Clerk Keith Martin Adam Monticelli, Director of Public Works John Bishop Bonnie Erickson, Deputy Clerk Matt Geszvain Paul Jungbauer, Recreation Coordinator Adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Park Commission December 8, 1998 Adopted by Resolution by the Town of Cedarburg Board of Supervisors January 6, 1999 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Park Commission January 13, 2004 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Board of Supervisors February 4, 2004 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Park Committee May 19, 2009 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Plan Commission June 15, 2009 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Board of Supervisors July 1, 2009 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Park & Recreation Committee February 28, 2018 Revised Plan adopted by the Town of Cedarburg Plan Commission March 21, 2018 Revised Plan adopted by Resolution by the Town of Cedarburg Board of Supervisors April 4, 2018 Town of Cedarburg COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN (2018-2022) 1 Table of Contents Resolution - Official Adoption of Plan by Town Board ......................................................................................... 8 1.0 Introduction
  • Proposed Wisconsin – Lake Michigan National Marine Sanctuary

    Proposed Wisconsin – Lake Michigan National Marine Sanctuary

    Proposed Wisconsin – Lake Michigan National Marine Sanctuary Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Management Plan DECEMBER 2016 | sanctuaries.noaa.gov/wisconsin/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator Kathryn D. Sullivan, Ph.D. Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management National Ocean Service W. Russell Callender, Ph.D. Office of National Marine Sanctuaries John Armor, Director Matt Brookhart, Acting Deputy Director Cover Photos: Top: The schooner Walter B. Allen. Credit: Tamara Thomsen, Wisconsin Historical Society. Bottom: Photomosaic of the schooner Walter B. Allen. Credit: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution - Advanced Imaging and Visualization Laboratory. 1 Abstract In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA, 16 U.S.C. 1434 et seq.), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that considers alternatives for the proposed designation of Wisconsin - Lake Michigan as a National Marine Sanctuary. The proposed action addresses NOAA’s responsibilities under the NMSA to identify, designate, and protect areas of the marine and Great Lakes environment with special national significance due to their conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, scientific, cultural, archaeological, educational, or aesthetic qualities as national marine sanctuaries. ONMS has developed five alternatives for the designation, and the DEIS evaluates the environmental consequences of each under NEPA. The DEIS also serves as a resource assessment under the NMSA, documenting present and potential uses of the areas considered in the alternatives.
  • Boats Built at Toledo, Ohio Including Monroe, Michigan

    Boats Built at Toledo, Ohio Including Monroe, Michigan

    Boats Built at Toledo, Ohio Including Monroe, Michigan A Comprehensive Listing of the Vessels Built from Schooners to Steamers from 1810 to the Present Written and Compiled by: Matthew J. Weisman and Paula Shorf National Museum of the Great Lakes 1701 Front Street, Toledo, Ohio 43605 Welcome, The Great Lakes are not only the most important natural resource in the world, they represent thousands of years of history. The lakes have dramatically impacted the social, economic and political history of the North American continent. The National Museum of the Great Lakes tells the incredible story of our Great Lakes through over 300 genuine artifacts, a number of powerful audiovisual displays and 40 hands-on interactive exhibits including the Col. James M. Schoonmaker Museum Ship. The tales told here span hundreds of years, from the fur traders in the 1600s to the Underground Railroad operators in the 1800s, the rum runners in the 1900s, to the sailors on the thousand-footers sailing today. The theme of the Great Lakes as a Powerful Force runs through all of these stories and will create a lifelong interest in all who visit from 5 – 95 years old. Toledo and the surrounding area are full of early American History and great places to visit. The Battle of Fallen Timbers, the War of 1812, Fort Meigs and the early shipbuilding cities of Perrysburg and Maumee promise to please those who have an interest in local history. A visit to the world-class Toledo Art Museum, the fine dining along the river, with brew pubs and the world famous Tony Packo’s restaurant, will make for a great visit.
  • Description of the Study Area

    Description of the Study Area

    Chapter II DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA INTRODUCTION The water-resource and water-resource-related problems of a watershed, as well as the ultimate solutions to those problems, are a function of the human activities within the watershed and of the ability of the underlying natural resource base to sustain those activities. Regional water quality management planning seeks to rationally direct the future course of human actions within the watershed so as to promote the conservation and wise use of the natural resource base. Accordingly, the purpose of this chapter is to describe the natural resource base and the man-made features of the greater Milwaukee watersheds, thereby establishing a factual base upon which the regional water quality management planning process may proceed. This description of the study area is presented in two major sections: the first describes the man-made features; the second describes the natural resource base of the watersheds. REGIONAL AND WATERSHED SETTING OF THE PLANNING AREA The planning area encompasses the greater Milwaukee watersheds within Southeastern Wisconsin, which, as shown on Map 1 in Chapter I of this report, cover approximately 1,127 square miles. About 861 square miles of these watersheds are located within the seven-county Southeastern Wisconsin Region, representing about 32 per- cent of the Region. Within the region, these watersheds include all of the Kinnickinnic River, Menomonee River, Oak Creek, and Root River watersheds, portions of the Milwaukee River watershed, and lands directly tributary to Lake Michigan. In addition, approximately 266 square miles of the greater Milwaukee watersheds, or about 23.6 percent of the study area, are located outside of the Region.
  • Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan

    Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan

    Village of Grafton Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan 2020 - 2024 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS VILLAGE BOARD PLAN COMMISSION Jim Brunnquell, President Jim Brunnquell, Chair David Antoine, Trustee David Liss, Trustee Lisa Uribe Harbeck, Trustee Carl Harms, Member Thomas Krueger, Trustee Alan Kletti, Member David Liss, Trustee Mark Paschke, Member Susan Meinecke, Trustee Randy Silasiri, Member James Miller, Trustee PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD VILLAGE STAFF Meg Canepa, Chair Jesse Thyes, Village Administrator Lisa Uribe Harbeck, Trustee John Safstrom, Parks and Recreation Director Thomas Krueger, Trustee Jessica Wolff, Community Development Director James Miller, Trustee Charlie Donohue, Administrative Secretary II Steve Nauta, Member Mark Slaminski, Member Jodie Wolf, Senior Center Representative Park and Open Space Plan i ii Village of Grafton, WI TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 3 HISTORY OF GRAFTON ................................................................................................ 4 GENERAL REGIONAL CONTEXT .................................................................................. 5 POPULATION TRENDS AND FORECASTS ................................................................... 7 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS .............................................................................................
  • Milwaukee Urban Water Trail

    Milwaukee Urban Water Trail

    MILWAUKEE URBAN WATER TRAIL A Canoe and Kayak Guide City of Milwaukee, as seen from the Menomonee River. (Friends of Milwaukee’s Rivers) The Milwaukee Urban Water Trail IS A CANOE & KAYAK ROUTE THROUGH URBAN Planning for a Safe Trip Although the Milwaukee Urban Water Trail is not as remote PORTIONS OF THE MILWAUKEE, MENOMONEE, AND KINNICKINNIC RIVERS – WITH MORE as many popular water trail routes, the power and unpredict- ability of the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic riv- THAN 25 MILES OF PADDLING. THE TRAIL ENHANCES PUBLIC RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNI- ers should never be underestimated! It is important to plan ahead before launching. Be aware of water levels, potential TIES, PROMOTES SAFE AND LEGAL RIVER ACCESS, AND ENCOURAGES STEWARDSHIP. hazards, and required and recommended portages. ilwaukee’s Rivers – Past and Present atural Attractions M Milwaukee’s rivers have always been im- N Our local rivers flow through lands that are both pri- Water Levels and Hazards portant cultural, economic, and natural pathways. vately and publicly owned, with most of the latter protected Water levels and flow can vary greatly with rainfall, affect- Native Americans used these water routes for by the Milwaukee County Parks system and other munici- ing safety both on the land and water. Higher water gener- trade and transportation, and sustained themselves pal parks. These parks provide a scenic backdrop along ally increases level of difficulty due to low bridges, snags, with the fish, wildlife, wild rice, and other plants much of the water trail, as well as provide excellent oppor- concealed boulders, low hanging trees, and other hazards.
  • Smart Growth Comprehensive Land Use Plan – 2025

    Smart Growth Comprehensive Land Use Plan – 2025

    SMART GROWTH COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN – 2025 CITY OF CEDARBURG OZAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN Preserving Yesterday’s Heritage Today January 28, 2008 City of Cedarburg Ozaukee County, Wisconsin CITY OF CEDARBURG Smart Growth Comprehensive Land Use Plan - 2025 COMMON COUNCIL Gregory Myers, Mayor Robert Loomis, Council President Chris Reimer Steven Glamm Halien Besaw Paul Radtke Sandra Beck Kip Kinzel PLAN COMMISSION Gregory Myers, Chair Sandra Beck Mark Burgoyne Brook Brown Joe Emmerich Keith Kaiman James Schara CITY STAFF Christy Mertes, City Administrator/Treasurer Thomas Wiza, P.E., Director of Engineering & Public Works Jonathan Censky, City Planner/Zoning Administrator Constance McHugh, City Clerk PLANNING CONSULTANT Martin Marchek, AICP January 28, 2008 City of Cedarburg Ozaukee County, Wisconsin TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 1 – ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES ................................................................. 1-1 History of Cedarburg .......................................................................................................... 1-1 Other Local Plans ................................................................................................................ 1-3 Historic and Projected Population Growth....................................................................... 1-4 Demographic Trends ..........................................................................................................